From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 00:16:34 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:16:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] again with the gun stats
In-Reply-To: <01b101c3b791$595fd720$c5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031201001634.25724.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > Note that these are not [all] deaths. How does this compare with
> some other places
> > of comparable size? Inner London in 2001: 2,765,975, so maybe
> roughly
> > equivalent of US population would be 94,000 armed crimes
> 
> A tad more tells me:
> 
> http://www.met.police.uk/about/index.htm
> 
> < Today, the Metropolitan Police Service employs 29,278 officers,
> 11,368
> police staff, 609 traffic wardens and 865 Police Community Support
> Officers
> (PCSOs), and, since the realignment of police boundaries in April
> 2000, it
> covers an area of 620 square miles and a population of 7.2million.
> (figures updated: August 2003) >

Lets see, London has 1 cop per 133 members of the general population,
and 68 cops per square mile.

In contrast, for example, the city of Concord, NH, has an entire police
department staff of 94, covering a population of 40,000+ and 64 square
miles, or just under 1 per 400 members of the general population, and
1.5 per square mile. Why is Concord's crime rate so much lower than
London's, despite London having three times as many police per 1000
population, and more than 40 times more cops per square mile??????

Note that New Hampshire has the lowest crime rate in the entire US, 2.2
per 100 population. We also have the 3rd most free gun laws in the US,
and one of the highest degrees of gun ownership in the US.

Look up NH crime rates:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_02/xl/02tbl05.xls



=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 00:24:30 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:24:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <022601c3b799$17ddd880$c5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031201002430.26834.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> As I pointed out last time this comical factoid came around, the
> figures in question were as follows:
> 
> http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/australiaguns.html
> 
> Victoria (population circa 5 million) recorded 7 firearm-related
> homicides in 1996, and 19 firearm-related homicides in 1997. That
> number has now fallen.
> 
> 1996 - 7
> 1997 - 19 (171.4% increase from 1996 to 1997)
> 1998 - 17 (10.5% decrease from 1997 to 1998).
> 1999 - 14 (17.6% decrease from 1998 to 1999).
> 
> =============
> 
> Why keep citing this preposterous silliness, Mike?

Lets see, you say a doubling of murders in a three year time span is a
decrease???? Did you write copy for the Clinton White House? This is
the ultimate in Orwellian spin doctoring...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 00:29:29 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:29:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] life expectancy
In-Reply-To: <3FCA7DC4.8010605@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031201002929.4005.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun Nov 30, 2003 03:38 pm Damien Broderick queried:
> >
> > Bill, I'm still trying to make sense of this. After you exclude the
> > wild and dangerous life style of Canadian women, their life 
> > expectancy *drops* from 81.4 years to 73.5? I guess that the latter
> > figure is for the entire living female population, or more exactly
> > that the former figure is for girl babies born between 1997 and
> 1999, does 
> > that sound right?
> >
> 
> Yeh, confusing isn't it? :)
> Even when you read it in the full report it still seems likely to
> confuse.

Depends. For example, while pregnancy is itself a mortality risk
factor, NOT having a child prior to age 25 raises a womans risk of
breast and cirvical cancer considerably. While not having kids might be
considered "reducing risk", in the end you are increasing your risk.
It's one of those counter-intuitive things that goes against
conventional wisdom, like moderate drinking is life extending and being
slightly overweight is better than being obese OR underweight for life expectancy.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From gregburch at gregburch.net  Mon Dec  1 00:45:08 2003
From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:45:08 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <20031201002430.26834.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDGEDMCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Lorrey
> Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 6:25 PM
> 
> --- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > As I pointed out last time this comical factoid came around, the
> > figures in question were as follows:
> > 
> > http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/australiaguns.html
> > 
> > Victoria (population circa 5 million) recorded 7 firearm-related
> > homicides in 1996, and 19 firearm-related homicides in 1997. That
> > number has now fallen.
> > 
> > 1996 - 7
> > 1997 - 19 (171.4% increase from 1996 to 1997)
> > 1998 - 17 (10.5% decrease from 1997 to 1998).
> > 1999 - 14 (17.6% decrease from 1998 to 1999).
> > 
> > =============
> > 
> > Why keep citing this preposterous silliness, Mike?
> 
> Lets see, you say a doubling of murders in a three year time span is a
> decrease???? Did you write copy for the Clinton White House? This is
> the ultimate in Orwellian spin doctoring...

For crying out loud, Mike, that's *NOT* what Damien is saying.  He's saying the numbers are so small in absolute terms that expressing increases in terms of percentages from one year to the next is meaningless.  If you must apply a percentage to these statistics, it would seem to be more meaningful to express them in terms of the percentage of the population killed by firearms:

1996: 0.00014%
1997: 0.00038%
1998: 0.00034%
1999: 0.00028%

All of which is statistically almost meaningless -- the numbers are just too small.

GB
http://www.gregburch.net/burchismo.html


From max at maxmore.com  Mon Dec  1 00:59:51 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:59:51 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gun and crime stats for the USA
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031130185856.05ba78d8@mail.earthlink.net>

More numbers to argue over:

The nation`s violent crime rate (the number of crimes per 100,000 
population) has declined every year since 1991 and is now at a 22-year low. 
And murder is at a 35-year low. (FBI, www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm) The trends 
include the following highlights:
?       Since 1991, the nation`s violent crime rates have all decreased 
substantially. Total violent crime (the aggregate of murder and 
non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault), has 
decreased 33.2%; murder and non-negligent manslaughter has decreased 43.7%; 
rape has decreased 24.2%; robbery has decreased 46.9%; and aggravated 
assault has decreased 25.3%.
?       National violent crime rates in 2000 were the lowest in years. 
Total violent crime, the lowest since 1978; murder, the lowest since 1965; 
rape, the lowest since 1978; robbery, the lowest since 1968; and aggravated 
assault, the lowest since 1985.
?       Further demonstrating the irrelevance of "gun control" to crime 
rates, between 1991 (when violent crime started declining nationally) and 
2000, states that had the greatest decreases in violent crime generally, 
and in murder in particular, included both those that have some of the 
nation`s least restrictive gun laws (such as Texas, Alabama, South 
Carolina, and West Virginia) and those that have some of the most 
restrictive (such as California, New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut).
?       In 2000, as in previous years, firearms were used in less than 
one-fourth of violent crimes. Most violent crimes were committed with hands 
and feet (32%), blunt objects and other weapons (28%), and knives (15%).
?       In 2000, states that had Right-to-Carry laws had lower violent 
crime rates on average, compared to the rest of the country. Their total 
violent crime rate was 21.9% lower, murder was 28.4% lower, robbery was 
37.7% lower, and aggravated assault was 16.5% lower. (Rape, the violent 
crime least likely to involve firearms, was 0.8% higher.)
?       The only states that experienced increases in their murder rates 
between 1991 (when violent crime began declining) and 2000 were Rhode 
Island (16%), Nebraska (12%), Kansas (3%), and Minnesota (3%), all of which 
still do not have Right-to-Carry laws.







From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec  1 02:06:08 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:06:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Personal effectiveness
In-Reply-To: <16330.23389.637199.899914@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <20031201020608.94250.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>

--- JDP <jacques at dtext.com> wrote:
> (You're really master of the art when you
> can add to all
> this a tricky conversation with a potential sexual
> partner that you
> have just met, or with an intellectually
> sophisticated person arguing
> about some novel philosophical point -- and if the
> same person is
> both, then that's really spectacular.)

My family does the second out of habit: cooking is a
survival skill (I'm actually the least talented out
of my immediate family), plus we discuss various
brainstorms in idle moments.  "Potential sexual
partner" does not apply, of course, except between the
family members married to each other - but bringing
the children up to be comfortable doing this has lead
to, well, us being able to do it.

> Which brings us back to time-management,
> prioritizing, and
> synchronization, all integral to personal
> effectiveness.

<nods>  Recently, I've been experimenting with
cramming more things into my schedule.  For the first
time in a long while, I've found the limits of how
much I can do at once.  (I'm *trying* to back away
from said limits now, to add emergency capacity - but,
of course, the holiday season adds in its own extra
tasks.)


From dsunley at shaw.ca  Mon Dec  1 02:23:35 2003
From: dsunley at shaw.ca (Darin Sunley)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:23:35 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
References: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDGEDMCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
Message-ID: <004701c3b7b2$1f9ab480$0201a8c0@BOB>

Any of us who've been around here long enough to remember the last big gun
flamefest have seen all of this rhetoric, on both sides, before. But there
is a new and intriguing element this time around.

The previous flamewar emerged from the standard, familiar dynamics of
text-based communications. Lack of face-to-face communication erodes the
standard social cognitive feedback loops that generate civil behavior in
most well-socialized adults. As is common in these situations, neither party
had any particular formal training in the subject area, just the informed
interest of a passionate layman. Neither party claimed to represent any
organization larger than themselves, and therefore all flames were strictly
personal. The participants could damage their own credibility, and sometimes
even that of their opponents, but no one else's.

This time however, the scale of the conflict is slightly larger. Dirk claims
to be representing a new political party and, one assumes, has aspirations
to eventually run as a candidate himself, or to speak for candidates running
in local elections in the UK.

Dirk, as fun as this petulant sniping and blatant stereotyping must be for
you, and as much as it must seem that Mr. Lorrey started it and that honour
must be satisfied, you MUST hold yourself to a higher standard of public
behavior. This list is archived publically. As a citizen of the UK you must
surely be famliar with the less savoury elements of your local media. The
publishing of this, frankly petty, flamefest  would, if spun appropriately,
do serious damage to your long term credibility as a member of the British
political community.

Do yourself a huge favour and rise above the petty flamefests that
characterize these kind of online debates. Tossing statistics of
indeterminate credibility, tidbits of sarcasm and mediocre wit, and
stereotypes constituting viscious insults won't win you the support of the
average cocktail party, let alone a parliamentary riding where your clear
passion for the issues might have some actual influence on public debate.

To summarize, Dirk, this is not the time, not the place, and it is certainly
not the manner in which to have this debate.

Darin Sunley,
dsunley at shaw.ca


----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Burch" <gregburch at gregburch.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>; "Damien Broderick"
<thespike at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 6:45 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Guns


>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mike Lorrey
> > Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 6:25 PM
> >
> > --- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > As I pointed out last time this comical factoid came around, the
> > > figures in question were as follows:
> > >
> > > http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/australiaguns.html
> > >
> > > Victoria (population circa 5 million) recorded 7 firearm-related
> > > homicides in 1996, and 19 firearm-related homicides in 1997. That
> > > number has now fallen.
> > >
> > > 1996 - 7
> > > 1997 - 19 (171.4% increase from 1996 to 1997)
> > > 1998 - 17 (10.5% decrease from 1997 to 1998).
> > > 1999 - 14 (17.6% decrease from 1998 to 1999).
> > >
> > > =============
> > >
> > > Why keep citing this preposterous silliness, Mike?
> >
> > Lets see, you say a doubling of murders in a three year time span is a
> > decrease???? Did you write copy for the Clinton White House? This is
> > the ultimate in Orwellian spin doctoring...
>
> For crying out loud, Mike, that's *NOT* what Damien is saying.  He's
saying the numbers are so small in absolute terms that expressing increases
in terms of percentages from one year to the next is meaningless.  If you
must apply a percentage to these statistics, it would seem to be more
meaningful to express them in terms of the percentage of the population
killed by firearms:
>
> 1996: 0.00014%
> 1997: 0.00038%
> 1998: 0.00034%
> 1999: 0.00028%
>
> All of which is statistically almost meaningless -- the numbers are just
too small.
>
> GB
> http://www.gregburch.net/burchismo.html
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 03:06:13 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 03:06:13 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
References: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDGEDMCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
	<004701c3b7b2$1f9ab480$0201a8c0@BOB>
Message-ID: <041e01c3b7b8$145e0f80$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Darin Sunley" <dsunley at shaw.ca>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 2:23 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Guns


> Any of us who've been around here long enough to remember the last big gun
> flamefest have seen all of this rhetoric, on both sides, before. But there
> is a new and intriguing element this time around.
>
> The previous flamewar emerged from the standard, familiar dynamics of
> text-based communications. Lack of face-to-face communication erodes the
> standard social cognitive feedback loops that generate civil behavior in
> most well-socialized adults. As is common in these situations, neither
party
> had any particular formal training in the subject area, just the informed
> interest of a passionate layman. Neither party claimed to represent any
> organization larger than themselves, and therefore all flames were
strictly
> personal. The participants could damage their own credibility, and
sometimes
> even that of their opponents, but no one else's.
>
> This time however, the scale of the conflict is slightly larger. Dirk
claims
> to be representing a new political party and, one assumes, has aspirations
> to eventually run as a candidate himself, or to speak for candidates
running
> in local elections in the UK.
>
> Dirk, as fun as this petulant sniping and blatant stereotyping must be for
> you, and as much as it must seem that Mr. Lorrey started it and that
honour
> must be satisfied, you MUST hold yourself to a higher standard of public
> behavior. This list is archived publically. As a citizen of the UK you
must
> surely be famliar with the less savoury elements of your local media. The
> publishing of this, frankly petty, flamefest  would, if spun
appropriately,
> do serious damage to your long term credibility as a member of the British
> political community.

I'm afraid I'm a long way from being a serious member of the British
political community, and I have another 40,000 odd posts to answer for
before the media gets to this. I use Usenet (and this to some extent) as a
'warts and all' record of my beliefs and opinions and how they change and
evolve over time.
Hence I always post under my own name.

> Do yourself a huge favour and rise above the petty flamefests that
> characterize these kind of online debates. Tossing statistics of
> indeterminate credibility, tidbits of sarcasm and mediocre wit, and
> stereotypes constituting viscious insults won't win you the support of the
> average cocktail party, let alone a parliamentary riding where your clear
> passion for the issues might have some actual influence on public debate.

I'm afraid nobody of consequence reads any of this crap, and the only reason
they might is because one (or more) of us becomes famous enough to put it on
the map in the real world.

> To summarize, Dirk, this is not the time, not the place, and it is
certainly
> not the manner in which to have this debate.

So what is the time and place to wind up self righteous Americans in love
with their guns?
Thing is, the party as such has no opinion on gun ownership so I feel free
to piss about as the mood takes me on this issue. Sometimes I'm for,
sometimes against.

For myself, I've always loved personal weapons from knives, through swords
and bows to automatic firearms. I've been a martial arts teacher for more
than two decades and am reasonably proficient with quite a selection,
including military rifles and pistols. If I lived in the US I would no doubt
have a decent collection eg Walther P99, Desert Eagle in 44cal for fun, a
full calbre bolt action and an AR15. Maybe even a 50cal long range rifle
like the Barrett depending on the law.

The point is, though, that I don't consider gun ownership sacred and am
quite prepared to go along with the majority decision of whatever society I
live in.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From aiguy at comcast.net  Mon Dec  1 03:48:25 2003
From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:48:25 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gun and crime stats for the USA
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031130185856.05ba78d8@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <003501c3b7bd$f96bf650$9ef9a343@GaryMiller01>

Don't we have to add the number of deaths from accidental gun deaths to the
number murdered to get a true picture of loss of life?

Quoting http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel013101.shtml

Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay figures show 2.39 accidental
or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every justifiable fatal
shooting. Now, 2 to 1 is a lot less dramatic than 43 to 1 earlier reported
in a flawed  earlier analysis, but we still have more unjustifiable gun
deaths than justifiable gun deaths in the home.

Worse yet many of those killed are the very children the parents seek to
protect.

Hand gun locks and smart guns could eliminate this disparity once the public
was legally required to meet this requirement.  But the cost of smart guns
could be cost prohibitive and hand gun locks laws could only be enforced
after the fact or on an inspection basis the way we do with automobiles.

Juries would be extremely reluctant to prosecute parents for manslaughter
who left an unlocked gun where a child could gain access but the publicity
from such trials could further server to educate other gun owners.

I have read that the decrease in murder rates is in a large part due to the
decreased fatalities caused by improvement of medical trauma.  Additional
factors include improved police work in getting repeat violent offenders off
the street sooner and laws like three strikes and your out which put repeat
violent offenders away for good.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Max More" <max at maxmore.com>
To: "Extropy Chat" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 7:59 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gun and crime stats for the USA


> More numbers to argue over:
>
> The nation`s violent crime rate (the number of crimes per 100,000
> population) has declined every year since 1991 and is now at a 22-year
low.
> And murder is at a 35-year low. (FBI, www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm) The trends
> include the following highlights:
> ?       Since 1991, the nation`s violent crime rates have all decreased
> substantially. Total violent crime (the aggregate of murder and
> non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault), has
> decreased 33.2%; murder and non-negligent manslaughter has decreased
43.7%;
> rape has decreased 24.2%; robbery has decreased 46.9%; and aggravated
> assault has decreased 25.3%.
> ?       National violent crime rates in 2000 were the lowest in years.
> Total violent crime, the lowest since 1978; murder, the lowest since 1965;
> rape, the lowest since 1978; robbery, the lowest since 1968; and
aggravated
> assault, the lowest since 1985.
> ?       Further demonstrating the irrelevance of "gun control" to crime
> rates, between 1991 (when violent crime started declining nationally) and
> 2000, states that had the greatest decreases in violent crime generally,
> and in murder in particular, included both those that have some of the
> nation`s least restrictive gun laws (such as Texas, Alabama, South
> Carolina, and West Virginia) and those that have some of the most
> restrictive (such as California, New York, Massachusetts, and
Connecticut).
> ?       In 2000, as in previous years, firearms were used in less than
> one-fourth of violent crimes. Most violent crimes were committed with
hands
> and feet (32%), blunt objects and other weapons (28%), and knives (15%).
> ?       In 2000, states that had Right-to-Carry laws had lower violent
> crime rates on average, compared to the rest of the country. Their total
> violent crime rate was 21.9% lower, murder was 28.4% lower, robbery was
> 37.7% lower, and aggravated assault was 16.5% lower. (Rape, the violent
> crime least likely to involve firearms, was 0.8% higher.)
> ?       The only states that experienced increases in their murder rates
> between 1991 (when violent crime began declining) and 2000 were Rhode
> Island (16%), Nebraska (12%), Kansas (3%), and Minnesota (3%), all of
which
> still do not have Right-to-Carry laws.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec  1 03:50:41 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:50:41 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <004701c3b7b2$1f9ab480$0201a8c0@BOB>
Message-ID: <000601c3b7be$4a49ddd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Darin Sunley
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Guns
>  
> Any of us who've been around here long enough to remember the 
> last big gun flamefest have seen all of this rhetoric, on both sides, 
> before. But there is a new and intriguing element this time around.
> 
> The previous flamewar emerged from the standard, familiar dynamics of
> text-based communications. Lack of face-to-face communication 
> erodes the standard social cognitive feedback loops that generate
civil 
> behavior in most well-socialized adults...

The participants have been remarkably civil this time
around.  Perhaps we really can discuss this topic.  {8-]

spike




From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 04:23:20 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 04:23:20 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
References: <000601c3b7be$4a49ddd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <046601c3b7c2$d9e81570$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 3:50 AM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Guns


> 
> > Darin Sunley
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Guns
> >  
> > Any of us who've been around here long enough to remember the 
> > last big gun flamefest have seen all of this rhetoric, on both sides, 
> > before. But there is a new and intriguing element this time around.
> > 
> > The previous flamewar emerged from the standard, familiar dynamics of
> > text-based communications. Lack of face-to-face communication 
> > erodes the standard social cognitive feedback loops that generate
> civil 
> > behavior in most well-socialized adults...
> 
> The participants have been remarkably civil this time
> around.  Perhaps we really can discuss this topic.  {8-]
 

I doubt it.
It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From ABlainey at aol.com  Mon Dec  1 04:30:21 2003
From: ABlainey at aol.com (ABlainey at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 23:30:21 EST
Subject: [extropy-chat] test
Message-ID: <b8.4c75f745.2cfc1ddd@aol.com>

test. what no mail for 2 days? hmmmmmmmmmm


From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec  1 05:18:45 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:18:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists harness rice gene in battle against
	poverty
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGEEIECAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

BusinessWorld, the Philippines' leading business newspaper, has an article
on designer rice that scientists say could save the human race, but which
some fear is a potential monster. The idea that nutrient-rich, yellow-tinged
golden rice seeds are the culinary equivalent of the Frankenstein monster
doesn't make any sense. So far, no GMO [genetically modified organism]
produced and released to the farmer has caused any risk or any adverse
effect that's known to us. These are the opinions of biotechnologists and
managers at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI).
A 10-year coordinated effort by IRRI, the private sector and a number of
national scientific institutions has led to "golden rice," where three genes
are manipulated to make them produce beta carotene, niacin, iron and other
essential minerals in the seed. This and other GMOs will be available to
ordinary Asian farmers and consumers in three or four years once governments
adopt national biosafety guidelines. It could have "tremendous impact" on
nutrition for Asians, who eat steamed rice at least twice a day.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031201/499673dd/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec  1 05:20:23 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:20:23 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Future Of Wireless Sensor Networks
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEIECAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Slashdot: In the 12/03 Wired, Intel's Tiny Hope for the Future
describes a fundamental transformation as Intel's Research director David
Tennenhouse realized the importance of sensor networks. He saw a Berkeley
project on 'motes,' little sensors that communicate on ad-hoc wireless
networks. 'The company now foresees networks consisting of thousands of
motes, located wherever there's a need for data collection, streaming
real-time data to one another and to central servers. Intel imagines the day
when every assembly line, soybean field, and nursing home on the planet will
be peppered with motes, prodding factory foremen to replace faulty machines,
farmers to water fields, and nurses to check on something unusual in room
E214.' Intel was impressed enough with the technology to fund a whole
'lablet' to develop it. Intel sees a huge potential market in developing
both the sensors and the computation to process the huge amounts of sensor
information.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031201/236f5a6d/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec  1 05:35:53 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:35:53 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <046601c3b7c2$d9e81570$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <000001c3b7cc$fd6d8390$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


... social cognitive feedback loops that generate civil 
> > > behavior in most well-socialized adults...
> > 
> > The participants have been remarkably civil this time
> > around.  Perhaps we really can discuss this topic.  {8-]
>  
> 
> I doubt it.
> It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.
> 
> Dirk


Dirk, it could be that a lot of gun debate is
pointless.  In this country, gun ownership is our
right, so the fed cannot legally challenge it in any
case.  Were the fed to attempt to do so, we would be 
forced to conclude that our legal constitutional 
government had been overthrown, and would be obligated 
to take up arms against it restore a legal government.  
That's pretty simple, isn't it?  Caustic debate on the
topic is unnecessary, pointless as hell. 

spike




From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 05:48:43 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 05:48:43 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
References: <000001c3b7cc$fd6d8390$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <049401c3b7ce$c780f850$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
To: "'Dirk Bruere'" <dirk at neopax.com>; "'ExI chat list'"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:35 AM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Guns


>
> ... social cognitive feedback loops that generate civil
> > > > behavior in most well-socialized adults...
> > >
> > > The participants have been remarkably civil this time
> > > around.  Perhaps we really can discuss this topic.  {8-]
> >
> >
> > I doubt it.
> > It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.
> >
> > Dirk
>
>
> Dirk, it could be that a lot of gun debate is
> pointless.  In this country, gun ownership is our
> right, so the fed cannot legally challenge it in any
> case.  Were the fed to attempt to do so, we would be
> forced to conclude that our legal constitutional
> government had been overthrown, and would be obligated
> to take up arms against it restore a legal government.
> That's pretty simple, isn't it?  Caustic debate on the
> topic is unnecessary, pointless as hell.


It's far from simple.
Why don't you tell me how you can own fully automatic rifles in California?
It may be your constitutional right to own guns, but the govt gets to decide
what guns you are allowed, and what you aren't.
Your rights would not be in breach of the constitution if they only allowed
you flintlock muskets.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 05:49:17 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 05:49:17 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] test
References: <b8.4c75f745.2cfc1ddd@aol.com>
Message-ID: <049a01c3b7ce$dbc654e0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ABlainey at aol.com>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:30 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] test


> test. what no mail for 2 days? hmmmmmmmmmm

You probably have your boredom filter set to 'on'.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  1 05:52:07 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 23:52:07 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns--generalized
References: <000001c3b7cc$fd6d8390$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <00d901c3b7cf$42e4a5a0$c5994a43@texas.net>

Spike reckons:

> In this country, gun ownership is our
> right, so the fed cannot legally challenge it in any
> case.  Were the fed to attempt to do so, we would be
> forced to conclude that our legal constitutional
> government had been overthrown, and would be obligated
> to take up arms against it

I don't know how this legal constitution caper works (being a benighted
Aussie), but a few questions spring to mind. Suppose slavery had been
enshrined from the outset in the Constitution, or suppose that women had
been forbidden suffrage. Would it not be permitted to change these rights
and exclusions? Suppose enough citizens wanted to forbid the sale and
consumption of alcoholic beverages, even though that had been implicitly a
right until then? And if the ban were legally inserted into the legal
constitution, would there be a legal constitutional way to get rid of it on
second thoughts? And then to reimpose it on third thoughts?

(I could ask the lawyer downstairs, but she's very busy...)

Damien Broderick



From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec  1 05:59:24 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:59:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] A question on Consensus policy
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEIFCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Dirk, I am still trying to interpret your ideas. Could you please answer
this?
Suppose Bigland is an old nation state where most citizens are proudly
worshipping the national flag and talking all the time of the national
culture, language, music, philosophy, battles won, etc. Suppose Smalland is
a region of Bigland where at some point the citizens democratically decide
to become independent from Bigland. Assuming that Bigland has vastly
superior military power, does Bigland have any right to force Smalland to
remain a part of Bigland?



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 06:12:32 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:12:32 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] A question on Consensus policy
References: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEIFCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <04c801c3b7d2$1b6e3b50$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <gpmap at runbox.com>
To: <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>; <extropy-chat at extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:59 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] A question on Consensus policy


> Dirk, I am still trying to interpret your ideas. Could you please answer
> this?
> Suppose Bigland is an old nation state where most citizens are proudly
> worshipping the national flag and talking all the time of the national
> culture, language, music, philosophy, battles won, etc. Suppose Smalland
is
> a region of Bigland where at some point the citizens democratically decide
> to become independent from Bigland. Assuming that Bigland has vastly
> superior military power, does Bigland have any right to force Smalland to
> remain a part of Bigland?

Militarily, no.
However, they do have a right to exert pressure within their own
(Bigland-Smalland) borders. For example, they could simply state that they
will not trade with them, or allow overflights of passenger aircraft etc.
That may hurt Smalland sufficiently to coerce the population, but only if
they value their money over their freedom.

A true nationstate must be a viable proposition and not exist solely due to
the generosity of its neighbours.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 06:12:32 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:12:32 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] A question on Consensus policy
References: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEIFCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <04c801c3b7d2$1b6e3b50$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <gpmap at runbox.com>
To: <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>; <extropy-chat at extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:59 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] A question on Consensus policy


> Dirk, I am still trying to interpret your ideas. Could you please answer
> this?
> Suppose Bigland is an old nation state where most citizens are proudly
> worshipping the national flag and talking all the time of the national
> culture, language, music, philosophy, battles won, etc. Suppose Smalland
is
> a region of Bigland where at some point the citizens democratically decide
> to become independent from Bigland. Assuming that Bigland has vastly
> superior military power, does Bigland have any right to force Smalland to
> remain a part of Bigland?

Militarily, no.
However, they do have a right to exert pressure within their own
(Bigland-Smalland) borders. For example, they could simply state that they
will not trade with them, or allow overflights of passenger aircraft etc.
That may hurt Smalland sufficiently to coerce the population, but only if
they value their money over their freedom.

A true nationstate must be a viable proposition and not exist solely due to
the generosity of its neighbours.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Dec  1 06:24:50 2003
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:24:50 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Drexler and Smalley news update
References: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEIFCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
	<04c801c3b7d2$1b6e3b50$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <025b01c3b7d3$d3582ea0$3f80e40c@NANOGIRL>

This is a direct copy and paste from the Foresight frontpage: "Nobel Winner
Smalley Responds to Drexler's Challenge,
Fails to Defend National Nanotech Policy Rice University Professor Richard
Smalley responds to a longstanding challenge by Foresight Chairman Eric
Drexler to defend the controversial direction of U.S. policy in
nanotechnology. Their four-part exchange is the cover story of the Dec. 1
2003 Chemical & Engineering News. This could mark a turning point in the
development of the field.
Press release
Foresight comments and FAQ
Full text of the exchange "


Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Tech-Aid Advisor http://www.tech-aid.info/t/all-about.html
nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."




From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec  1 07:30:08 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 08:30:08 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] PC eye-control for severely disabled
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGOEIGCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From BBC News: Award-winning Spanish technology that lets severely disabled
people control a computer using eye movement could soon be available in the
UK. The Iriscom, which emulates mouse movement by tracking the iris, is
already on sale in Spanish-speaking countries and Portugal. Iriscom moves
the mouse pointer by tracking a person's eye movement and mouse clicks are
performed by blinking. It also has an on-screen keyboard so users can input
text. It can be used by anyone who has control of one eye, including people
wearing glasses or contact lenses. The main Iriscom website is in spanish,
see also EyeTech Digital Systems.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031201/f1f67ed9/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Mon Dec  1 10:32:14 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:32:14 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] (2)ImmInst Update "Girls Night Out" Sun Nov 30
Message-ID: <p05100300bbf0c82a7a95@[150.146.134.133]>

support at imminst.org wrote:
>
>ImmInst Update
>*******************************
>
>Chat Topic: "Girls Night Out" -  Women & the Future
>
>Time: Nov 30 - SUN 8pm Eastern, Length: 1 Hour
>Host: Susan Fonseca-Klein - co-director, ImmInst.org
>Susan's Biography and Discussion Topic:
>http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=99&t=2218&s=
>
>CHAT FOR WOMEN ONLY!
>
>Sponsored by the Immortality Institute (ImmInst.org), a nonprofit
>with the mission to end the blight of involuntary death, and hosted by
>Susan Fonseca-Klein, this chat is for women only.


I hope it was fun!

I was seriously considering to participate in this until I looked
at the time... It's 2am in Europe. That's too difficult for me.

Is there any chance that occasionally, these chats could be held
at a different time?

Amara



-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"The best presents don't come in boxes." --Hobbes


From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Dec  1 11:49:12 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 12:49:12 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] (2)ImmInst Update "Girls Night Out" Sun Nov 30
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bbf0c82a7a95@[150.146.134.133]>
References: <p05100300bbf0c82a7a95@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <20031201114912.GF22650@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 12:32:14PM +0200, Amara Graps wrote:

> 
> I was seriously considering to participate in this until I looked
> at the time... It's 2am in Europe. That's too difficult for me.

Ditto here. There's no way how I could stay up late, and be
at work the next day, rested.
 
> Is there any chance that occasionally, these chats could be held
> at a different time?

Yes, me too.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031201/17534a07/attachment.bin>

From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Dec  1 11:59:52 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 11:59:52 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] again with the gun stats
Message-ID: <3FCB2D38.1030508@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Sun Nov 30, 2003 03:28 pm Damien Broderick wrote:
> The Brits on the list will surely know in better detail.
>

One big problem in all these stats is that it is very difficult to
compare like with like. What is classified as 'violent crime' varies
greatly from country to country and even from state to state.

In the UK the 'horrifying' rise in violent street crime is mostly kids
nicking mobile phones off each other. And a lot of these are 'fake'
crimes. Mobile phones are a fashion item and they all want the latest
gear. So some thieving goes on, but many just toss them in the river and
claim they were stolen so they can get the latest new phone from the
insurance or gullible parents.

"Crime statistics show that in London:

  * In half of all street robberies, a mobile phone is stolen
  * In two thirds of those robberies, a mobile phone is the only item taken.
  * Fourteen- to 17-year-olds are the age group most likely to be
victims of street crime."


Summary statistics are only a general guide. You have to look behind the
20% increase or decrease to see what is really going on.

BillK








From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Dec  1 15:28:33 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 07:28:33 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] (2)ImmInst Update "Girls Night Out" Sun Nov
  30
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bbf0c82a7a95@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031201072417.02122990@pop.earthlink.net>

At 12:32 PM 12/1/03 +0200, Amara Graps wrote:

>I hope it was fun!
>
>I was seriously considering to participate in this until I looked
>at the time... It's 2am in Europe. That's too difficult for me.
>
>Is there any chance that occasionally, these chats could be held
>at a different time?

Hi Amara! - Yes it was great fun.  Discussed many topics and had many 
lols.  Why don't you contact Susan about scheduling next months chat at a 
time convenient for you.

Natasha


Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc
----------
President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.transhuman.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031201/5e9449ad/attachment.html>

From iph1954 at msn.com  Mon Dec  1 13:47:09 2003
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 08:47:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley-Drexler Debate Analysis
Message-ID: <BAY5-F13mEKYQUgbU76000199c4@hotmail.com>

Eric Drexler and Richard Smalley recently have been exchanging views about 
Drexler?s version of nanotechnology and Smalley?s objections to it. Their 
back and forth written debate is the cover story in today's Chemical and 
Engineering News 
(http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html).

As described in the press release shown below, CRN has prepared an 
independent review of the Smaller-Drexler exchange (see 
http://CRNano.org/Debate.htm).

Mike Treder

Executive Director, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology - 
http://CRNano.org
Director, World Transhumanist Association - http://transhumanism.org
Executive Director, New York Transhumanist Association - http://nyta.net
Founder, Incipient Posthuman Website - http://incipientposthuman.com
Executive Advisory Team, Extropy Institute - http://extropy.org
KurzweilAI "Big Thinker" - http://kurzweilai.net/bios/frame.html

==================

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Published Debate Shows Weakness of MNT Denial

NEW YORK ? Attackers of molecular nanotechnology (MNT) received a setback 
today when a published debate revealed the weakness of their position. The 
four-part exchange between Eric Drexler, the founder of nanotechnology, and 
Nobelist Richard Smalley, who contends that many of Drexler's plans are 
impossible, is the cover story in the December 1 Chemical & Engineering 
News.

"We have carefully examined the arguments presented by each side," says 
Chris Phoenix, Director of Research at the Center for Responsible 
Nanotechnology (CRN). "We conclude that Smalley failed to show why MNT 
cannot work as Drexler asserts." Phoenix has prepared a 6-page review of the 
Smalley-Drexler debate, including historical overview, technical analysis, 
and commentary on policy implications. It is available at 
http://CRNano.org/Debate.htm.

Drexler, who single-handedly launched the field of nanotechnology in the 
late 1980's, believes that mechanical control of chemical reactions can form 
the basis of powerful manufacturing systems. Smalley has tried for years to 
debunk the possibility of such manufacturing, since it could in theory lead 
to scary consequences such as tiny machines building exponential copies of 
themselves at the expense of the biosphere.

In 2001, Smalley published an article in Scientific American claiming that 
mechanical control of reactions would require impossible "magic fingers." 
But in the current debate, Smalley agreed that "something like an enzyme or 
a ribosome ... can do precise chemistry." The question to be answered now 
is: What kind of chemistry can an enzyme-like chemical system do?

Smalley attempts to define limits, and fails. He claims that enzymes can 
only work under water, but this is untrue, as almost two decades of 
published research have shown. With this crucial support missing, his 
remaining case against mechanical chemistry falls apart. At this point, no 
one knows the limits of such a system. As far back as 1959, Nobel-winning 
physicist Richard Feynman said it should be possible "to synthesize any 
chemical substance." Work by Drexler and others over the past decade has 
shown that even a much more limited capability should be sufficient to 
develop manufacturing systems that can duplicate themselves.

"Smalley's factual inaccuracies, his unscientific and vehement attacks on 
MNT, and his continued failure to criticize the actual chemical proposals of 
MNT, demonstrate that it is time to move beyond this debate," says Mike 
Treder, Executive Director of CRN. "It?s time to focus on the technical 
proposals and the serious societal implications that we can no longer afford 
to ignore."

During the past decade, detailed proposals have been developed for the 
architecture and technology of molecular manufacturing systems. Such 
proposals cannot be tested fully in the absence of laboratory work and 
targeted research, but enough is known to initiate action based on existing 
work. The proposals are sufficiently detailed to support a much more 
thoughtful critical study than has yet been done, and such a study would 
result in further refinement of the proposals.

"We can?and we must?begin to quantify the expected capabilities of molecular 
manufacturing systems," says Phoenix. "What substances and devices can they 
build? How rapidly can they work? How easy will it be to design products for 
these manufacturing systems? How much will it cost to create such a system, 
and how quickly will that cost decrease over time?"

Treder adds, "Now that even Richard Smalley is talking about the 
capabilities of enzymes in molecular manufacturing, instead of impossible 
magic fingers, we hope that facile and ungrounded denials of MNT will no 
longer be credible."

The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology is headquartered in New York. CRN 
is an affiliate of World Care, an international, non-profit, 501(c)(3) 
organization. For more information on CRN, see http://www.crnano.org/.

Press release link -- http://CRNano.org/PR-Debate.htm

_________________________________________________________________
Is there a gadget-lover on your gift list?  MSN Shopping has lined up some 
good bets!  http://shopping.msn.com



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 14:04:56 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:04:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gun and crime stats for the USA
In-Reply-To: <003501c3b7bd$f96bf650$9ef9a343@GaryMiller01>
Message-ID: <20031201140456.86096.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Gary Miller <aiguy at comcast.net> wrote:
> Don't we have to add the number of deaths from accidental gun deaths
> to the
> number murdered to get a true picture of loss of life?
> 
> Quoting http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel013101.shtml
> 
> Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay figures show 2.39
> accidental
> or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every justifiable
> fatal
> shooting. Now, 2 to 1 is a lot less dramatic than 43 to 1 earlier
> reported
> in a flawed  earlier analysis, but we still have more unjustifiable
> gun deaths than justifiable gun deaths in the home.

Kellerman's figures have been thoroughly destroyed as anything
meaningful. In fact, his study is taught in statistics classes as an
example of how to lie with fraudulent stats.

The facts are that the Keck surveys established that lawful defensive
gun use occurs over 2 million times a year in the US, with around 9,000
homicides. Most defensive gun uses never result in the firing of a
shot. People like Kellerman refuse to count such uses.

> 
> Worse yet many of those killed are the very children the parents seek
> to protect.

On the contrary, another area Kellerman lies is in counting ALL child
deaths at the hands of parents as being gun related if there is a gun
in the home. Most child deaths at the hands of parents occur with the
hands (choking, beating, kicking, starving, drowning, etc).

Another area is one you are confusing here. When the FBI reports a
murder victim as being 'related or acquainted' with their killer, this
does NOT just include parents, relatives, friends and neighbors. THis
includes the drug dealer on the corner and the cranck addict in the
alley. Being 'acquainted' with the perpetrator means "was the victim
aware of the perpetrators identity and/or presence in the neighborhood
prior to the crime?" and does not just include people you wouldn't mind
having over for tea.

> 
> Hand gun locks and smart guns could eliminate this disparity once the
> public was legally required to meet this requirement.  But the cost
> of smart guns could be cost prohibitive and hand gun locks laws
> could only be enforced after the fact or on an inspection basis
> the way we do with automobiles.

Actually studies have shown no increase in safety with gun locks
outside of an increase in safety for abusive parents, who might
otherwise be killed at the hands of their victim children if they could
get their hands on their parents firearms. Gun locks are very easy to
overcome in several minutes with a small pair of bolt cutters or a
bobby pin or paper clip. I have even seen some that would pop open if
you banged them on your desk at the right angle while pulling on the
hasp. Contrarily, gun locks hamper a homeowners ability to use the gun
in the event of an actual home invasion of any sort, and are recorded
as responsible for a number of deaths as a result.

> 
> Juries would be extremely reluctant to prosecute parents for
> manslaughter
> who left an unlocked gun where a child could gain access but the
> publicity
> from such trials could further server to educate other gun owners.

The OB/GYN who delivered myself and my siblings, who was also my
grandfathers best friend, was killed on holiday evening, along with his
wife and son by a biker gang invading their home in Massachusetts in
the late 1970's. Massachusetts law did not allow even the training of
handgun use to children under 16, and his 14 year old son was the only
one in reach of a hand gun at the time, a boy who had been an avid
shooter since age 9. He tried to use his fathers 1911 pistol, but it
jammed and he was overpowered before he could clear the stack. Do NOT
try to tell me that preventing children from accessing firearms is any
sort of answer to anything.

> 
> I have read that the decrease in murder rates is in a large part due
> to the decreased fatalities caused by improvement of medical trauma. 
> Additional factors include improved police work in getting repeat
> violent offenders off
> the street sooner and laws like three strikes and your out which put
> repeat violent offenders away for good.

It is documented that states that pass right-to-carry laws experience a
minimum of a 12% greater decrease in violent crime than states without
such laws. (Dr John Lott, "More Guns, Less Crime"; University of
Chicago Press) Furthermore, Lott shows that spree killings are reduced
by 80% over non-right-to-carry states.

Violent offenders are not being put away for good, either. Violent
criminals are being released early, without warning victims and
witnesses, in order to make room for drug offenders.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 14:09:07 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 06:09:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <046601c3b7c2$d9e81570$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> I doubt it.
> It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.

Sorry, Dirk, but the numbers really do prove my side. Dr. John Lott's
study was of ALL FBI crime data from 1980 to 1995 and proves that
right-to-carry reduces crime. Antyi-gun studies always cherry pick
their data sets from communities that fit their prejudices. NONE have
ever looked at even a large fraction of the data that Lott's study
covered. Furthermore, a more recent study of the same data using more
advanced statistical methods demonstrated that the crime reduction was
greater than the 12% that Lott reported, more in the order of 25%.

Faith does not get proven by statistics, faith only exists in SPITE of
evidence to the contrary, so I am sorry, but it is the anti-gun stance
that lives by faith.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From extropy at audry2.com  Mon Dec  1 15:20:09 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 23:20:09 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gun and crime stats for the USA
In-Reply-To: <003501c3b7bd$f96bf650$9ef9a343@GaryMiller01> (aiguy@comcast.net)
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031130185856.05ba78d8@mail.earthlink.net>
	<003501c3b7bd$f96bf650$9ef9a343@GaryMiller01>
Message-ID: <200312011520.hB1FK9X16392@igor.synonet.com>


> Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay figures show 2.39 accidental
> or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every justifiable fatal
> shooting. Now, 2 to 1 is a lot less dramatic than 43 to 1 earlier reported
> in a flawed  earlier analysis, but we still have more unjustifiable gun
> deaths than justifiable gun deaths in the home.

To get a real ratio you need to factor in the justifiable shootings
which do not occur. Innocent people defending themselves probably
shoot (or shoot to kill) less often than the bad guys.

Major




From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec  1 14:24:38 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 14:24:38 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <184DD522-240A-11D8-9B19-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 1 Dec 2003, at 14:09, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>> I doubt it.
>> It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.
>
> Sorry, Dirk, but the numbers really do prove my side. Dr. John Lott's
> study was of ALL FBI crime data from 1980 to 1995 and proves that
> right-to-carry reduces crime. Antyi-gun studies always cherry pick
> their data sets from communities that fit their prejudices. NONE have
> ever looked at even a large fraction of the data that Lott's study
> covered.

Are we talking about the same John Lott who invents sock-puppets on  
mailing lists ("Mary Rosh") to defend him against the accusations that  
he cited figures from surveys that funnily enough nobody else can find  
any records of?

http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/features/reader/ 
0,2061,561876,00.html

Or switches statistical model without saying so then blames a computer  
error?

http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/cgi-bin/blog/2003/09#0913b




-- Charlie



From matus at matus1976.com  Mon Dec  1 15:15:27 2003
From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 10:15:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns a choice for the individual
In-Reply-To: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00b501c3b81d$f6913660$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>



All this talk in the conversation on gun centers around the effects that
guns have in populations, not on individuals.  Does *my* owning a gun,
and learning its proper operation end up making *me* more or less safe?


I don't care if the average person is made less safe on average if more
people have guns, or if the average person is made safer if more people
have guns.  I thought this list was full of rugged individualists!

Do more guns = less crime, or more crime?  Frankly, I am not concerned
with this, I am inclined to feel the evidence suggests the former, but
this may be dependant on other factors, like average income of an area,
average population density, or education levels. 

The question of primary concern is, for an individual, does owning a gun
make one safer or less safe?  This decision will come down to each one
of us, it seems the majority of the people on this list have chosen to
not own a gun.  What made you make that decision?  I do not yet own a
gun, but I intend on buying one and learning its proper operation.  Does
anyone here feel that my owning a gun would make me less safe?  If so, I
am open to hear the compelling arguments, since my goal is to increase
my safety, not an ideological support of owning a gun.

I see a lot of people on this list making pretty severe changes in their
lives for the chance to live longer, for instance, practicing CR, or
exercising regularly and radically altering diet, or taking medication
that might not be proven effective.  Yet I would wager that most of the
individuals would never own a gun, can I only conclude that they feel
this would make them less safe?

Michael




From extropy at audry2.com  Mon Dec  1 16:31:05 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 00:31:05 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns--generalized
In-Reply-To: <00d901c3b7cf$42e4a5a0$c5994a43@texas.net>
	(thespike@earthlink.net)
References: <000001c3b7cc$fd6d8390$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
	<00d901c3b7cf$42e4a5a0$c5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <200312011631.hB1GV5816829@igor.synonet.com>


"Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net> writes:

> I don't know how this legal constitution caper works (being a benighted
> Aussie), but a few questions spring to mind.

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not, so I will answer the
questions "straight".

> Suppose slavery had been enshrined from the outset in the
> Constitution, Would it not be permitted to change these rights and
> exclusions?

A constitution can only be amended (retained but changed) according
to its own provisions. The basis in international law for completely
replacing a constitution is complicated but may be summarized "if you
have the most guns you will get away with it".

> Suppose enough citizens wanted to forbid the sale and consumption of
> alcoholic beverages, even though that had been implicitly a
> right until then? And if the ban were legally inserted into the legal
> constitution

Exactly what happened in the US (prohibition was a constitutional
amendment)

> would there be a legal constitutional way to get rid of it on
> second thoughts? And then to reimpose it on third thoughts?

If and only if your constitution has an "amendment" clause. Both
the US and Australian constitution do, though it is interesting to note
that the power to change the constitution in the US rests with the
congress (2/3 majority), not the people (referendum) as it does in
Australia.

Major


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 15:39:57 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 07:39:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <049401c3b7ce$c780f850$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031201153957.96469.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> It's far from simple.
> Why don't you tell me how you can own fully automatic rifles in
> California?

It is simple: California is in violation of the US Constitution, and
cases are proceeding through the courts right now. It will take a few
years, but things will get straightened out eventually. States like
California currently justify their banning of automatic rifles under an
odd interpretation of the decision in the 1939 case of US v Miller,
which involved a rum-runner arrested shortly after the end of
Prohibition with an allegedly short shotgun (a violation of the newly
minted NFA of 1934, a law passed to give the revinuers something to
do). Miller was the beginning of the militia interpretation of the 2nd
amendment. Problems with the Miller decision, though: Miller's lawyers
never showed at the SCOTUS for the trial, they figured that since
they'd won at every level below the SCOTUS that their case was sewn up.
They did not count on the federal prosecutors lying three times in
their arguments before the court.

> It may be your constitutional right to own guns, but the govt gets to
> decide what guns you are allowed, and what you aren't.

Actually, this is not true. The BATF does not restrain your ability to
own any model of gun you want. Its only constitutional authority is to
tax. The NFA of 1934 was not a ban on automatic firearms, it was a tax
bill. There is a $200 tax on transfers of automatic weapons and
silencers. Any non-felon can buy one if they pay the tax and do the
paperwork. I've owned automatic firearms, and silencers, as a matter of
fact. The BATF TRIES to regulate everything, both military style and
non-military style weapons, and when you contest them on one side, they
claim that Miller gives them authority on that side because of the
militia argument, then when you contest them on the other, they claim
an entirely DIFFERENT and opposite interpretation of Miller.


> Your rights would not be in breach of the constitution if they only
> allowed you flintlock muskets.

Uh, no, even in Miller the court recognised that the people, as members
of the unorganized militia
(http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html), have a justified
reason to have access to military style weapons. The only way that
Miller lost his case to the feds was that the feds lied and claimed
that sawed off shotguns had never been used by any military unit in
history, when they were actually widely used in trench warfare in WWI,
just 21 years prior.

Since the federal law says all of the people are members of the
militia, and anti-gunners claim that the militia clause limits gun
ownership to the militia, then the only legally unrestricted guns
should be so-called 'assault weapons'.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From amara at amara.com  Mon Dec  1 14:42:56 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 16:42:56 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>

Ciao,

I ran across this online program that tries to analyze the gender
of the writer of a writing selection. I am writing quite a lot these
days, and I was curious about what the "gender genie" would
calculate for my gender.

http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html

"According to Koppel and Argamon, the algorithm should predict the
gender of the author approximately 80% of the time."

However, in my case, it was wrong, 100% of the time. Some other
people experienced the same errors, apparently, because, when I
input my results into their database, I saw:

----------------
"accuracy results

Am I right?
yes
	107582 (67.93%)
no
	50800 (32.07%)
158382 total responses since September 13, 2003"
-----------------

In order to test whether it was a fluke, I tried six different
essays, and got the following scores:


Eternal City Grapsody #1 - Mythology for Transhumans
http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=P84_0_4_0_C
Words: 1767
Female Score: 1922
Male Score: 3452

Eternal City Grapsody #2 - Of Snakes and Immortality
http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=P89_0_4_0_C
Words: 1402
Female Score: 1618
Male Score: 2048

Eternal City Grapsody #3 - The Pause that Refreshes
http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=P94_0_4_0_C
Words: 1016
Female Score: 1188
Male Score: 1585

Eternal City Grapsody #4 - Scales of Man: Adapting Technology to
Transhumans
http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=P380_0_4_0_C
Words: 1682
Female Score: 1746
Male Score: 2777

Eternal City Grapsody #5 - Parmigianino's Golden Transformations
http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=P551_0_4_0_C
Words: 1790
Female Score: 1239
Male Score: 2356

Eternal City Grappsody #6 - Tricksters: Synchronicity, Dirt, and Laughter
http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=P877_0_4_0_C
Words: 1678
Female Score: 2019
Male Score: 2068


The last one was a different style for me, a kind of giggling-out-
loud-style, as if speaking to a group of close friends, but the
algorithm still calculated me to be male.


I am sad about these results and this algorithm, I must say,
for a range of reasons, including:

* Are women 'themselves' when they write, or are they adapting
to the style of the Internet?

* The algorithm seems to have pretty narrow definition of
gender writing style.


How did the algorithm work? The following is a note about that.

Amara



=======================================

http://www.nature.com/nsu/030714/030714-13.html

Computer program detects author gender

Simple algorithm suggests words and syntax bear sex and genre stamp.
18 July 2003

PHILIP BALL

A new computer program can tell whether a book was written by a man
or a woman. The simple scan of key words and syntax is around 80%
accurate on both fiction and non-fiction1,2.

The program's success seems to confirm the stereotypical perception
of differences in male and female language use. Crudely put, men
talk more about objects, and women more about relationships.

Female writers use more pronouns (I, you, she, their, myself), say
the program's developers, Moshe Koppel of Bar-Ilan University in
Ramat Gan, Israel, and colleagues. Males prefer words that identify
or determine nouns (a, the, that) and words that quantify them (one,
two, more).

So this article would already, through sentences such as this, have
probably betrayed its author as male: there is a prevalence of
plural pronouns (they, them), indicating the male tendency to
categorize rather than personalize.

If I were female, the researchers imply, I'd be more likely to write
sentences like this, which assume that you and I share common
knowledge or engage us in a direct relationship. These differing
styles have previously been called 'informational' and 'involved',
respectively.

Koppel and colleagues trained their algorithm on a few test cases to
identify the most prevalent fingerprints of gender and of fiction
and non-fiction. They then set it searching for these fingerprints
in 566 English-language works in a variety of genres, ranging from A
Guide to Prague to A. S. Byatt's novel Possession - which,
intriguingly, the programme misclassified by gender, along with
Kazuo Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day.

Strikingly, the distinctions between male and female writers are
much the same as those that, even more clearly, differentiate
non-fiction and fiction. The programme can tell these two genres
apart with 98% accuracy. This is perhaps unsurprising, given that
non-fiction is more informational and fiction more involved.

Most of the works studied were published after 1975. The Israeli
team now intends to probe whether the differences extend further
back in time - and so whether George Eliot was wasting her time
disguising herself with a male nom de plume - and also whether they
occur in other languages.

References

1.Koppel, M., Argamon, S. & Shimoni, A. R. Automatically
categorizing written texts by author gender. Literary and Linguistic
Computing, in the press, (2003). |Homepage| 2.Argamon, S., Koppel,
M., Fine, J. & Shimoni, A. R. Gender, genre, and writing style in
formal written texts. Text, in the press, (2003).

========================================
-- 

***********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD             email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics        vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers            URL:   http://www.amara.com/
***********************************************************************
"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage."
       --Anais Nin


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 15:55:30 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 07:55:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns--generalized
In-Reply-To: <00d901c3b7cf$42e4a5a0$c5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031201155530.2326.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Spike reckons:
> 
> > In this country, gun ownership is our
> > right, so the fed cannot legally challenge it in any
> > case.  Were the fed to attempt to do so, we would be
> > forced to conclude that our legal constitutional
> > government had been overthrown, and would be obligated
> > to take up arms against it
> 
> I don't know how this legal constitution caper works (being a
> benighted
> Aussie), but a few questions spring to mind. Suppose slavery had been
> enshrined from the outset in the Constitution, or suppose that women
> had been forbidden suffrage. Would it not be permitted to change
these
> rights and exclusions? 

If you can get a supermajority of both congress and the states to vote
for a constitutional amendment, then you can amend the constitution, as
has been done with slavery and womens suffrage. Given that 75%+ of
Americans believe in an individual right to keep and bear arms, it
ain't bloodly likely to happen any time soon. Given also that it took a
civil war in addition to a constitutional amendment to get rid of
slavery, I doubt very much that you'd succeed with a constitutional gun
ban without a similar civil war. 

There are several other hurdles to overcome. Firstly, NH never lost its
constitutional right to revolt and seceed. Secondly, Texas retains the
right to break up into 5 separate states if it so decides to, in order
to gain leverage in the Senate (i.e. 5 states x 2 Senators per state =
10 Senate seats rather than just 2 as it now has), should such an
un-American amendment come to a vote. Thirdly, you'd have to overcome
the fact that most states have a right to bear arms in their own state
constitution. 

Fourthly, you'd have to deal with the fact that the federal government
is not a sovereign entity. Its authority is entirely delegated to it by
the people. No part of the Constitution alienates individuals from
their rights, amendments simply recognise that certain pre-existant
individual rights are not to be violated by the government. Any
amendment that sought to restrain individual rights such as the first
or second amendments would most certainly result in a very violent
reaction from a large portion of the citizenry.

You do not see such a reaction to mere laws like the Patriot Act
because most citizens recognise that this law is applied only to
non-Americans and/or Americans allied with foreign fasco-terrorist
groups. The population isn't ready to oppose it because their own ox is
not being gored, as evidenced by the fact that surveys show that 80%+
of african americans support racial profiling when it is applied to
arabs or other foreign muslims. We were far closer to armed
insurrection here in the US when the Clinton WHite House and its
supporters waged an undeclared war on Redneck-Americans.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From bjk at imminst.org  Mon Dec  1 16:00:25 2003
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 10:00:25 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat]  "Girls Night Out" - Chat Log
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20031201072417.02122990@pop.earthlink.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20031201072417.02122990@pop.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <3FCB6599.9040709@imminst.org>

Here's a link to the 'Girls Night Out' chat log (Nov 30)*
*http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=99&t=2218&st=0&#entry19111

By the way, Susan had a great time!

At first she worried no one would attend.  Happily,  Natasha, Nanogirl, 
sheliatx, Mermaid, Saille, Sabina, and others graciously took time out 
to join the chat.  Because this chat was such as success, Susan will 
schedule a time for next months chat soon.  Hopefully, at a time when 
more women can participate. 

Feel free to contact her: susan at imminst.org

Thanks!

Bruce Klein
Chair - ImmInst.org








From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Dec  1 16:13:46 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 17:13:46 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing
	styles
In-Reply-To: <B55E044559115F4B8C9EE62323C322B4032E347B@hickory.cmpcntr.tc.trincoll.edu>
References: <B55E044559115F4B8C9EE62323C322B4032E347B@hickory.cmpcntr.tc.trincoll.edu>
Message-ID: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 10:57:34AM -0500, Hughes, James wrote:
> Very cool Samantha - thanks for sharing this. I think it relates to a

Amara, iirc.

I find that apparent mis-classification (which is remarkably 
consistent) another data point confirming that we're weird.

Transhumanism *is* a distinct put-off to the majority of
women. I do not see how to package the meme complex in a more
palatable way. Perhaps out transhumanist women can produce
a diagnosis, and a suggestion.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031201/d17faa6d/attachment.bin>

From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  1 16:50:55 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 11:50:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <157240-220031211165055760@M2W083.mail2web.com>

Amara, bella, perhaps the test is outdated.  

We cannot expect either gender to write in tithe style prescribed to it by
any one generational testing regulation.  Also, I don't think it is
necessarily pejorative that a test senses a "male" writing style. Androgyny
is beautiful and an ability to write both across both gender-styles is a
lovely thing to do. This is expressly, I put on a tie many times when I
give a talk.  There is a time and place for all aspect of our "selves" and
you seem to have chosen an educated style in your articles.  However, I
wonder what the article you wrote on Fiorella Terenzi comes out as.  Did
you run that one through the test?

As an educated scientist, your training will come out in your writing no
matter how you fancify it. Also, try running some of your email stories
(that you send to your friends) through the test.  For example, Fiorella
writes in a "female" mode in her books, but in a professorial mode when
teaching.  Likewise, Sometimes I write as an artist/poet in metaphors and
off-the-cuff anecdotes.  Sometimes I write in a professorial mode when it
is required, and at other times, legal language creeps in.

Brings me back to the beginning. Who's judging and is the criteria
objective.

Ciao-
Natasha




--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  1 16:56:23 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 11:56:23 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] FAQ: TRANSHUMANIST FUTURES: CHALLENGES AND CONCERNS
Message-ID: <184670-2200312111656235@M2W065.mail2web.com>

ExI has been updating the FAQ. With so many changes, this has been on our
to do list, but hasn't been addressed until quite recently.

Do you have comments and/or suggestions for the following:

5. TRANSHUMANIST FUTURES: CHALLENGES AND CONCERNS

5.1 Do transhumanists in general, and friends of Extropy Institute in
particular, share economic and political views?   

5.2 What views do extropes have on the dangers of biotechnology,
nanotechnology, machine intelligence, and neurotechnology?  

5.3 What views do transhumanists have about religion?  

5.4 What political views are held by transhumanists?  

5.5 How does Extropy Institute respond to the neo-Luddites, including the
President?s Council on Bioethics?  




Thanks,
Natasha



--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From hemm at br.inter.net  Mon Dec  1 15:57:22 2003
From: hemm at br.inter.net (Henrique Moraes Machado)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:57:22 -0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
	<184DD522-240A-11D8-9B19-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <01b801c3b823$ce7276c0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>

Hello extropians,

I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. The first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems to be stalled. Is it related? Are we concentrating our resourses in evolving our communication means because our transportation means are poor, or does de current pace of developments on comms in fact causes less effort on advancing transportation? Just thinking. Sorry for the bad english, but it's not my native language and I am still learning.


From james.hughes at trincoll.edu  Mon Dec  1 15:57:34 2003
From: james.hughes at trincoll.edu (Hughes, James)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 10:57:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing
	styles
Message-ID: <B55E044559115F4B8C9EE62323C322B4032E347B@hickory.cmpcntr.tc.trincoll.edu>

Very cool Samantha - thanks for sharing this. I think it relates to a
sometimes subtle, often overt problem in transhumanist discussion lists
- the dominant masculine style of aggressive tech, politics and
philosophy argumentation, with less reference to personal life and
relationships. Sometimes, as a man, I think women are handicapped by
socialization to be uncomfortable with self-assertion and disputation,
and sometimes I feel like the male communication style in general, and
its extreme versions on our lists, are both a political problem for
transhumanism in our inability to attract more women and an
organizational problem that makes it more difficult to build on-line
community. I see the problem also in the context of the very similar
issues in the socialist movement (my background) which is similarly
disproportionately male and conversationally disputatious. But at least
there is a strong spirit of feminist self-criticism among socialist men
which made us more conscious of the problem, and more open to
counter-vailing efforts, even if they met with little success.

J. Hughes


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  1 17:04:48 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 09:04:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <184DD522-240A-11D8-9B19-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031201170448.25804.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> 
> On 1 Dec 2003, at 14:09, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >
> > --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> >> I doubt it.
> >> It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.
> >
> > Sorry, Dirk, but the numbers really do prove my side. Dr. John
> Lott's
> > study was of ALL FBI crime data from 1980 to 1995 and proves that
> > right-to-carry reduces crime. Antyi-gun studies always cherry pick
> > their data sets from communities that fit their prejudices. NONE
> have
> > ever looked at even a large fraction of the data that Lott's study
> > covered.
> 
> Are we talking about the same John Lott who invents sock-puppets on  
> mailing lists ("Mary Rosh") to defend him against the accusations
> that  
> he cited figures from surveys that funnily enough nobody else can
> find  any records of?

Your refer to this?
"Second, Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren reported
that he had investigated Lott's claim of a 1997 survey which found that
"98 percent of the time that people use guns defensively, they merely
have to brandish a weapon to break off an attack," and found no
evidence of the survey's existence."

The Kleck study is very widely known and published, though I am sure
that anti-gunners would wish that it did not exist.
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

For critiques of Kellerman's flawed study (where the 43 to 1 claim
comes from) see:
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgaga.html

Nor did he use the pseudonym to defend himself from such claims, he
used the name to write a fictitious review of his book, which is far
less offensive than the offenses of anti-gunner Michael Bellisiles,
recently drummed out of Emory University for academic dishonesty and
stripped of literary prizes, in that he invented citations and
fabricated data on a broad scale.

> 
> http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/features/reader/ 
> 0,2061,561876,00.html
> 
> Or switches statistical model without saying so then blames a
> computer  
> error?
> 
> http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/cgi-bin/blog/2003/09#0913b

Actually, he blames a computer error (on a Mac, mind you) for errors in
his data tables, essentially errors in labelling dates numerically,
which may more accurately be user errors from inexperience with the
software, which result in data files created in April (04) of one year
being confused with data files created in 2004...

Plassman and Tideman show that if there is any error, it is on the
conservative side. Their results show an even greater effect on crime
than Lott reported, though less consistent across all counties and
states.
"In this paper we use a Poisson-lognormal model to analyze
intertemporal and geographical variations in the effects of
right-to-carry laws on murders, rapes, and robberies. For each of these
crime categories our estimates suggest the existence of statistically
significant deterrent effects of right-to-carry laws for the majority
of the 10 states that have adopted such laws between 1977 and 1992, but
we also find that some of these states experienced statistically
significant increases in the numbers of certain crimes."
http://bingweb.binghamton.edu/~fplass/gun.pdf

Furthermore, Plassman and WHitley issued a response to critics of their
study as well as Lott's study:
http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol55/4/Plassmann_Whitley.pdf

Ayers and Donohue attempt to counter, claiming their study that P&W
critique, was not to show that crime dropped or increased in
jurisdictions that passed right to carry laws, but that such laws
merely imposed a 'jurisdiction selection effect' in which criminals
take their criminal activity elsewhere where right-to-carry did not
exist.
http://lawreview.stanford.edu/content/vol55/4/Ayres_Donohue_comment.pdf

Furthermore, Black and Nagin are rightly criticized by Lott for using a
systematic means of cherry picking, excluding 86% of counties because
such counties have less than 100,000 population, in their study
refuting Lott's work. Since most states with right-to-carry are mostly
made up of counties with less than 100,000 population, Black and Nagin
are simply excluding those areas where right-to-carry is most heavily
practiced and would therefore result in the greatest effect on crime.
Black and Nagin are essentially studying ONLY urban centers in the US,
not the US as a whole, when it is urban centers that have far worse
criminal problems than guns, such as drug war activity, and which
vastly misrepresent the degree of ethnic and racial diversity in the US overall.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  1 17:41:25 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 11:41:25 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat]  "Girls Night Out" - Chat Log
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20031201072417.02122990@pop.earthlink.net>
	<3FCB6599.9040709@imminst.org>
Message-ID: <003401c3b832$5a45b820$9e994a43@texas.net>


> Here's a link to the 'Girls Night Out' chat log (Nov 30)*
> *http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=99&t=2218&st=0&#entry19111


For a male observer, this is truly fascinating. It's hard to imagine a group
of men getting into this so quickly, if at all:

===================

18:23:37 Saille Love is a lot more, than just for a lover


18:23:40 Mermaid i have been married for ten years now...i'd like to still
be friends with my husband after many many years..but i hope to become more
'seperate' from him..i dont think of it as a failure of love..rather..i
think its a strengthening of love....
18:23:50 SusanFK Mermaid: my love for my lifepartner has only increased with
years...we are coming up on our 8th year together i i feel more passionate
about him today than the day we met.
18:23:56 Natasha I wonder what the product liability would be for "Primo
Posthuman" future body prototype.
18:24:02 Sabina Same here

18:24:18 Natasha I've been in love many times. I love my husband and I can
understand many levels of love.
18:24:22 sheilatx my husband and i are better friends since the divorce
18:24:37 Mermaid i feel more passion too..it has multiplied several
folds..esp because its now passion for more than one person
18:25:06 sheilatx guess i should say ex husband


18:25:17 Mermaid sheilatx: divorce is unnecessary
18:25:20 Natasha I left the hair color on my hair too long.

===================

Damien Broderick



From jacques at dtext.com  Mon Dec  1 17:54:31 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 18:54:31 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns--generalized (modifying the constitution)
In-Reply-To: <200312011631.hB1GV5816829@igor.synonet.com>
References: <000001c3b7cc$fd6d8390$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
	<00d901c3b7cf$42e4a5a0$c5994a43@texas.net>
	<200312011631.hB1GV5816829@igor.synonet.com>
Message-ID: <16331.32855.815446.310102@localhost.localdomain>

Major a ?crit (2.12.2003/00:31) :

> 
> "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net> writes:
> 
> > would there be a legal constitutional way to get rid of it on
> > second thoughts? And then to reimpose it on third thoughts?
> 
> If and only if your constitution has an "amendment" clause. Both
> the US and Australian constitution do, though it is interesting to note
> that the power to change the constitution in the US rests with the
> congress (2/3 majority), not the people (referendum) as it does in
> Australia.


Here's how it works in Switzerland (quite spectacular, I think).

Switzerland has a political right of "popular initiative", in which
anyone can submit a constitutional amendment, to be voted on by the
people, provided they collect the preliminary support of 100,000
voters (pop. is 7,3 millions) within 18 months. To result in an actual
modification of the Constitution, it needs to get the majority of the
people, and the majority of States.

http://www.admin.ch/ch/e/pore/index3.html

Incredible isn't it? It's not very complicated to get 100,000
signatures, if you create 50 small comittees in the country which each
get 2000 signatures, you're done. And then, all the Swiss people get
to read your proposal and vote yes or no. If it's yes, then you have
changed the constitution of your country.

To give an example. On May 18 we voted (I am Swiss, live in France,
vote by mail) on 7 such popular initiatives regarding potential
constitutional amendments.

One was to enforce rents to be "fair", one was to have a 4 years
experience of no cars running one day per season, one was to make
commitments of not building nuclear plants for some time, one was to
guarantee cheap access to health services, one was an equal-rights
text to force many institutions to provide facilities for disabled
people, one was about nuclear policy again, and finally one was to
guarantee that professional training be offered to such and such
people.

I voted against all 7 initiatives, and they were all rejected. What do
such subjects have to do with the fundamental law that Constitution is
supposed to be? Right, not much. Basic law is made by parliament like
everywhere else, and popular initiative can only result in the
modification of the Constitution. Which gets proposed often, but is
usually rejected. That's our system.

There are two things which contribute to make constitutional change
through popular initiative rare. One is that the German-speaking part
of Switzerland contains an array of very small States which are very
conservative (they are the founding, still quite rural, States), so
that this relatively small population has a strong weight in the
majority of States. The other one is that the government can add to
the popular initiative its own counter-project, which tries to address
some of the aspirations that prompted the initative, while avoiding
its pitfalls or excesses. It often happens that the people who started
the initiative really had a point, but it was captured in the
counter-project, which was accepted by the people instead of the
initiative.

Between 1891 and 2003, only 13 popular initiatives were accepted and
resulted in the modification of the Constitution. The last one was in
March 2002, when Switzerland decided to adhere to UN. Browsing the
list, I see that in 1908, the production and drinking of absynth was
constitutionally forbidden:

http://www.absinthe.ch/new/monhistoire_linterdiction.php?l=en

It would be quite practical to launch transhumanist-oriented popular
initiatives in Switzerland, to the effect, for example, that one of
the goal of the community is to extend healthy lifespans, and that
adequate credits and research must be devoted to it. And it's a good
way to get to talk about some subject, even if the popular initiative
is eventually rejected. (I can imagine this one being accepted.)

Jacques



From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec  1 17:53:08 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 17:53:08 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Trolling (was: Guns)
In-Reply-To: <20031201170448.25804.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031201170448.25804.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <391BEFD4-2427-11D8-9B19-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 1 Dec 2003, at 17:04, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>>> red.
>>
>> Are we talking about the same John Lott who invents sock-puppets on
>> mailing lists ("Mary Rosh") to defend him against the accusations
>> that
>> he cited figures from surveys that funnily enough nobody else can
>> find  any records of?
> Your refer to this?

The URL that you cut. You're not reading for comprehension, Mike, 
you're assuming that I'm attacking your figures on gun use. I'm not. 
I'm questioning the reliability of youur sources. You're assuming that 
because I'm insisting on accuracy I'm an anti-gun campaigner. You're 
also assuming that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, 
in terms of the fabrication of research data: that lies on one side 
justify lies by the other side.

Bluntly: you're so intent on following your own script for how to 
interact with people on the topic of gun ownership that you've 
effectively turned yourself into a troll. Can I request some time out? 
Because this thread *is* a waste of energy, brains, and CPU cycles, for 
all concerned.



-- Charlie



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Mon Dec  1 18:17:32 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:17:32 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031201131526.02581450@mail.comcast.net>

Natasha wrote:

>Amara, bella, perhaps the test is outdated.
>
>We cannot expect either gender to write in tithe style prescribed to it by
>any one generational testing regulation.  Also, I don't think it is
>necessarily pejorative that a test senses a "male" writing style. Androgyny
>is beautiful and an ability to write both across both gender-styles is a
>lovely thing to do. This is expressly, I put on a tie many times when I
>give a talk.  There is a time and place for all aspect of our "selves" and
>you seem to have chosen an educated style in your articles.  However, I
>wonder what the article you wrote on Fiorella Terenzi comes out as.  Did
>you run that one through the test?

When my ex and I were divorcing and went through a child custody 
evaluation, I took the MMPI.  The clinical psychologist pasted boilerplate 
text in his report:

>This profile occasionally reflects an individual who is conflicted over 
>their sexual identity.  They do not identify with the cultural stereotype 
>of the masculine role.  These men have a wide range of interests, and are 
>apt to be idealistic.

At trial, opposing counsel pounced on this, trying to impute that I am 
homosexual and (in the eyes of a conservative judge) perforce an unsuitable 
parent.  The psychologist testified that it's extremely common to find an 
elevated Scale 5 in highly educated men, and that he himself did.

 From _Psychological Experts in Divorce Actions_:

>... originally intended to be a measure of homosexuality.  However they 
>quickly realized that the homosexual population was too heterogeneous to 
>be measured by one scale.  It is also the only scale that has different 
>norms for males and females.
>
>Scale 5 is highly related to education.
>
>Men with low scores ... are individuals who tend to have "macho" 
>self-images and present themselves as being extremely masculine, 
>overemphasizing their masculinity in a somewhat unsophisticated 
>way.  Women with similar scores identify with the stereotypical feminine 
>roles but may doubt their own femininity.
>
>Men with elevated 5's -- have conflicted thoughts about their sexual 
>identity; are insecure in a masculine role; are effeminate and have 
>aesthetic and artistic interests; are intelligently capable; are 
>ambitious, competitive, and persevering; show good judgment and common 
>sense; are curious; are creative as well as imaginative, and 
>individualistic; are social and sensitive to others; are tolerant; are 
>capable of expressing warm feelings to others; are passive and dependent 
>as well as submissive; have good self-control and rarely act out; are 
>inner-directed.
>
>Women with elevated 5's -- tend to be uninterested in being seen as 
>feminine; not interested in appearing or behaving as other women do; 
>reject the traditional female role; have stereotypic masculine interests; 
>are active, vigorous, and assertive; are competitive, aggressive, and 
>dominating; are outgoing, uninhibited, and self-confident; are 
>unemotional; are unfriendly.

I'd guess that virtually everyone on this list has an elevated 5.

I further suspect that the accuracy of Koppel's and Argamon's test is 
inversely correlated with the subject's MMPI Scale 5.


-- David Lubkin.




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Dec  1 18:22:17 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:22:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
Message-ID: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>

I've thought a bit on this lately and am a little let down with the pace of 
transportation. If you look at air travel over the last 50 years there are 
few major breakthroughs. 75 years ago, it took weeks to travel around the 
world and then with commercial air travel, that was cut down to a day or 
merely hours. 50 years later, we're still pretty much at the same flight 
times. We have more routes and scheduled and tvs in the seats but flights 
are still about the same length. Perhaps they are even longer if you take 
security waits into the equation.

I think the main reason why air travel tech has stalled is lack of 
competition. There's really only two companies making planes-Airbus and 
Boeing- and both are heavily subsidized by their respective governments. Air 
travel is subsidized by local governments and businesses who don't have much 
incentive to decrease travel time.

For ground travel, in the US at least, road trips take less time because the 
speed limit has been increased from 55 to 70-75 on interstates. It's nice to 
be save 2 hours from an Atlanta to Miami trip, but I'm still waiting for 15 
minute NY-London trips and flying cars.

How long until the science fiction breakthroughs come on line? Transporters, 
etc.

I've done a bit of teleconferencing and videoconferencing and while it is 
sufficient for basic communication, it's not yet replacing meatspace.

BAL
>From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at br.inter.net>
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
>Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:57:22 -0200
>
>Hello extropians,
>
>I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. The 
>first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems to be stalled. 
>Is it related? Are we concentrating our resourses in evolving our 
>communication means because our transportation means are poor, or does de 
>current pace of developments on comms in fact causes less effort on 
>advancing transportation? Just thinking. Sorry for the bad english, but 
>it's not my native language and I am still learning.
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

_________________________________________________________________
Is there a gadget-lover on your gift list?  MSN Shopping has lined up some 
good bets!  http://shopping.msn.com



From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  1 19:29:55 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 14:29:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
Message-ID: <410-220031211192955719@M2W054.mail2web.com>

From: Brian Lee 

>I've thought a bit on this lately and am a little let down with the pace
of transportation.<

It's not exactly travelling next door or across the planet, but it's
something to think about.


_A Vision of Future Space Transportation_ (Apogee Books Space Series)
by Tim McElyea, David Brin
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1896522939/104-3904145-7775949
?v=glance

"The glorious space age has come and gone. So what now? What's next? To go
further, to go faster, we must take the next step. Space is still full of
mystery and challenges humankind as much as ever. Ideas on what the next
step, or steps vary greatly and there is no shortage of concepts for the
future of space transportation. Concepts include new engines, new
strategies, harnessing gravity, electromagnetism, nuclear energy and more.
This book will take you on a guided visual tour of the future of space
transportation. From Earth to Orbit to In-Space transportation, you will
sample what is being considered and get an easy-to-understand explanation
of what the spacecraft will do and how it will work. 

"Decades ago Dr. Wernher von Braun teamed with Walt Disney to animate a
mission to Mars and inspired a generation. Today multimedia, animation and
video serve a similar communications need. The CD-ROM included contains
official NASA videos, vehicle concept animation, and dynamic multimedia.
View spacecraft concepts in 3D, see mission animation and hear first hand
what the visionaries of the aerospace industry hope to accomplish."




--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 20:29:29 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 20:29:29 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
References: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01ee01c3b849$d535ebb0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Guns


>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > I doubt it.
> > It's a religious issue that is a matter of faith.
>
> Sorry, Dirk, but the numbers really do prove my side. Dr. John Lott's
> study was of ALL FBI crime data from 1980 to 1995 and proves that
> right-to-carry reduces crime. Antyi-gun studies always cherry pick
> their data sets from communities that fit their prejudices. NONE have
> ever looked at even a large fraction of the data that Lott's study
> covered. Furthermore, a more recent study of the same data using more
> advanced statistical methods demonstrated that the crime reduction was
> greater than the 12% that Lott reported, more in the order of 25%.
>
> Faith does not get proven by statistics, faith only exists in SPITE of
> evidence to the contrary, so I am sorry, but it is the anti-gun stance
> that lives by faith.

The faith I am referring to is the *belief* that society should have no say
in the legitimacy of your position.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From scerir at libero.it  Mon Dec  1 20:53:27 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 21:53:27 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <000801c3b84d$2c2f8450$68c31b97@administxl09yj>

From: "Brian Lee" 

> How long until the science fiction breakthroughs come on line? 
> Transporters, etc.

If you mean teleportation we are waiting for a "physical" 
full interpretation (and then implementation) of it.

Because, talking about the transmission of quantum information
from Alice to Bob, in general and also in the usual teleportation 
scheme, we intuitively think there must be a channel connecting 
Alice and Bob. But, in this case, a paradox arises. If - look here - 
'only' two 'classical' bits were sent from Alice to Bob, by 'classical'
means, how did the 'full' quantum information pass from Alice to Bob? 
This seems to be a violation of the conservation of information,
or something like this. There are different views about it.  

Somebody thinks there is no trasmission of quantum information 
from Alice to Bob, but the (missing) quantum information is already 
there, at Bob's home, 'because' we live in a multiverse. 

Another possible view states there is 'another' channel, 
'another' path connecting Alice and Bob, which is defined 
by the two world-lines of the distributed EPR particle pair. 
This means - following Bennett - that the 'remaining' quantum information
must have been transmitted from Alice to the EPR source 'backward in 
time' and then from the EPR source to Bob 'foward in time'. 
This interpretation is fully consistent (no paradoxes like 'you can
kill your grandfather' arise here) so long as the two 'classical' 
bits Alice wish to send (to Bob) remain unknown, while that weird
informational jamming happens.
  



From alex at ramonsky.com  Mon Dec  1 20:51:29 2003
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 20:51:29 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Scott Walker Kama Sutra
References: <p05100302bbefada56603@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <3FCBA9D1.6010907@ramonsky.com>



Amara Graps wrote:

> Came into my office to pick up some papers about carbonaceous
> chondrites on Earth, and I leave my office as I saw words and pictures
> about kama sutra for robots. Made me smile. Have a good day.
>
> Amara

Hey, there's hope for me yet  :  )
AR




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Mon Dec  1 21:01:17 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 16:01:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gender roles
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031201154514.0287fec8@mail.comcast.net>

After my posting re Scale 5, I got curious and did a little more 
research.  The test was revised slightly for the MMPI-2.  Since I read the 
score interpretation taught to clinical psychologists (reprinted below), 
questions and doubts about anything clinical psychologists assert have been 
bubbling inside me faster than I can voice them.

But I thought you might be interested in what passes for science.

 From http://cmhs.utoledo.edu/npiazza/Courses/Adv%20Personality/MMPI-2.htm :

Scale 5 Interpretations for Men

 > 75 -- Typically self-proclaimed homosexuals and persons willing to admit 
their homosexual concerns.

65 - 75 -- Lacks identification with culturally prescribed sex roles. 
Passive, inner-directed, have aesthetic interests, and may even seem 
effeminate.

58 - 64 -- Men tend toward aesthetic activities, are imaginative, 
introspective, and have a wide range of interests. They are socially 
perceptive and sensitive to interpersonal interactions. Typical range for 
most college educated men.

45 - 57 -- Traditional identification with sex role interests and 
activities. Typical range for college educated males in masculine oriented 
fields, e.g., engineering and agriculture.

< 44 -- Very strong identification with traditional masculine role. May be 
rigid and inflexible about their masculinity. Tend to be adventurous, 
easygoing, coarse, and have interests in mechanics, sports, and outdoor 
activities.

Scale 5 Interpretations for Women

 > 75 -- Typically self-proclaimed homosexuals and persons willing to admit 
their homosexual concerns.

65 - 74 -- Unusual for women to score in this range. Check for errors in 
scoring or profiling. Not interested in appearing or behaving according to 
traditional feminine role. Tend to be vigorous, aggressive, dominating, and 
competitive. Confident and spontaneous, but may become anxious when 
expected to conform to traditional feminine sex roles.

45 - 64 -- Less interested in traditional feminine activities with more 
masculine interests and activities that women who score low on this scale.

35 - 44 -- Genuinely identifies with traditional feminine interests and 
activities.

< 34 -- Over-identification with the feminine role. Tend to be passive, 
submissive, modest, yielding, and demure. They may be coy, seductive, and 
feign helplessness. May be self-pitying, masochistic, and manipulate men 
via sex.


-- David Lubkin.




From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  1 21:03:25 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 21:03:25 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <025401c3b84e$a177aac0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Lee" <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com>
To: <hemm at br.inter.net>; <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


> I've thought a bit on this lately and am a little let down with the pace
of
> transportation. If you look at air travel over the last 50 years there are
> few major breakthroughs. 75 years ago, it took weeks to travel around the
> world and then with commercial air travel, that was cut down to a day or
> merely hours. 50 years later, we're still pretty much at the same flight
> times. We have more routes and scheduled and tvs in the seats but flights
> are still about the same length. Perhaps they are even longer if you take
> security waits into the equation.
>
> I think the main reason why air travel tech has stalled is lack of
> competition. There's really only two companies making planes-Airbus and
> Boeing- and both are heavily subsidized by their respective governments.
Air
> travel is subsidized by local governments and businesses who don't have
much
> incentive to decrease travel time.


It's more basic than that.
To get from my house in Britain to a friends in New York takes approximately
13hrs.
Of that, 7 is the flight time.

I have no intention of paying a premium so I can knock 3hrs off that time.
It's not the speed of the flight that matters, but the journey times and
getting through the airports at both ends.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec  1 22:16:12 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 14:16:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> Transhumanism *is* a distinct put-off to the
> majority of
> women.

Inherently?  No more than it is a distinct put-off to
the majority of men, at least by my experience.
There are many things that (Western) men and women
both want, self-control among them.

Is not one of the end goals of transhumansism vastly
increased control over oneself, including the ability
not to age and die if desired?


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec  1 22:41:38 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 14:41:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <20031201224138.6071.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> I ran across this online program that tries to
> analyze the gender
> of the writer of a writing selection. I am writing
> quite a lot these
> days, and I was curious about what the "gender
> genie" would
> calculate for my gender.
> 
> http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html
> 
> "According to Koppel and Argamon, the algorithm
> should predict the
> gender of the author approximately 80% of the time."
> 
> However, in my case, it was wrong, 100% of the time.

Same here.  Perhaps it can distinguish
"classic-masculine" from "classic-feminine", but it's
probable that most people on this list are neither.
As per the recent posts on Scale 5, perhaps there are
actually three mental "genders" in modern society:
masculine, feminine, and educated (which incorporates
some traits from the classic pair - like sensitivity
to others from feminine and assertiveness from
masculine - but also has traits all its own).

I'm not sure if "educated" is quite the most accurate
word for it, but from the reports, it does seem to be
what highly-educated men and women tend towards.

...I wonder.  If I am correct about that, then might
some of the social problems we're seeing be caused by
a fundamental perception of "there are men" and "there
are women", with the modification "some men act like
women and some women act like men", with no allowance
for this third "gender" since it falls outside of that
model?  (And if there is a third, might there be a
fourth?  Or would that be dividing things up too far
to be useful?)

The source of the model is obvious - and body
modification is not (yet) widespread enough that there
are many who do away with the bothersome reproductive
organs.  (What if I don't want to have kids, but
rather to impress other peoples' kids so they'll
follow in my footsteps more firmly than offspring
related only by genetics?)


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 02:49:54 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 18:49:54 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <20031201153957.96469.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002b01c3b87e$f737df90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > 
> > It's far from simple.
> > Why don't you tell me how you can own fully automatic rifles in
> > California?
> 
> It is simple: California is in violation of the US Constitution, and
> cases are proceeding through the courts right now...

Furthermore, the Taxifornia government is evil and corrupt,
in the pockets of gambling interests and under the control
of those who plot to harm the taxpayers.  A group of them
were caught by a live microphone a few months ago, plotting
to cut funds to highway repair, so that drivers would hit
potholes and ruin their tires, resulting in their crying 
out for higher taxes to repair roads.  Fortunately, they
were heard by everyone in the capital building.  Busted!
Book em, Dano.

Watch what happens next fall.  We will send these reprehensible
miscreants packing with a one-way ticket out of Taxamento,
and that will be a fiiiine day indeed.  The voters will 
take this state back from those who would enslave our minds, 
restrict our sacred freedoms, plunder our paychecks and 
mess up our tires.

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 03:07:24 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 19:07:24 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] think this will catch on?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031201154514.0287fec8@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <003801c3b881$68d30e20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Looks like fun:

http://motobykz.co.uk/MercF300/Merc300Funjet.htm

spike



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Tue Dec  2 04:42:27 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 23:42:27 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] think this will catch on?
In-Reply-To: <003801c3b881$68d30e20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <003801c3b881$68d30e20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312012328260.-457029@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


Wow, spike! It looks like a wonderfully updated version of
the Messerschmitt from the 1950s....

Here, Google!  :)
http://members.shaw.ca/tallteri/messeropenme.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/tallteri/messerclosed.jpg

Ha! You can even make a paper model!
http://papertoys.com/messerschmitt.htm

If the F300 LifeJet gets 50 mpg I'll be *happy* to
have one!  oooh. :)  I can just see it now, chasing around
these little mountain roads!  ;D

Regards,
MB

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> Looks like fun:
>
> http://motobykz.co.uk/MercF300/Merc300Funjet.htm
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 04:53:06 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 20:53:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <01ee01c3b849$d535ebb0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031202045306.22644.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> The faith I am referring to is the *belief* that society should have
> no say in the legitimacy of your position.

Ah, well, on that, society does have a say, and more than 3/4 of the US
population supports an individual right to keep and bear arms. 39
states have laws guaranteeing a right-to-carry-concealed, most of which
were passed in the last decade, a decade in which the US has seen crime
drop by half, a phenomenon seen in no other industrialized nation,
where no other industrialized nation has as gun laws as free as ours.
Society has spoken, in support of my position.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 04:55:32 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 20:55:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <002b01c3b87e$f737df90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031202045532.79700.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > It's far from simple.
> > > Why don't you tell me how you can own fully automatic rifles in
> > > California?
> > 
> > It is simple: California is in violation of the US Constitution,
> and
> > cases are proceeding through the courts right now...
> 
> Furthermore, the Taxifornia government is evil and corrupt,
> in the pockets of gambling interests and under the control
> of those who plot to harm the taxpayers.  A group of them
> were caught by a live microphone a few months ago, plotting
> to cut funds to highway repair, so that drivers would hit
> potholes and ruin their tires, resulting in their crying 
> out for higher taxes to repair roads.  Fortunately, they
> were heard by everyone in the capital building.  Busted!
> Book em, Dano.

Ah, finally the statists trespass on one freedom that Californians
cannot brook trespass against: the right to drive.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 05:01:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 21:01:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] think this will catch on?
In-Reply-To: <003801c3b881$68d30e20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031202050114.77087.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Looks like fun:
> 
> http://motobykz.co.uk/MercF300/Merc300Funjet.htm

Why call it a jet if it has no jet engine???

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec  2 06:04:55 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 06:04:55 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
References: <20031202045306.22644.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <044001c3b89a$35475ed0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 4:53 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Guns


>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> >
> > The faith I am referring to is the *belief* that society should have
> > no say in the legitimacy of your position.
>
> Ah, well, on that, society does have a say, and more than 3/4 of the US
> population supports an individual right to keep and bear arms. 39
> states have laws guaranteeing a right-to-carry-concealed, most of which
> were passed in the last decade, a decade in which the US has seen crime
> drop by half, a phenomenon seen in no other industrialized nation,
> where no other industrialized nation has as gun laws as free as ours.
> Society has spoken, in support of my position.

But I thought you believed in 'inalienable' rights?
Or is gun ownership not one of them?

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 06:31:16 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 22:31:16 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031202045532.79700.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c3b89d$e3cdfdd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> 
> Ah, finally the statists trespass on one freedom that Californians
> cannot brook trespass against: the right to drive.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey


Roger that, big time.  They won't admit it, but the
tripling of the car tax is what got our previous sorry
excuse for a governor hurled out of office head first.
People looked the other way while all the other stuff
was going on, but when they messed with our wheels, it
was time to take action.  {8^D

Extropians, do stop and think about this: we all pay taxes 
out the kazoo and most of it disappears into the mist, gone
forever.  But a little gets spent on a wonderful toy:
the interstate highway system.  And what a thing it is:
whenever we take a notion we can hop in our internal 
combustion freedom machines and set out on a journey, on the
road like Jack Kerouac!  Just go, take off, get the hell
outta town for a while.  It doesn't even cost much, especially 
if you take along camping gear and a cooler full of grub and 
sodas and beer.  You can drive a typical detroit all day for 
40 or 50 bucks, chase the far horizon for a solid week for just 
a few Franklins.  You seldom need to slow down or pay a toll, 
rarely get caught in heavy traffic, none of that, just roll 
along for as long as you want.  This works especially well
out in the western US, big open country, no one around,
like a ride thru the desert on a horse with no name, cause
there aint no one there to give you no pain.  Psychiatrists
offices must be filled with people who have never discovered
driving your cares away on the open road, free wind blowing
in one ear and out the other.

What a terrific way to unwind!  Low cost getaway, man!  
No need to compare it with sex, because you can do 
both.  Not only can money buy happiness, it isn't even 
particularly expensive any more.  Go with a sweetheart
or with a bunch of guys, or just go by yourself and have 
a hell of a good time.  For those who understand the
extra freedom of going on two wheels, all the above
only more so.  

If all tax dollars were spent as well as they
are on the good old interstate highway system, well
then, even *I* would be in favor of taxes, and this
is *me* talking.

{8-]

spike




Dont mess with our wheels or our roads.   



From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 06:48:29 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 22:48:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <003e01c3b89d$e3cdfdd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312012235510.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> If all tax dollars were spent as well as they are on the good old
> interstate highway system, well then, even *I* would be in favor of
> taxes, and this is *me* talking.

OK, so here's a question I was pondering briefly the other day: if all of
the money spent on the Interstates since their inception had been instead
pumped into R&D for several companies like Moller, would we have
competitively-priced flying cars yet?  And if we did have (VTOL) flying
vehicles, would we still need roads?

The reason I was thinking about it is that I recently finished reading 
Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax trilogy, where the Neanderthal 
society in an alternate universe has developed advanced technology while 
maintaining their hunter-gatherer ways, and although they have flying 
vehicles and helicopters, they never invented roads, or even non-VTOL 
aircraft with their required long clearings for takeoff and landing.  And 
I was wondering how feasible this was -- wouldn't you still need roads for 
shipping heavy items?



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 07:18:10 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 23:18:10 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312012235510.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <000001c3b8a4$7156ff20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Don Dartfield
> 
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
> 
> > If all tax dollars were spent as well as they are on the good old
> > interstate highway system, well then, even *I* would be in favor of
> > taxes, and this is *me* talking.
> 
> OK, so here's a question I was pondering briefly the other 
> day: if all of the money spent on the Interstates since their
inception had 
> been instead pumped into R&D for several companies like Moller, would
we have
> competitively-priced flying cars yet?

No.  Moller and others aren't struggling against a lack of 
research, they are struggling against physics.  There is a
good reason why those designs don't fly.  The military has
dumped cubic tons of money into flying cars, but the power
requirements keep pushing us towards the flying cars that
we have had for fifty years: helicopters.  

The equations for power requirements as a function of rotor
length are well understood Don.  Textbooks on VTOL design
are available at your local university.  There is a very 
good reason why choppers have long rotors, and why sailplanes
with long skinny wings have a more efficient glide slope
than high powered aircraft.

spike 




From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  2 10:24:00 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:24:00 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>
	<20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:16:12PM -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> Inherently?  No more than it is a distinct put-off to
> the majority of men, at least by my experience.

We seem to be both trading anecdotes here.

> There are many things that (Western) men and women
> both want, self-control among them.

I'm very certain that there is empiric evidence
that transhumanism acceptance rate in males is at
least an order (maybe two) of magnitude higher than
women.

However, I have no actual statistics in hand, so I can't
prove my case.
 
> Is not one of the end goals of transhumansism vastly
> increased control over oneself, including the ability
> not to age and die if desired?

Most old people look forward to dying. Too much control
is a bad thing, imo.

You've been soaking in here too long. The bulk of the
world is rural; try preaching there. You'll be surprised...

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031202/2209ab0b/attachment.bin>

From jacques at dtext.com  Tue Dec  2 11:51:58 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 12:51:58 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>	<20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <3FCC7CDE.1000609@dtext.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> I'm very certain that there is empiric evidence
> that transhumanism acceptance rate in males is at
> least an order (maybe two) of magnitude higher than
> women.
> 
> However, I have no actual statistics in hand, so I can't
> prove my case.

I'll say the obvious: speculation (for best and worse) is distinctively 
male. You don't easily get the attention of a woman with speculation 
(except her attention on yourself, as a typical... male). They are 
usually more practical, caring about what is in the present and makes a 
difference there.

It's one of the obvious gender opposition in the culture, and it is 
probable that it reflects some biological difference (the origin of 
which seems rather easy to imagine). Of course, like all 
"genderalizations", I don't intend it normatively and anyone is welcome 
to be a counter-example. I am a counter-example of many gender things 
that I think usually hold.

Jacques




From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec  2 14:01:50 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 14:01:50 GMT
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Opening of Biotech
Message-ID: <E1ARB67-0005Nm-K6@odie.runbox.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031202/3d2674d2/attachment.html>

From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 14:05:00 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 06:05:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <000001c3b8a4$7156ff20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020604230.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> No.  Moller and others aren't struggling against a lack of research,
> they are struggling against physics.  There is a good reason why those
> designs don't fly.

I thought that the current Moller Skycar *does* fly -- it just costs a 
million dollars.



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  2 14:19:24 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:19:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <01b801c3b823$ce7276c0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
References: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
	<184DD522-240A-11D8-9B19-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
	<01b801c3b823$ce7276c0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <20031202141923.GC22120@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 01:57:22PM -0200, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote:

> I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. The first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems to be stalled. Is it related? Are we concentrating our resourses in evolving our communication means because our transportation means are poor, or does de current pace of developments on comms in fact causes less effort on advancing transportation? Just thinking. Sorry for the bad english, but it's not my native language and I am still learning.

Current communications depend on advances in electronics
and optics; the signalling speed is about the speed of
light already. Electromagnetic communication needs
no wires but is limited in bandwidth/cell, the 
amount of wire/fibre buried is clearly
very limited (watch the current dark fibre debacle).
However, better coding and hardware can put 
more bits/s through a given infrastructure.

Transportation has stalled in throughput because it's
an infrastructure issue (new infrastructure can't occupy
the same space as old, need to be compatible and is 
intrinsically expensive), and speed is an energy and noise
issue (you want to stay subsonic, and evacuated channels
are ridiculously expensive).

If you want to go to orbit, you still have the atmosphere
to go through (and it *is* called rocket science not for
nothing). The best you can do is hypersonic scramjet,
and if you thought Concorde was expensive... 

So, yeah, communication is where it's at. Especially if we
get good telepresence. Online gaming is progressing nicely
towards VR already. Once we get head-up displays with good
head tracking and good body tracking you can mix both freely.

You can expect good augmented reality in about 15-20 years.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031202/6717502f/attachment.bin>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 14:38:12 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 06:38:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Guns
In-Reply-To: <044001c3b89a$35475ed0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031202143812.43177.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >
> > --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The faith I am referring to is the *belief* that society should
> > > have no say in the legitimacy of your position.
> >
> > Ah, well, on that, society does have a say, and more than 3/4 of
> the US
> > population supports an individual right to keep and bear arms. 39
> > states have laws guaranteeing a right-to-carry-concealed, most of
> which
> > were passed in the last decade, a decade in which the US has seen
> crime
> > drop by half, a phenomenon seen in no other industrialized nation,
> > where no other industrialized nation has as gun laws as free as
> ours.
> > Society has spoken, in support of my position.
> 
> But I thought you believed in 'inalienable' rights?
> Or is gun ownership not one of them?

I don't believe, I know. That I know that I have inalienable rights
such as the keeping and bearing of arms (any arms, not just guns) is a
distinctly different issue as to whether any particular society thinks
so as well. It is fortunate that I live in a society where a
supermajority posesses similar knowledge, for that means I do not have
to either move somewhere else, or work very hard to secure my liberties
against the slave mentality of a serf society such as you do. In my
society, we have constitutional barriers against modern ignorance
corrupting our natural rights, barriers which serve to protect those
rights in times when public opinion sways and flags, such as the
1968-86 period.

It is quite evident that certain serf societies on the european
continent and elsewhere still believe they have no right to defend
their liberties yet still beleive they are are free. They believed this
before WWII as well, and look where that got you.

We saw a similar phenomenon with the slavery period here in the US,
where house slaves saw no reason for the field slaves to yearn for
liberty in the north, that privilege was available to those who
sufficiently pleased the masters and those that did not deserved to
work the fields.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From amara at amara.com  Tue Dec  2 13:43:18 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:43:18 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <p05100301bbf23ed83cae@[150.146.134.133]>

Dear Natasha,

>
>Amara, bella, perhaps the test is outdated.

I hope so.

In any case the people in this group can provide a sample to
further check the algorithm. The transhumanists are a pretty wide mix
in the gender arena, in my view.


>
>We cannot expect either gender to write in tithe style prescribed to it by
>any one generational testing regulation.

Vero

>  Also, I don't think it is
>necessarily pejorative that a test senses a "male" writing style. Androgyny
>is beautiful and an ability to write both across both gender-styles is a
>lovely thing to do. This is expressly, I put on a tie many times when I
>give a talk.  There is a time and place for all aspect of our "selves" and
>you seem to have chosen an educated style in your articles.

or 'it' chose me :-)

>  However, I
>wonder what the article you wrote on Fiorella Terenzi comes out as.

'Male'

>  Did
>you run that one through the test?

(just tried)

For the record, the results for all of my poetry test out as 'Male' too.

>
>As an educated scientist, your training will come out in your writing no
>matter how you fancify it.

Vero

>Also, try running some of your email stories
>(that you send to your friends) through the test.

Thank you for the suggestion. I didn't try that before, mostly
because I am more myself in those personal writings, and they
are private among my friends and family.

The results from those vignettes are that they are more skewed
towards the 'Female' scale, in fact, an almost perfect balance
between 'Male' and 'Female'. The interesting thing (to me) about my
email stories is that I think my writing style is more or less
uniform, but the topics change. Those that discuss immediate
relationship topics immediately test out as 'Female'. I don't think
that it is a very smart algorithm, that is, if a man talks about
relationships he would probably test out as 'Female' too.


>
>Brings me back to the beginning. Who's judging and is the criteria
>objective.
>


It's hard for me to see how my writings appear while I'm on the
inside of my head. Directly, no one is judging but me, but
indirectly, (depending on which writings) editors are judging. No
matter, though, because I didn't gain very much from that exercise.
In the end, I don't  think the criteria for that test were useful
criteria.

Amara
-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"The best presents don't come in boxes." --Hobbes


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 14:57:48 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 06:57:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312012235510.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031202145748.87585.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
> 
> > If all tax dollars were spent as well as they are on the good old
> > interstate highway system, well then, even *I* would be in favor of
> > taxes, and this is *me* talking.
> 
> OK, so here's a question I was pondering briefly the other day: if
> all of the money spent on the Interstates since their inception had
> been instead pumped into R&D for several companies like Moller,
> would we have competitively-priced flying cars yet?  And if we did
> have (VTOL) flying vehicles, would we still need roads?

Firstly, most all of the money spent on the interstates was money
collected in the form of taxes on gasoline, which was burned by
motorists driving the roads, i.e. a self funded mandate. People get
ticked if you take taxes for one purpose and spend them on another that
doesn't benefit the purpose in which they are paying the taxes.

A smarter concept would be to take all the aviation-gas tax revinues
and invest them in aircar development, rather than building airports
and subsidizing airline tickets.

That being said, air cars that burn fuels are just bad ideas, IMHO. The
mpg efficiency sucks major league. Don't get me wrong, I want one
myself, but from any rational economic or environmental perspective,
air cars are major wastes of resources on consumer pleasure if they are
burning chemical fuels.

We were all told as kids that we would live in a future of air cars
because the research back in the 1950's and 60's indicated that we
would develop anti-gravity sometime in the 21st century, or at least
high power high efficiency ion propulsion technologies.

> 
> The reason I was thinking about it is that I recently finished
> reading Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax trilogy, where the
> Neanderthal society in an alternate universe has developed
> advanced technology while maintaining their hunter-gatherer ways,
> and although they have flying
> vehicles and helicopters, they never invented roads, or even non-VTOL
> aircraft with their required long clearings for takeoff and landing. 
> And I was wondering how feasible this was -- wouldn't you still need
> roads for shipping heavy items?

Developing technology requires a certain critical mass of population,
accumulated knowledge, and an educated class of tinkerers. Hunter
gatherer economics cannot support a large enough population exclusively
to allow the needed critical mass to accumulate. Besides an ignorance
of neanderthal physiognomy, and a misuse of the term 'parallax', he
displays a similar ignorance of basic caloric economics.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 14:59:43 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 06:59:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020604230.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031202145943.88024.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> 
> I thought that the current Moller Skycar *does* fly -- it just costs
> a million dollars.

His R&D saucer does fly, somewhat. It sucks major amounts of fuel to do
so. Prepare to pay $100 in gas to fly to work each day.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 15:16:44 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 07:16:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <20031202141923.GC22120@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031202151644.11109.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 01:57:22PM -0200, Henrique Moraes Machado
> wrote:
> 
> > I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation.
> 
> Current communications depend on advances in electronics
> and optics; the signalling speed is about the speed of
> light already. Electromagnetic communication needs
> no wires but is limited in bandwidth/cell, the 
> amount of wire/fibre buried is clearly
> very limited (watch the current dark fibre debacle).
> However, better coding and hardware can put 
> more bits/s through a given infrastructure.

Yes, virtually all of the increases in bandwidth in the last decade
have been in improved compression algorithms and higher frequency use,
and the attendand equipment designs to do so.

> 
> Transportation has stalled in throughput because it's
> an infrastructure issue (new infrastructure can't occupy
> the same space as old, need to be compatible and is 
> intrinsically expensive), and speed is an energy and noise
> issue (you want to stay subsonic, and evacuated channels
> are ridiculously expensive).

It's also an energy issue. You can build SSTs and SSTOs all day long
that use existing airports. What you can't get over is the energy cost.
The faster you go, the more fuel/mile you burn to deal with thermal
friction, and higher power propulsion systems tend also to be less fuel
efficient on a gallons per lb thrust basis.

The good thing is that resource prices drop over time as technology
decreases resource utilization costs and increases utilization
efficiency. Eventually higher velocity transportation systems become
commercially feasible, this is just a much longer curve than
communications has.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From amara at amara.com  Tue Dec  2 14:48:34 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:48:34 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <p05100300bbf255bda10b@[150.146.134.133]>

Dear Eugene:

>Transhumanism *is* a distinct put-off to the majority of
>women.

Perhaps. The main reason that I occasionally talk here is because I
have some good friends here.  For me, that is more important than
the meme-complex, if that provides insight. I see my future with my
own circle of friends, family, teachers, students, and not any
particular group. (In this respect I've probably changed during the
last year or two.)

>I do not see how to package the meme complex in a more palatable
>way.

(I'll need to think on it.)

>  Perhaps our transhumanist women can produce a diagnosis, and a
>suggestion.

I'm not the best person to produce a diagnosis and suggestion on
this topic now. Probably you know that often, or at least in the last
several years, I think that I don't have a strong enough character
to accept/handle/counter/respond in a good way to some of the
aggression and/or coldness and/or other nastiness that I sometimes
encounter on the tranhumanist lists. I had years of practicing
talking on Usenet too, but somehow that wasn't the right training
for here. This is not any cause for alarm, though, because I have
similar thoughts and feelings when I think that I am not strong
enough to handle living in Italy, and then I meet someone with a
warmth and generosity that blows me away, and it makes me want to
continue trying. Same thing with the transhumanists. My headspace
regarding interaction with strangers is not the best this year
anyway because of this tremendously difficult year and I'm very
tired.


Amara
-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"The best presents don't come in boxes." --Hobbes


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 16:05:21 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:05:21 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <3FCC7CDE.1000609@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <002301c3b8ee$169d7150$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> > I'm very certain that there is empiric evidence
> > that transhumanism acceptance rate in males is at
> > least an order (maybe two) of magnitude higher than
> > women.
> > 
> 
> I'll say the obvious: speculation (for best and worse) is 
> distinctively male. You don't easily get the attention of a woman with
speculation 
> (except her attention on yourself, as a typical... male). They are 
> usually more practical, caring about what is in the present 
> and makes a difference there...

This is one that made the rounds last newtonmass:


 Do you know what would have happened if it had been Three Wise Women
instead of Three Wise Men?

They would have asked directions,
arrived on time,
helped deliver the baby,
cleaned the stable,
made a casserole,
brought practical gifts, and
there would be Peace On Earth.

{8^D

spike





From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 16:08:40 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:08:40 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020604230.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <002a01c3b8ee$8d5bd980$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
> 
> > No.  Moller and others aren't struggling against a lack of research,
> > they are struggling against physics.  There is a good 
> > reason why those designs don't fly.
> 
> I thought that the current Moller Skycar *does* fly -- it 
> just costs a million dollars... Don


If it does fly, it's worth twice that, nay three times.
There are plenty of yahoos around here that have money
to blow their noses on, $3E6 wouldn't even slow
them down.  spike



From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 16:10:47 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:10:47 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031202145748.87585.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020809550.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Besides an ignorance of neanderthal physiognomy, and a misuse of the
> term 'parallax', he displays a similar ignorance of basic caloric
> economics.

So you read the books?  What was the ignorance of neanderthal physiognomy 
and ignorance of caloric economics?



From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 16:11:14 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:11:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020556000.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> Most old people look forward to dying. Too much control is a bad thing,
> imo. You've been soaking in here too long. The bulk of the world is
> rural; try preaching there. You'll be surprised...

But if they had the choice, and if they weren't encumbered by religious 
ideas about death being a good thing, I would think they would rather be 
young again than die.





From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  2 16:23:21 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:23:21 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bbf255bda10b@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <003001c3b8f0$9a585d50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Amara, where can I find the gender genie test?  That previous
URL was about how to interpret it, but I didn't see the
test itself.  spike


Yukadoos below.  Most of them are old, some new.  
I didn't write em but I had fun with them:


======================

1. Two peanuts walk into a bar.  One was a salted.


2. A jumper cable walks into a  bar. The barman says "I'll
serve you, but don't start anything."


3. A sandwich walks into a bar. The barman  says, "Sorry,
we don't serve food in here."


4. A dyslexic man walks into a bra.



5. A man walks into a bar with a slab of  asphalt under his
arm and says, "A beer please, and another one for the road."



6. Two cannibals are eating a clown. One says  to the other,
"Does this taste funny to you?"


7. "Doc, I can't stop singing 'The green, green  grass of home.'"
"That sounds like Tom Jones syndrome." "Is it common?"  "It's not
unusual."


8. Two cows standing next  to each other in a field, Daisy says
to Dolly. "I was artificially  inseminated this morning." "I don't
believe you," said Dolly. "It's true, no  bull!" exclaimed Daisy.


9. Two hydrogen atoms  walk into a bar. One says, "I've lost my
electron." The other says, "Are you  sure?" The first replies,
"Yes, I'm positive..."


10. A man takes his Rottweiler to the vet and  says, "My dog's
cross-eyed. Is there anything you can do for him?" "Well,"  says
the vet, "let's have a look at him" So he picks the dog up and
examines  his eyes, then checks his teeth. Finally, he says "I'm
going to have to put  him down." "What? Because he's cross-eyed?"
"No, because he's really heavy."


11. I went to buy some camouflage trousers the  other day but I
couldn't find any.


12. I went to the butcher's the other day and I bet him $50 that
he couldn't reach the  meat on the top shelf. He said, "No,the
steaks are too high."


13. I went to a seafood disco rave last  week...and pulled a mussel.


14. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly; but when  they lit
a fire in the craft, it sank, proving once and for all that you
can't have your kayak and heat it too.!


15.  A man walks into a doctor's office. "What seems to be the problem?"
asks the doc. "It's... um...well... I have five penises," replies the
man.
"Blimey!" says the doctor, "How do your trousers fit?" "Like a glove."


16. What do you call a fish with no eyes? A  fsh.




From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  2 16:27:16 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 17:27:16 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020556000.9234-100000@hplx.net>
References: <20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020556000.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031202162715.GJ22120@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 08:11:14AM -0800, Don Dartfield wrote:

> But if they had the choice, and if they weren't encumbered by religious 

I don't know what the cutoff is, but in the current generation it's
difficult to get through to people past 50. Maybe our generation will
fare better; we'll see. Kids are easy, but I'm not sure they retain
the view as they age. 

I notice several transhumanists have drifted away as they aged.

> ideas about death being a good thing, I would think they would rather be 

They think they're immortal already, so they will fight you tooth and nail when
you attempt to take their only protection away. Actually, they will simply
reject whatever you say, so there's even not much fighting involved.

> young again than die.

A lot of people do not want to become young again. Because they're
comfortable as they are, and don't want to go back to teen/twen angst.
They don't understand that you can have the one, and not the another
as well. 

It will become iffy as chronical diseases make the daily living
really painful, so anything becomes an improvement (you never seen
old people longing for death?). But, old people are the toughest cases.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031202/0c72a36c/attachment.bin>

From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 16:28:35 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:28:35 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWSWEEK:   Test your Digital IQ
Message-ID: <184670-220031222162835774@M2W095.mail2web.com>

"Next Frontiers:

Test Your Ditigal IQ
     Computers havae infiltrated almost every phase of our lives, from the
office to the car, phones to mucic. Just how much do you know about
technologies that are taking over your world?  Take this quick quiz and see
if you're a geek or a Luddite."
___________________________________________________________________

For Extropy list members, this test is utterly basic, but if anyone wants
to take it, here is one oneline:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/987180.asp

Some comments are funny by Ernie the attorney: 
http://www.ernietheattorney.net/ernie_the_attorney/2003/11/newsweek_survey.h
tml

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 16:32:00 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:32:00 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <281450-2200312221632091@M2W092.mail2web.com>


Bloody hell Spike!  I'm trying to get some work done!!!

Every time I open my email hub to sneak a peek at an incoming message I
start lol and disrupting my workday.


======================

1. Two peanuts walk into a bar.  One was a salted.


2. A jumper cable walks into a  bar. The barman says "I'll
serve you, but don't start anything."


3. A sandwich walks into a bar. The barman  says, "Sorry,
we don't serve food in here."


4. A dyslexic man walks into a bra.



5. A man walks into a bar with a slab of  asphalt under his
arm and says, "A beer please, and another one for the road."



6. Two cannibals are eating a clown. One says  to the other,
"Does this taste funny to you?"


7. "Doc, I can't stop singing 'The green, green  grass of home.'"
"That sounds like Tom Jones syndrome." "Is it common?"  "It's not
unusual."


8. Two cows standing next  to each other in a field, Daisy says
to Dolly. "I was artificially  inseminated this morning." "I don't
believe you," said Dolly. "It's true, no  bull!" exclaimed Daisy.


9. Two hydrogen atoms  walk into a bar. One says, "I've lost my
electron." The other says, "Are you  sure?" The first replies,
"Yes, I'm positive..."


10. A man takes his Rottweiler to the vet and  says, "My dog's
cross-eyed. Is there anything you can do for him?" "Well,"  says
the vet, "let's have a look at him" So he picks the dog up and
examines  his eyes, then checks his teeth. Finally, he says "I'm
going to have to put  him down." "What? Because he's cross-eyed?"
"No, because he's really heavy."


11. I went to buy some camouflage trousers the  other day but I
couldn't find any.


12. I went to the butcher's the other day and I bet him $50 that
he couldn't reach the  meat on the top shelf. He said, "No,the
steaks are too high."


13. I went to a seafood disco rave last  week...and pulled a mussel.


14. Two Eskimos sitting in a kayak were chilly; but when  they lit
a fire in the craft, it sank, proving once and for all that you
can't have your kayak and heat it too.!


15.  A man walks into a doctor's office. "What seems to be the problem?"
asks the doc. "It's... um...well... I have five penises," replies the
man.
"Blimey!" says the doctor, "How do your trousers fit?" "Like a glove."


16. What do you call a fish with no eyes? A  fsh.


_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Dec  2 16:39:53 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 16:39:53 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] think this will catch on?
Message-ID: <3FCCC059.7080701@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Mon Dec 01, 2003 09:42 pm MB wrote:
> Wow, spike! It looks like a wonderfully updated version of
> the Messerschmitt from the 1950s....
>

Huh! Three wheels - Far too many.

Try a Harley-style single-wheel motorcycle!

<http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/2003/11/04/cx_dl_1104vow.html>
<http://wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,61216,00.html?tw=wn_techhead_7?

What tricks could Spike do on one of these?


BillK









From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 16:40:47 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020809550.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031202164047.14918.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Besides an ignorance of neanderthal physiognomy, and a misuse of
> the
> > term 'parallax', he displays a similar ignorance of basic caloric
> > economics.
> 
> So you read the books?  What was the ignorance of neanderthal
> physiognomy and ignorance of caloric economics?

>From what I've read, neurological studies of the shape of the brain
case of neanderthals indicate they lacked a lot of the higher brain
functions that homo sap needed to make the breakthrough to actual
conciousness, beyond being ordered around by a god module.

As for caloric economics, as I said in the previous post, you cant
generate enough calories per acre of wilderness via hunter gatherer
economics to support a large enough population or to support job
specialization needed to achieve a highly technological society. The
best such a society can do is have a tribe with a few specialized tool
makers and medicine men. You certainly could NOT support the industrial
infrastructure needed to build advanced technologies like helicopters.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 16:50:50 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:50:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031202145748.87585.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020847000.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> misuse of the term 'parallax'

I'm also not sure where you got this.  Parallax is the apparent shift when 
you view something from two different positions, right?  I took his use of 
the term "Neanderthal parallax" to refer to the different way of looking 
at things that his main characters were exposed to when seeing things from 
the viewpoint of the Neanderthal society.  Seems like a perfectly valid 
use of the term to me.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 16:58:05 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 08:58:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWSWEEK:   Test your Digital IQ
In-Reply-To: <184670-220031222162835774@M2W095.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20031202165805.76866.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Next Frontiers:
> 
> Test Your Ditigal IQ

147
"nerd"
"loser"
"nerd"
"dweeb"
"melvin"
"dork"
"chode"
"geek"
ayup....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 17:00:53 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 09:00:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020847000.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031202170055.77812.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > misuse of the term 'parallax'
> 
> I'm also not sure where you got this.  Parallax is the apparent shift
> when you view something from two different positions, right?  I
> took his use of the term "Neanderthal parallax" to refer to the
> different way of looking at things that his main characters were
> exposed to when seeing things from the viewpoint of the Neanderthal
> society.  Seems like a perfectly valid use of the term to me.

He seemed to me to be using it as a term to describe parallel
universes. It is a bit of a stretch though I suppose not out of the
realm of artistic license.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 17:11:07 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 09:11:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031202170055.77812.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020904200.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> He seemed to me to be using it as a term to describe parallel universes.
> It is a bit of a stretch though I suppose not out of the realm of
> artistic license.

Okay, then yeah, that would be an incorrect usage.  Unless he's trying to
coin a new "popular usage" meaning for the term.  Perhaps we should ask
him. <g> It might be handy to have a single word term for an alternate
universe in my writing, rather than always having to use "parallel
universe" or "alternate universe" or "from anooooooother
dimEEEENSSSSSSSion..."



From amara at amara.com  Tue Dec  2 16:40:46 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:40:46 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
Message-ID: <p05100300bbf27027d895@[150.146.134.133]>

Dear Spike:
>Amara, where can I find the gender genie test?

http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html


>Yukadoos below. Most of them are old, some new.
>        I didn't write em but I had fun with them:

>        1. Two peanuts walk into a bar. One was a salted.
[...]


http://www.amara.com/ilDolore_sm.jpg

(thanks for the laughs Spike. Really!)

Amara

-- 

***********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD             email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics        vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers            URL:   http://www.amara.com/
***********************************************************************
"The trouble with nude dancing is that not everything stops when the
music stops."   --Robert Helpmann


From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 17:46:46 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:46:46 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
References: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <00d901c3b8fc$51e46da0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Amara Graps" <amara at amara.com>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 8:42 AM

> I ran across this online program that tries to analyze the gender
> of the writer of a writing selection. I am writing quite a lot these
> days, and I was curious about what the "gender genie" would
> calculate for my gender.
>
> http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html
>
> "According to Koppel and Argamon, the algorithm should predict the
> gender of the author approximately 80% of the time."


I ran the first 5000 words of my and Rory Barnes's
female-first-person-narrated novel THE HUNGER OF TIME through the algorithm:

Female Score: 5925
Male Score: 5036

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: female!

==========

Cool!

Si I tried the first 6500 words of THE JUDAS MANDALA, a novel by me alone,
also first-person-female (but one tough cookie):

Female Score: 7519
Male Score: 7679

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

====

Well... close enough.

Then I tried the opening of THE WHITE ABACUS, much of it narrated by a
purportedly androgynous ai:






From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Tue Dec  2 17:57:46 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:57:46 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312012235510.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE58jq65Rn8P500000e41@hotmail.com>

That's just plain silly if you ask me. Roads have been around far longer
than cars. Long before the society was developed enough to make flying cars,
they would have had to invent roads and agriculture. The technology of a
civilization relies somewhat on the size of the population.
For example: You coulndn't have flying cars without highly developed
computer systems. Those wouldn;t exist unless the civilization was heavily
computerized.
That wouldn;t happen without a solid infrastructure of utilities and roads
to deliver the computers.
etc, etc.
Roads were a necessary contribution to the development of our civilization.

On a side note, I am currently considering the possibility that neandertal
man lacked the fine motor skills necessary for manipulating small objects.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway
system


> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
>
> > If all tax dollars were spent as well as they are on the good old
> > interstate highway system, well then, even *I* would be in favor of
> > taxes, and this is *me* talking.
>
> OK, so here's a question I was pondering briefly the other day: if all of
> the money spent on the Interstates since their inception had been instead
> pumped into R&D for several companies like Moller, would we have
> competitively-priced flying cars yet?  And if we did have (VTOL) flying
> vehicles, would we still need roads?
>
> The reason I was thinking about it is that I recently finished reading
> Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax trilogy, where the Neanderthal
> society in an alternate universe has developed advanced technology while
> maintaining their hunter-gatherer ways, and although they have flying
> vehicles and helicopters, they never invented roads, or even non-VTOL
> aircraft with their required long clearings for takeoff and landing.  And
> I was wondering how feasible this was -- wouldn't you still need roads for
> shipping heavy items?
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 17:59:57 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 11:59:57 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
References: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <00e601c3b8fe$1bfee740$4f9d4a43@texas.net>

Stupid goddamned emailer jumped the gun; try again:


----- Original Message -----
From: "Amara Graps" <amara at amara.com>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 8:42 AM

> I ran across this online program that tries to analyze the gender
> of the writer of a writing selection. I am writing quite a lot these
> days, and I was curious about what the "gender genie" would
> calculate for my gender.
>
> http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html
>
> "According to Koppel and Argamon, the algorithm should predict the
> gender of the author approximately 80% of the time."


I ran the first 5000 words of my and Rory Barnes's
female-first-person-narrated novel THE HUNGER OF TIME through the algorithm:

Female Score: 5925
Male Score: 5036

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: female!

==========

Cool!

So I tried the first 6500 words of THE JUDAS MANDALA, a novel by me alone,
also first-person-female (but one tough cookie):

Female Score: 7519
Male Score: 7679

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

====

Well... close enough.

Then I tried the opening of THE WHITE ABACUS, much of it narrated by a
purportedly androgynous ai:

Female Score: 4581
Male Score: 5318

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!


======

Hmmm. Fair enough.

So I tried the opening 1700 words of THE BLACK GRAIL, where the narrator is
a tough but reflective sword-wielding hero:

Female Score: 2354
Male Score: 1643

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: female!

========

Whaaaa--?!

Damien Broderick
www.thespike.us








From jacques at dtext.com  Tue Dec  2 18:03:26 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:03:26 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and old people
In-Reply-To: <20031202162715.GJ22120@leitl.org>
References: <20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020556000.9234-100000@hplx.net>
	<20031202162715.GJ22120@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <16332.54254.386946.867389@localhost.localdomain>

Eugen Leitl a ?crit (2.12.2003/17:27) :

> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 08:11:14AM -0800, Don Dartfield wrote:
> 
> > But if they had the choice, and if they weren't encumbered by religious 
> 
> I don't know what the cutoff is, but in the current generation it's
> difficult to get through to people past 50. Maybe our generation will
> fare better; we'll see. Kids are easy, but I'm not sure they retain
> the view as they age. 
> 
> I notice several transhumanists have drifted away as they aged.


If you are confident it won't happen in your lifetime, and you will
plain old die, then it is natural to discard crazy hopes and try to
mentally adapt to what you think is your real fate.

The old people have adapted. Adopting new hopes which seem improbable
is too tiring emotionally and cognitively. I am pretty sure that if
the thing was really available NOW, most would be happy to take the
trouble of changing their mind and choose to avoid death. It is just
that if they don't believe it will happen, they don't want to disturb
the acceptance and adaptation they have managed to build in
themselves. (Which makes good sense to me.)


Jacques




From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec  2 18:14:37 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 10:14:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031202164047.14918.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020854170.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> From what I've read, neurological studies of the shape of the brain case
> of neanderthals indicate they lacked a lot of the higher brain functions
> that homo sap needed to make the breakthrough to actual conciousness,
> beyond being ordered around by a god module.

Really?  That seems odd.  I thought they could make musical instruments,
and had larger braincases than us ... but they lack higher brain
functions?  Are these brand new studies?

In any case, in the Neanderthal Parallax trilogy's worldview (or
worldsview, as the case may be), actual consciousness seemed to be
attributed more more of a random event which was intimately tied with the
universe splitting, rather than being purely a function of brain
structure.  Probably not realistic, but that doesn't mean

> As for caloric economics, as I said in the previous post, you cant
> generate enough calories per acre of wilderness via hunter gatherer
> economics to support a large enough population or to support job
> specialization needed to achieve a highly technological society. The
> best such a society can do is have a tribe with a few specialized tool
> makers and medicine men. You certainly could NOT support the industrial
> infrastructure needed to build advanced technologies like helicopters.

Maybe not for us, but given the higher-than-human intelligence of Sawyer's
Neanderthals, maybe they could technology without requiring such a high
population density.  Maybe their advanced intelligence means that
individuals can invent high technology without needing a lot of spare 
people. ;)



From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 18:16:28 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:16:28 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
References: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
	<00e601c3b8fe$1bfee740$4f9d4a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <015901c3b900$6a4bd8c0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>

This is fun! I ran the first 6000 words of my novel-under-development
through the thing. YGGDRASIL STATION is told by a nerdboy Slan/godlet:

Female Score: 5878
Male Score: 6776

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

=========

Okay, you're getting better, d00D.

Damien Broderick



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Tue Dec  2 18:20:43 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:20:43 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE41pQq5pneeF00000f39@hotmail.com>

I think that this has occurred simply because the masses have decided that
what we have is good enough. The market has stabilized and the cost-benefit
is about equal. The airlines already struggle with making profits because of
this. If they raise the price of tickets, more people choose to drive to
their destination. Faster flights and more exclusive, dedicated service to
streamline the waiting would only increase the cost which most people are
simply not willing to pay.
This doesn;t mean that the technology hasn't improved however. If you look
at the last 50 years (1953 to today) there are many breakthroughs fololowing
Yeager's 1947 mach 1 flight in a single-man rocket with wings. Concorde
travels at 1350 mph, SR-71 travels at mach 3.3. We went to the moon in 1969
(speeds averaging 25,000 mph). Aurora (if it exists) is supposed to cruise
between mach 5 and mach 8. Nasa's X-43 HyperX is supposed to travel between
mach 7 and mach 10. The shuttle re-enters about mach 23 (i think)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lee" <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com>
To: <hemm at br.inter.net>; <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 12:22 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


> I've thought a bit on this lately and am a little let down with the pace
of
> transportation. If you look at air travel over the last 50 years there are
> few major breakthroughs. 75 years ago, it took weeks to travel around the
> world and then with commercial air travel, that was cut down to a day or
> merely hours. 50 years later, we're still pretty much at the same flight
> times. We have more routes and scheduled and tvs in the seats but flights
> are still about the same length. Perhaps they are even longer if you take
> security waits into the equation.
>
> I think the main reason why air travel tech has stalled is lack of
> competition. There's really only two companies making planes-Airbus and
> Boeing- and both are heavily subsidized by their respective governments.
Air
> travel is subsidized by local governments and businesses who don't have
much
> incentive to decrease travel time.
>
> For ground travel, in the US at least, road trips take less time because
the
> speed limit has been increased from 55 to 70-75 on interstates. It's nice
to
> be save 2 hours from an Atlanta to Miami trip, but I'm still waiting for
15
> minute NY-London trips and flying cars.
>
> How long until the science fiction breakthroughs come on line?
Transporters,
> etc.
>
> I've done a bit of teleconferencing and videoconferencing and while it is
> sufficient for basic communication, it's not yet replacing meatspace.
>
> BAL
> >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at br.inter.net>
> >To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
> >Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:57:22 -0200
> >
> >Hello extropians,
> >
> >I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. The
> >first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems to be
stalled.
> >Is it related? Are we concentrating our resourses in evolving our
> >communication means because our transportation means are poor, or does de
> >current pace of developments on comms in fact causes less effort on
> >advancing transportation? Just thinking. Sorry for the bad english, but
> >it's not my native language and I am still learning.
> >_______________________________________________
> >extropy-chat mailing list
> >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Is there a gadget-lover on your gift list?  MSN Shopping has lined up some
> good bets!  http://shopping.msn.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From jonkc at att.net  Tue Dec  2 18:26:08 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 13:26:08 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
References: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
	<00d901c3b8fc$51e46da0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <006001c3b901$d0972ca0$cfff4d0c@hal2001>

I tried it on some stuff I wrote and it was correct 3 out of 4 times, but
according to it by far the most masculine prose came from something I didn't
write, the first few pages of Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone by JK
Rowling, Female Score: 912 Male Score: 1737.



John K Clark      jonkc at att.net






From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 18:39:50 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:39:50 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
References: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
	<00d901c3b8fc$51e46da0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <018001c3b903$af0533a0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>

Let's see how the sucker reacts to my theoretical book THE ARCHITECTURE OF
BABEL:

Words: 2490

Female Score: 1788
Male Score: 3677

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

Hmm. We boyz do hard wordz, eh?

Let's check out THEORY AND ITS DISCONTENTS:

Weird, it cracks up and can't cope. Repeatedly. Can't handle Derrida, huh?

Damien Broderick




From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  2 18:52:14 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:52:14 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
References: <p05100300bbf10272b8a2@[150.146.134.133]>
	<00d901c3b8fc$51e46da0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <019101c3b905$6a7da4e0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>

And a fairly flagrantly `male' piece of strutting, my gonzo review of John
Clute's APPLESEED:

Words: 2732

(Female Score: 1834
Male Score: 3577

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

Let's try some of THE SPIKE:

Words: 2718

Female Score: 2597
Male Score: 3432

The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

Inneresting...

Damien Broderick




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec  2 19:38:14 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:38:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWSWEEK:   Test your Digital IQ
In-Reply-To: <184670-220031222162835774@M2W095.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <009501c3b90b$d7b92600$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

This is not a knowledge test, it is a market survey.  "Did you buy your
computer online?", etc.  What do you use most?  Where do you use it?  How
often do you use it?  They are surveying what people use, not what people
know.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From charlie at antipope.org  Tue Dec  2 19:53:35 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:53:35 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE41pQq5pneeF00000f39@hotmail.com>
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
	<LAW10-OE41pQq5pneeF00000f39@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <372B67A6-2501-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 2 Dec 2003, at 18:20, <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think that this has occurred simply because the masses have decided 
> that
> what we have is good enough. The market has stabilized and the 
> cost-benefit
> is about equal. The airlines already struggle with making profits 
> because of
> this. If they raise the price of tickets, more people choose to drive 
> to
> their destination. Faster flights and more exclusive, dedicated 
> service to
> streamline the waiting would only increase the cost which most people 
> are
> simply not willing to pay.
>

Personally, I'd like *slower* intercontinental flights. Jet lag leaves 
me feeling washed out for days, and the cramped cabin conditions are 
distinctly unpleasant. I'd be more than happy to travel by airship at, 
say, 200-300km/h instead of by jet at 800-1000km/h, as long as the 
cubic volume available to passengers was comparable to that on a 
sea-going ship. And if there's one thing airships aren't short on, it's 
cubic volume! Standard class on the Hindenberg included a berth in a 
two-bunk stateroom and access to the lounge and promenade decks. Give 
me bandwidth, a lounge to sit in with a laptop, and a comfortable bed, 
and I'd be a lot happier to take 48 hours to cross the Atlantic 
(getting work done en route and shifting my sleep pattern at a natural 
rate) than spending 7 hours in cattle class (unable to work and feeling 
like crap at the other end of the journey).

(NB: This isn't to say that I wouldn't prefer to travel by sub-orbital 
hop and get wherever I'm going in mere minutes, but as a comparison to 
today's subsonic jet travel an airship has its merits.)


-- Charlie



From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Dec  2 20:12:05 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 20:12:05 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
Message-ID: <3FCCF215.6010501@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Tue Dec 02, 2003 09:08 am Spike wrote:
> If it does fly, it's worth twice that, nay three times.
> There are plenty of yahoos around here that have money
> to blow their noses on, $3E6 wouldn't even slow
> them down.
>

Popular Science have published a review
'Best of What's New 2003'
<http://www.popsci.com/popsci/bown/2003/homepage/0,18882,,00.html>

In the Aviation section they mention the Bell Agusta 609

Vertical takeoff, high-speed cruising: This is the ideal, and
potentially profitable, vision for air commuting. Which is why two
leading helicopter builders--Texas-based Bell and Agusta of
Italy--carried out a long-awaited first hovering flight of the
tilt-rotor BA609 in March. The little brother of the Pentagon?s
controversial, expensive, formerly crash-prone and now improved V-22
Osprey, the BA609 takes off straight up, rotates its engines forward,
then flies like a plane--twice as fast as a helicopter. It is scheduled
to enter service in 2007, a mere 52 years after Bell flew its first
experimental tilt-rotor in 1955.

<http://www.bellagusta.com/html/theAircraft/ba_609/>

Sounds more practical than the Moller Skycar.

BillK

PS. All the other sections are worth a read also!





From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Tue Dec  2 20:13:30 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:13:30 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>
	<20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312020915560.-298187@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>



On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote:


>
> Most old people look forward to dying.
>

Unfortunately this is true. Young folk do not "get it", most
of the time. When one finds health failing, pain a constant
companion, friends and loved ones gone (already dead), it
can be hard to keep up enthusiasm to go on.

Now living life longer in better condition, feeling good and
energetic and strong..... that's a winner, most folk would
like it, in my experience. But living longer when you're old
and poor and sick and getting worse? Why?

> Too much control
> is a bad thing, imo.

What do you mean by "too much control is a bad thing"? Would
you *force* people to continue to exist in their misery and
pain and suffering because ... what?

Regards,
MB


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec  2 21:37:22 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 21:37:22 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org><20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com><20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312020915560.-298187@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <06eb01c3b91c$8dbd4480$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "MB" <mbb386 at main.nc.us>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles


>
>
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Most old people look forward to dying.
> >
>
> Unfortunately this is true. Young folk do not "get it", most
> of the time. When one finds health failing, pain a constant
> companion, friends and loved ones gone (already dead), it
> can be hard to keep up enthusiasm to go on.

And there's one other factor - one that I'm beginning to experience.
It is the 'seen it all' syndrome where fewer and fewer things hold any
novelty.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  2 21:49:53 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 22:49:53 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312020915560.-298187@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>
	<20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312020915560.-298187@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <20031202214953.GT22120@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 03:13:30PM -0500, MB wrote:
> 
> What do you mean by "too much control is a bad thing"? Would
> you *force* people to continue to exist in their misery and
> pain and suffering because ... what?

This is from another context entirely! This is directed to
the control freaks amongst us. It can be liberating to realize
that this is only an illusion of control, in a world that is
entirely uncontrollable. 

(I better stop before I get all new-agey here).

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031202/bded2407/attachment.bin>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 21:51:46 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 13:51:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020854170.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031202215146.19703.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > From what I've read, neurological studies of the shape of the brain
> case
> > of neanderthals indicate they lacked a lot of the higher brain
> functions
> > that homo sap needed to make the breakthrough to actual
> conciousness,
> > beyond being ordered around by a god module.
> 
> Really?  That seems odd.  I thought they could make musical
> instruments,
> and had larger braincases than us ... but they lack higher brain
> functions?  Are these brand new studies?

No, neanderthals did not have larger braincases than homo sapiens, that
is a myth. What they did have was larger spaces for anterior lobes,
i.e. the more primitive area of the brain, while having less space for
frontal lobes.

Making music, nor even religion, is not a function of conciousness.
Birds make music all the time, and apes are known to use tools and make
primitive art. Conciousness in man is not even thought to have
developed (according to some) until after the invention of writing.
Read Julian Jaynes' book The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of
the Bicameral Mind.

> 
> Maybe not for us, but given the higher-than-human intelligence of
> Sawyer's
> Neanderthals, maybe they could technology without requiring such a
> high
> population density.  Maybe their advanced intelligence means that
> individuals can invent high technology without needing a lot of spare
> people. ;)

As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence. The fact that
they are extinct demonstrates that they failed miserably at the most
important test of intelligence against a more intelligent competitor
for the same resources.

Even if they were of higher intelligence does not mean anything about
reducing the need for a technological and industrial infrastructure.
Homo sap did not NEED written language until after it had developed
agriculture. Virtually no hunter gatherer societies invented writing
independently in all of pre-history. Writing is an artifact of
agricultural technology and the need to manage its infrastructure in
the areas of labor pooling, resource sharing, land ownership, etc.
Societies that do not have such needs never develop writing because
they don't need writing as a management technology.

Even if we assume that for some reason, neanderthals needed writing to
keep track of who owned what hunting areas, what shelters belonged to
what hunters, to store knowledge of wild plant medicines and so forth
(they would actually have to have a really poor memory to have such a
need, since homo sapiens hunter gatherers have been able to perform
such functions without writing for thousands of years), this would not
allow the development of a leisure class of scientific minds that would
be needed to spur technological development, especially if they have
poor memories.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 22:06:57 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:06:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <3FCCF215.6010501@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031202220657.48617.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Popular Science have published a review
> 'Best of What's New 2003'
> <http://www.popsci.com/popsci/bown/2003/homepage/0,18882,,00.html>
> 
> In the Aviation section they mention the Bell Agusta 609
> 
> <http://www.bellagusta.com/html/theAircraft/ba_609/>
> 
> Sounds more practical than the Moller Skycar.

Well, it carries three times as many people as a Moller. It is probably
an $8-10 million vehicle. I saw a mockup for a two seater tiltrotor
called a BAT several years ago in Aviation Week that was on display at
an airshow. A tiltrotor that holds 2-4 people is what would be more
practical than the Moller.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec  2 22:27:02 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 22:27:02 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <20031202215146.19703.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <070501c3b923$7e548c90$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway
system


>
> As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence. The fact that
> they are extinct demonstrates that they failed miserably at the most
> important test of intelligence against a more intelligent competitor
> for the same resources.

ie outbreeding their competitor.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From rhanson at gmu.edu  Tue Dec  2 22:55:51 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 17:55:51 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <06eb01c3b91c$8dbd4480$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>
	<20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312020915560.-298187@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031202175419.01e7b5a0@mail.gmu.edu>

I just read someone who said:

"no one anticipated the explosive diffusion of the Internet during the 1990s"

and I figured that this can't be right - surely someone must have had the 
dumb luck to predict such a thing before 1990.  Can anyone point to a quote?



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Tue Dec  2 23:05:15 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 17:05:15 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <20031202215146.19703.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE47EIXq2gEIn00001353@hotmail.com>

> No, neanderthals did not have larger braincases than homo sapiens, that
> is a myth. What they did have was larger spaces for anterior lobes,
> i.e. the more primitive area of the brain, while having less space for
> frontal lobes.
Do you have anything to show this? Everything I have come acroos shows the
braincase itself exceeding modern man's by about 200cc.
Here for example: http://www.ecu.edu/org/ags/archives/hominidtable.htm
Kevin


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  2 23:40:32 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:40:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <070501c3b923$7e548c90$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031202234032.78927.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>> 
> >
> > As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence. The fact
> that
> > they are extinct demonstrates that they failed miserably at the
> most
> > important test of intelligence against a more intelligent
> competitor
> > for the same resources.
> 
> ie outbreeding their competitor.

No, there is no evidence of that. Neanderthals suffered from several
disadvantages: their bones were much more dense, so they could not
swim. Their arms did not allow as much dexterity as homo sap so they
could not wield distance weapons like spears with any accuracy or force
beyond ten meters or so, and so likely never evolved the mental ability
to judge trajectories very well. 

Their lack of intelligence was evidenced primarily by their extreme
lack of hygiene or organization in their living quarters (jokes about
the living arrangements of certain geeks notwithstanding). They
typically lived in nests of decaying prey, bones, and ash, infested by
rodents and insect parasites. They seemed to have developed a basic
concept of "mine" with regards to personal property, such that dead
neanderthals were buried with "their stuff", a feature that many
anthropologists assumed meant some sort of religious belief in an
afterlife existed, but this is nothing more than transference.

As another poster mentioned, burial was an act of conspicuous
consumption. Neanderthal burials became less and less elaborate over
time as pressure from homo sapiens put many clans on the run and could
not afford such displays. Hunger will turn any animal into a thief.

This competition was not exclusive to the neanderthal/homo sap
confrontation. There was a similar intelligence arms race going on
between predator species and prey species in all parts of the world
during this period up until the present day. A predator species would
evolve a larger brain case, and gain advantage over its prey species
until the selective preying on less intelligent prey resulted in the
evolution of smarter prey. This cut back on the competetiveness of the
predator species until it evolved into a smarter species with a bigger
brain.

This goes on today, particularly with regard to human predation on deer
and other mammal populations in North America. Human hunters use ever
more advanced technologies to help hunt these animals, but do not
decimate the herd, due to wildlife management principles. This has
resulted in the forced evolution of smarter deer, bear, and other
animal species. Especially with deer, where predation has been
predominantly on the male deer, one can see a measurable difference in
the intelligence of bucks vs does.

Back to the debate at hand, homo sapiens was just smarter than
neanderthals, and like many of the large mammals worldwide following
the Ice Age, neanderthal was forced into extinction because homo
sapiens was smart enough to outpredate anything, but not at that point
concious enough to manage wildlife wisely.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec  2 23:46:55 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 23:46:55 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <20031202234032.78927.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <076a01c3b92e$92076c20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway
system


>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>>
> > >
> > > As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence. The fact
> > that
> > > they are extinct demonstrates that they failed miserably at the
> > most
> > > important test of intelligence against a more intelligent
> > competitor
> > > for the same resources.
> >
> > ie outbreeding their competitor.
>
> No, there is no evidence of that. Neanderthals suffered from several
> disadvantages: their bones were much more dense, so they could not
> swim. Their arms did not allow as much dexterity as homo sap so they
> could not wield distance weapons like spears with any accuracy or force
> beyond ten meters or so, and so likely never evolved the mental ability
> to judge trajectories very well.

Yet it is quite conceivable that Homo Sapiens simply bred more quickly, esp
since they were smaller and presumably needed less food.
Only a 1% differential would have led to Neanderthals becoming extinct in a
very short timescale.
It may have nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec  2 23:48:42 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:48:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031202214953.GT22120@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031202234842.10650.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 03:13:30PM -0500, MB wrote:
> > What do you mean by "too much control is a bad
> thing"? Would
> > you *force* people to continue to exist in their
> misery and
> > pain and suffering because ... what?
> 
> This is from another context entirely! This is
> directed to
> the control freaks amongst us. It can be liberating
> to realize
> that this is only an illusion of control, in a world
> that is
> entirely uncontrollable. 

Sorry, but MB is correct.  I specified "control over
oneself" - as in, the opportunity to not grow old and
deterioriate, if desired.  That is not illusiory in
the same sense as "control" over other sentient
beings.

You are correct in what you did say: people who
currently have withered bodies, or who believe that
the only path to old age is to wither, might not want
to live forever given what they think it must mean.
But that is not what we are discussing.  We are
discussing the ability to live forever in relatively
good health.  (Frankly, it might be technically more
difficult to achieve immortality in a withered shell
than in a perpetually healthy shell, even if there
was not the desirability issue.  Were I to wither at
current rates, yet survive to 100, I might seriously
contemplate whether cryonic suspension might give me a
better chance of seeing the far future than continued
life.)


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec  3 00:07:46 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:07:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <06eb01c3b91c$8dbd4480$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031203000746.74516.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> And there's one other factor - one that I'm
> beginning to experience.
> It is the 'seen it all' syndrome where fewer and
> fewer things hold any
> novelty.

Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek out
new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have
found some novelty in the World Wide Web during the
90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed to
it).  Likewise, one who believes they have experienced
everything could take a crack at designing, say, a
nanotech assembler to leave a grand legacy.  (If one
has experienced *everything*, this should be simple -
but, of course, it won't be since there are ways of
thinking and fields of knowledge one has not truly
experienced.)

There's always more to learn and do, although one
might become tired of it and start justifying that
everything out there is all the same.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec  3 00:07:59 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:07:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <06eb01c3b91c$8dbd4480$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031203000759.36606.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> And there's one other factor - one that I'm
> beginning to experience.
> It is the 'seen it all' syndrome where fewer and
> fewer things hold any
> novelty.

Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek out
new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have
found some novelty in the World Wide Web during the
90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed to
it).  Likewise, one who believes they have experienced
everything could take a crack at designing, say, a
nanotech assembler to leave a grand legacy.  (If one
has experienced *everything*, this should be simple -
but, of course, it won't be since there are ways of
thinking and fields of knowledge one has not truly
experienced.)

There's always more to learn and do, although one
might become tired of it and start justifying that
everything out there is all the same.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec  3 00:10:20 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:10:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
Message-ID: <20031203001020.15316.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> There's always more to learn and do

...such as finding out why double-posts happen. 
(Sorry
about that.)


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 00:45:04 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:45:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE47EIXq2gEIn00001353@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031203004504.3065.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- kevinfreels at hotmail.com wrote:
> > No, neanderthals did not have larger braincases than homo sapiens,
> that
> > is a myth. What they did have was larger spaces for anterior lobes,
> > i.e. the more primitive area of the brain, while having less space
> for
> > frontal lobes.
> Do you have anything to show this? Everything I have come acroos
> shows the braincase itself exceeding modern man's by about 200cc.
> Here for example:
> http://www.ecu.edu/org/ags/archives/hominidtable.htm

http://www.psychomedia.it/pm/science/psybyo/mancia.htm
"FIG. 6 - Brain of a) cat, b) macaque, c) chimpanzee, d)
australopithecus, e) sinianthropus, f) Neanderthal Man, and g) Homo
sapiens. Numbers on the various circumvolutions indicate central areas
according to Brodmann. Note the considerable development of the parieto
- occipital cortex in Australanthropus and the large cranial fan
aperture which bring it very close to Neanderthal Man. In Homo Sapiens
we find a further widening of the fan and an increase in the cortical
areas of the "liaison brain". "

As stated, neanderthalis lacked a number of advanced brain
developments, relying instead on enlargement of more primitive lobes.

A problem with the hominid table brain volume specs you cited is that
the volumes specified for neanderthalis were calculated using a number
of fossils that exhibited a congenital malformation involving a lack of
the sagittal suture, which would lead to larger than normal brain case
size. This is not unsurprising, since the first neanderthalis found was
severely wracked by arthritis, a condition that led early
anthropologists to conclude that the neanderthalis was primitive
because it walked hunched over. It was not until the arthritic
condition of the bones was recognised that this picture of
neanderthalis changed.

Another problem with the table is that homo sapiens sapiens exhibited a
much wider variation in braincase size than neanderthalis, ranging from
as little as 900cc to as much as 2200 cc, with entirely healthy skull
development.

I would also be concerned about a paper that referred to a
neanderthalis' diet as including "veggies". Is that a scientific term?


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 00:52:24 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:52:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <076a01c3b92e$92076c20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031203005224.4746.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> Yet it is quite conceivable that Homo Sapiens simply bred more
> quickly, esp
> since they were smaller and presumably needed less food.
> Only a 1% differential would have led to Neanderthals becoming
> extinct in a very short timescale.
> It may have nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence.

It might, but examination of the tool record indicates differently.
Tools of neanderthalis were typically far more crude than sapiens
tools, they also lacked in variety, and despite being capable of it,
they never adopted force multiplier weapons like spear throwers or
bows.

They were also less adaptable, evolved specifically for the subarctic
conditions just south of the glacier line during the ice ages, they
lacked the adaptability of sapiens to migrate and survive in any
climate. They faced a quandary quite similar to that faced by the
native americans at the hands of european migration.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec  3 01:01:00 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:01:00 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
References: <20031203000759.36606.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <079501c3b938$eacfcd20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 12:07 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles


> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > And there's one other factor - one that I'm
> > beginning to experience.
> > It is the 'seen it all' syndrome where fewer and
> > fewer things hold any
> > novelty.
>
> Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek out
> new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have

I do, which makes the problem more acute - not less.

> found some novelty in the World Wide Web during the
> 90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed to
> it).  Likewise, one who believes they have experienced

To some extent, but almost all technologies simply enable one to do existing
things faster or easier.
I'm not bored by the Net, any more than I'm bored by a screwdriver.
It's just another tool.

> everything could take a crack at designing, say, a
> nanotech assembler to leave a grand legacy.  (If one
> has experienced *everything*, this should be simple -
> but, of course, it won't be since there are ways of
> thinking and fields of knowledge one has not truly
> experienced.)

I've been an engineer for 25years and I'm *bored* by it now.
That includes nanotech, after the first few 'gee whizz' minutes of reading
about some new innovation.

> There's always more to learn and do, although one
> might become tired of it and start justifying that
> everything out there is all the same.

Depends what you mean by 'new'.
Every program I've ever written has been 'new'.
That kind of 'new' is now tedious.


Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  3 01:03:54 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:03:54 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <20031202234032.78927.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<076a01c3b92e$92076c20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE47zJcZikaTA00001485@hotmail.com>

Or, given the fact that so many humans engage in farm animal sex, maybe they
were assimilated into human society yet were unable to produce viable
offspring when crossbred.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway
system


> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway
> system
>
>
> >
> > --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>>
> > > >
> > > > As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence. The fact
> > > that
> > > > they are extinct demonstrates that they failed miserably at the
> > > most
> > > > important test of intelligence against a more intelligent
> > > competitor
> > > > for the same resources.
> > >
> > > ie outbreeding their competitor.
> >
> > No, there is no evidence of that. Neanderthals suffered from several
> > disadvantages: their bones were much more dense, so they could not
> > swim. Their arms did not allow as much dexterity as homo sap so they
> > could not wield distance weapons like spears with any accuracy or force
> > beyond ten meters or so, and so likely never evolved the mental ability
> > to judge trajectories very well.
>
> Yet it is quite conceivable that Homo Sapiens simply bred more quickly,
esp
> since they were smaller and presumably needed less food.
> Only a 1% differential would have led to Neanderthals becoming extinct in
a
> very short timescale.
> It may have nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence.
>
> Dirk
>
> The Consensus:-
> The political party for the new millennium
> http://www.theconsensus.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From twodeel at jornada.org  Wed Dec  3 01:06:54 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 17:06:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031202170055.77812.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312021659120.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Making music, nor even religion, is not a function of conciousness.
> Birds make music all the time, and apes are known to use tools and make
> primitive art. Conciousness in man is not even thought to have developed
> (according to some) until after the invention of writing. Read Julian
> Jaynes' book The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the
> Bicameral Mind.

Yes, birds make music and apes use tools, but creating a musical
instrument (a flute, in particular) seems like a much more advanced thing
to do than sing like a bird or use a stick to fish out termites.  After
reading Steven Baxter's novel _Evolution_, though, I realize that even
this relatively sophisticated toolmaking does not necessarily indicate
full-fledged consciousness, or even consciousness at all.  So I'm
interested to read more.  The book you recommended will cost me $18 at 
Borders, though, since my local library doesn't have it -- is there any 
other book on the subject you'd recommend over this one, or is this the 
one I should go for?

> As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence.

Well, I said "given the superior intelligence of Sawyer's Neanderthals."  
In his trilogy, they WERE more intelligent than humans (or at least their
modern-day descendants were), regardless of whether they were in reality.  
Call it a suspension-of-disbelief thing.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 01:46:24 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 17:46:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Questioning The Consensus
In-Reply-To: <076a01c3b92e$92076c20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031203014624.98420.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

Dirk,
From: http://www.theconsensus.org/uk/principia/judicial/index.html
"The origin of Rights in human nature is a more plausible argument. For
example, it can be argued that the 'Right of self defence' is rooted in
and derived from innate instincts for self preservation. However, it
does require some convoluted and unconvincing reasoning to extrapolate
that to other Rights such as the 'Right to vote'. It is also not much
of a foundation if one has the power to alter Human nature at its
genetic source, which will soon be an available technology. Which
leaves Rights as a social construct - but what kind of construct?"

The "right to vote" is a part and parcel of the right to choose, a
result of every individual posessing free will.

Having the power to alter human nature, according to your charter,
would be illegal and unacceptable, so you cannot have your cake and eat
it. You cannot argue away human nature as the source of rights with
claims that technology is hand hand to alter that nature if your party
intends to prevent such technology from being applied.

Furthermore, self modification is an inherent part of self-ownership.
If you cannot alter your own nature, then you are a slave to that which
prevents you from doing so.

Secondly, do you really think that altering of human beings would go so
far as to change the basic features of human sentience? Given that the
goal of your alleged claim to transhumanism is to improve humans, to
advance human capabilities, it follows that a more capable human would
have MORE rights. Nor is this out of line with human development. Once
humans could not speak, and therefore had no right to free speech. Once
human predecessors had no weapons technology, and had no right to bear
arms.

As we become more abled, we gain greater liberty. As humans are
differently abled, they are differently free. A quadrepelegic is not
free to walk until s/he makes the investment in regaining that ability,
but the quadrepelegic is free to travel by other means: by wheelchair,
for example. A person capable of leading a nation responsibly is able
to handle the liberty of controlling massive destructive capabilities,
like nuclear weapons.

Your "Consensus" is a rather minor form of fascism that grants liberty
as privilege issued by the whim of government and not as ability gained
via nature of being born or nurture of being raised as a free citizen.

No government you imagine can prevent becoming a tyranny because you
have proposed no means of embedding checks on abuse of power or of
limiting the potential for majoritarian tyranny. Contracts mean nothing
when the people who sign them do not believe they posess that which
they are negotiating as an inherent property of their being. When
anything can be negotiated, then slavery is only one vote away.



=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 01:51:01 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 17:51:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312021659120.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031203015101.20727.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> 
> > As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence.
> 
> Well, I said "given the superior intelligence of Sawyer's
> Neanderthals."  
> In his trilogy, they WERE more intelligent than humans (or at least
> their
> modern-day descendants were), regardless of whether they were in
> reality.  
> Call it a suspension-of-disbelief thing.

Well, that is a pretty thin thing to not disbelieve. The primary
features that neanderthal would have needed to gain greater
intelligence were the very thing that sapiens developed, so unless you
just mean they stayed ugly, any 'more intelligent' neanderthalis would
have been evolved into sapiens, so far as brain structure was concerned.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec  3 02:27:11 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 02:27:11 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Questioning The Consensus
References: <20031203014624.98420.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <07d901c3b944$f5fdee00$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:46 AM
Subject: Questioning The Consensus


> Dirk,
> From: http://www.theconsensus.org/uk/principia/judicial/index.html
> "The origin of Rights in human nature is a more plausible argument. For
> example, it can be argued that the 'Right of self defence' is rooted in
> and derived from innate instincts for self preservation. However, it
> does require some convoluted and unconvincing reasoning to extrapolate
> that to other Rights such as the 'Right to vote'. It is also not much
> of a foundation if one has the power to alter Human nature at its
> genetic source, which will soon be an available technology. Which
> leaves Rights as a social construct - but what kind of construct?"
>
> The "right to vote" is a part and parcel of the right to choose, a
> result of every individual posessing free will.

Sure - you can choose to fly like a bird by flapping your arms, but it won't
work.
You can choose to express your opinion, and others can choose to ignore it -
or execute you.

> Having the power to alter human nature, according to your charter,
> would be illegal and unacceptable, so you cannot have your cake and eat

Not at all - where does it say that? The Consensus Essentia?

> it. You cannot argue away human nature as the source of rights with
> claims that technology is hand hand to alter that nature if your party
> intends to prevent such technology from being applied.

On the contrary - the party is expressly in favour of altering Human
Nature - which is why the notion of Rights as flowing from Human Nature is
no foundation at all.

> Furthermore, self modification is an inherent part of self-ownership.
> If you cannot alter your own nature, then you are a slave to that which
> prevents you from doing so.

Who said one cannot alter ones nature?

> Secondly, do you really think that altering of human beings would go so
> far as to change the basic features of human sentience? Given that the

Yes, in some cases.

> goal of your alleged claim to transhumanism is to improve humans, to
> advance human capabilities, it follows that a more capable human would
> have MORE rights. Nor is this out of line with human development. Once

Just as many Rights as they can take and hold - like now.

> humans could not speak, and therefore had no right to free speech. Once
> human predecessors had no weapons technology, and had no right to bear
> arms.

So?

> As we become more abled, we gain greater liberty. As humans are

And we lose it by becoming dependent on others.

> differently abled, they are differently free. A quadrepelegic is not
> free to walk until s/he makes the investment in regaining that ability,
> but the quadrepelegic is free to travel by other means: by wheelchair,
> for example. A person capable of leading a nation responsibly is able
> to handle the liberty of controlling massive destructive capabilities,
> like nuclear weapons.
>
> Your "Consensus" is a rather minor form of fascism that grants liberty
> as privilege issued by the whim of government and not as ability gained
> via nature of being born or nurture of being raised as a free citizen.

A loonytarian POV.
As I said, in practice Rights flow from a social contract.
They have no other existence.

> No government you imagine can prevent becoming a tyranny because you
> have proposed no means of embedding checks on abuse of power or of
> limiting the potential for majoritarian tyranny. Contracts mean nothing
> when the people who sign them do not believe they posess that which
> they are negotiating as an inherent property of their being. When
> anything can be negotiated, then slavery is only one vote away.

Nothing in principle can prevent tyranny, only make it less likely.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 02:33:31 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 20:33:31 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312021659120.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <007501c3b945$d9a29a20$4f9d4a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 7:06 PM

> > Read Julian
> > Jaynes' book The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the
> > Bicameral Mind.

> The book you recommended will cost me $18 at
> Borders, though, since my local library doesn't have it -- is there any
> other book on the subject you'd recommend over this one, or is this the
> one I should go for?

It's extremely eccentric and ignored by the literature. Try Damasio or
Calvin (William, not John).

Damien Broderick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 02:41:43 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:41:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312021659120.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031203024143.25933.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> 
> Yes, birds make music and apes use tools, but creating a musical
> instrument (a flute, in particular) seems like a much more advanced
> thing
> to do than sing like a bird or use a stick to fish out termites. 

THis is true, however, the flute discovered in a neanderthal grave was
dated to the same period in which evidence has been found of trading of
sapiens made bone tools and jewelry with neanderthals. So it is
conceivable that the flute originated with sapiens and was traded to
neanderthals. Neanderthals were not known for developing much tool
technology beyond that which distinguished them from heidelbergensis,
and that which they initially developed remained pretty static for the
remainder of their tenure, like a mathematician doing nobel prize work
at age 20 and coasting the rest of his life with no new ideas.
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Atrium/1381/hominids2.html

> After reading Steven Baxter's novel _Evolution_, though, I realize
> that even this relatively sophisticated toolmaking does not 
> necessarily indicate full-fledged consciousness, or even 
> consciousness at all.  So I'm interested to read more.  The book
> you recommended will cost me $18 at Borders, though, since my local
> library doesn't have it -- is there any other book on the subject
> you'd recommend over this one, or is this the one I should go for?

Well, I assume you like SF. Neal Stephenson wrote a book called Snow
Crash which you might be familiar with. A lot of the basic ideas he
used in fleshing out his plot device of root language viral programming
of humans is based on Jaynes' work. Of course, he does take it to a
rather absurd conclusion... but that was the book that actually
motivated me to read Jaynes, to get the straight scoop. In Snow Crash,
when Hiro is in his Library in the metasphere talking to the Librarian,
he is talking about a lot of Jaynes work.

That being said, Jaynes is not an exciting writer. It has been very
slow reading for me. I tend to fall asleep frequently reading it,
something which has never happened before with anything I've ever read.
Perhaps there is a virus in my mind that does not want me to read it...


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  3 02:49:21 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 20:49:21 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
References: <20031203000746.74516.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE25q5Z3JjQWr00001500@hotmail.com>

It's interesting to note here how quickly new innovations make their way
into mainstream society and become the norm. A Cell phone that takes
pictures and sends them to someone else without wires and all fits in the
palm of your hand, $100. A PC that fits in your pocket, $500. Doing all my
Christmas shopping without ever having to leave my home? Priceless.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles


> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> > And there's one other factor - one that I'm
> > beginning to experience.
> > It is the 'seen it all' syndrome where fewer and
> > fewer things hold any
> > novelty.
>
> Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek out
> new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have
> found some novelty in the World Wide Web during the
> 90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed to
> it).  Likewise, one who believes they have experienced
> everything could take a crack at designing, say, a
> nanotech assembler to leave a grand legacy.  (If one
> has experienced *everything*, this should be simple -
> but, of course, it won't be since there are ways of
> thinking and fields of knowledge one has not truly
> experienced.)
>
> There's always more to learn and do, although one
> might become tired of it and start justifying that
> everything out there is all the same.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  3 03:04:16 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 21:04:16 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <20031203004504.3065.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE23k31TZ14eB00001516@hotmail.com>

Thanks for the reference. I'll add that to my collection. That's the first
I've seen of this. I really appreciate it. I wonder why all the references I
have, even current ones, average about 1500 for H. sapiens and 1700 for H.
neanderthalensis.

> I would also be concerned about a paper that referred to a
> neanderthalis' diet as including "veggies".

It was the quickest thing I could find with a quick Google and was only
intended as an example. I have a variety of sources in books, but those are
difficult to source in email. I didn't actually read that reference from
beginning to end. I was just searching for an example that stated what I had
read elsewhere.

 Is that a scientific term?

Yes, "veggies" is a scientific term. They keep changing the dictionary. Did
you see where they recently added the word "bling bling" to the Oxford
English dictionary? :-)






From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  3 03:06:38 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 21:06:38 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312021659120.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE15KVApwOLZC00001522@hotmail.com>

I am reading The Neandethal's Necklace by Juan Luis Arsuaga. I just started
it and it seems really good.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway
system


> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>
> > Making music, nor even religion, is not a function of conciousness.
> > Birds make music all the time, and apes are known to use tools and make
> > primitive art. Conciousness in man is not even thought to have developed
> > (according to some) until after the invention of writing. Read Julian
> > Jaynes' book The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the
> > Bicameral Mind.
>
> Yes, birds make music and apes use tools, but creating a musical
> instrument (a flute, in particular) seems like a much more advanced thing
> to do than sing like a bird or use a stick to fish out termites.  After
> reading Steven Baxter's novel _Evolution_, though, I realize that even
> this relatively sophisticated toolmaking does not necessarily indicate
> full-fledged consciousness, or even consciousness at all.  So I'm
> interested to read more.  The book you recommended will cost me $18 at
> Borders, though, since my local library doesn't have it -- is there any
> other book on the subject you'd recommend over this one, or is this the
> one I should go for?
>
> > As above, neanderthals were not of higher intelligence.
>
> Well, I said "given the superior intelligence of Sawyer's Neanderthals."
> In his trilogy, they WERE more intelligent than humans (or at least their
> modern-day descendants were), regardless of whether they were in reality.
> Call it a suspension-of-disbelief thing.
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec  3 03:13:43 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 03:13:43 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
References: <20031203000746.74516.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>
	<Law10-OE25q5Z3JjQWr00001500@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <082d01c3b94b$7565fdd0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <kevinfreels at hotmail.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 2:49 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles


> It's interesting to note here how quickly new innovations make their way
> into mainstream society and become the norm. A Cell phone that takes
> pictures and sends them to someone else without wires and all fits in the
> palm of your hand, $100. A PC that fits in your pocket, $500. Doing all my
> Christmas shopping without ever having to leave my home? Priceless.

Tedious and predictable, but useful.
Now show me some technology that is neither, and that enables me to do
something I have never before done (that is worth doing).
Back in 1977 I wrote a document on an idea I had, a 'digital book'. The idea
was shelved by GEC management (as usually happens in Britain), but a couple
of years ago I actually worked on the Cytale ebook in Paris. I can't say it
was a 'new' experience from an engineering POV. Paris far outranked it.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec  3 03:25:29 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:25:29 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
In-Reply-To: <281450-2200312221632091@M2W092.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <006101c3b94d$19dadce0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> natashavita at earthlink.net> 
> 
> Bloody hell Spike!  I'm trying to get some work done!!!
> 
> Every time I open my email hub to sneak a peek at an incoming 
> message I start lol and disrupting my workday.
> 
> 
> ======================


Ja, me too.  I crack me up.  My jokes are more fun than
my job.  

Bloody hell?  Sounds very British.  A Maxism perhaps?

{8^D

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec  3 03:31:52 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:31:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] think this will catch on?
In-Reply-To: <3FCCC059.7080701@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <006201c3b94d$fe1cda70$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Huh! Three wheels - Far too many.
> 
> Try a Harley-style single-wheel motorcycle!
> 
<http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/2003/11/04/cx_dl_1104vow.html>
<http://wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,61216,00.html?tw=wn_techhead_7?

What tricks could Spike do on one of these?


BillK

Ja this does look cool, altho it's hard to see
how it would fare in an emergency stop situation.
Of course they would be great for racing and the
bikini tug-of-war games, etc, for which the Segway
seems perfect.

spike

ps, Bill, I can ride a unicycle, as well as a
bicycle and motorcycle on the back wheel, so I
imagine this contraption wouldn't be so different.  s



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec  3 03:59:03 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:59:03 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] new record prime!
In-Reply-To: <019101c3b905$6a7da4e0$4f9d4a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <006901c3b951$ca3c8800$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Woooohooooo!

Michael Shafer discovered the 40th known Mersenne prime, 
2^20996011-1.

This prime is over 6.3 million digits, beating the 
previous world record prime by over 2 million decimal digits.

Scott has handed out the press release and already the 
first online article of the discovery has appeared:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994438

You can also read Scott's press release
http://www.mersenne.org/20996011.htm

The size of the record largest known prime is about 2^7529000
times larger than the previous record which was set about two
years ago, so the size of the record largest prime doubled
about every 8.4 seconds on the average, which is itself a
record.

The previous records were set on the dates shown in the
table below, along with the number of seconds for each
doubling.  So you can see the doubling time is shorter
than ever:

Record set on:		Doubling time in seconds:

01-Jul-94			614.8
03-Sep-96			172.4
13-Nov-96			43.7
24-Aug-97			15.6
27-Jan-98			298.5
01-Jun-99			10.7
14-Nov-01			11.9
17-Nov-03			8.4

Ohhhh, this is waaay cool.  Who wants to have a party?
There are several other math types in the area who
will go and party our brains out at such a happy
occasion.

{8^]

spike





From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Wed Dec  3 04:11:04 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 23:11:04 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <079501c3b938$eacfcd20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
References: <20031203000759.36606.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
	<079501c3b938$eacfcd20$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312022228550.-84115@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>



On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Dirk Bruere wrote:


>
> I've been an engineer for 25years and I'm *bored* by it
now.
> That includes nanotech, after the first few 'gee whizz'
minutes of reading
> about some new innovation.



Ah! My brother, who is now in his mid 70s, told me something
very like this when he was not yet quite 50. He said he'd
done all the things he had set out as goals, and was
currently looking at the wide open space of "now what?"

He took early retirement when it was offered (he was an
engineer also, mechanical) and then he began to *play* with
various things he'd not really had time for during his
working life.

He built a machine shop for himself - so he could make
things. He made some knives - by hand. That was quite a
challenge. He learned to make Damascus steel knife blades.

Some of the furniture from our parents' home was in bad
shape and he began to repair it. He repaired our old square
piano which was coming to pieces inside and out.  Then he
began to make some furniture, a grandfather (tallcase)
clock. He made the clockworks as well as the case. He
learned to carve the lovely shell patterns that show up on
18th century Chippendale style furniture. He made a chest of
drawers. He made a sideboard for his younger daughter. And
then another clock.

He decided it might be fun to build an electric car.  I
think he's on car #2 now.

He took up playing the bagpipe because he thought it might
be easy. Wrong. He found it was quite hard. But he also
found it relieved his headaches after his aneurism surgery.
:?

He began working on the genealogy our grandfather had been
collecting, putting it in order, making copies of old
documents, visiting places mentioned in them.

He found that he couldn't buy some of the tools he needed,
so he began to make his tools.

It's quite an experience to visit him. He has so many
interests now he hardly ever leaves his house unless his
wife insists.  He hardly ever does anything that was related
to his job. It's all play, and it runs free.

There's stuff out there. You can find it. It may not be what
you expect. It may be sort of out of your field, but nothing
wrong with that.

:)

Regards,
MB





From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Dec  3 07:09:04 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 23:09:04 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Gender Genie - analyzing writing styles
In-Reply-To: <006101c3b94d$19dadce0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <281450-2200312221632091@M2W092.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031202230803.02edc5e0@pop.earthlink.net>

At 07:25 PM 12/2/03 -0800, Spike wrote:

> > natashavita at earthlink.net>
> >
> > Bloody hell Spike!  I'm trying to get some work done!!!
> >
> > Every time I open my email hub to sneak a peek at an incoming
> > message I start lol and disrupting my workday.
> >
> > ======================
>
>Ja, me too.  I crack me up.  My jokes are more fun than
>my job.
>
>Bloody hell?  Sounds very British.  A Maxism perhaps?

Better than a marxist :-)

N 



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec  3 05:50:38 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 00:50:38 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031202175419.01e7b5a0@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <002701c3b961$64673ec0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> I just read someone who said:
> 
> "no one anticipated the explosive diffusion of the Internet 
> during the 1990s"
> 
> and I figured that this can't be right - surely someone must 
> have had the dumb luck to predict such a thing before 1990.
> Can anyone point to a quote?

I suggest reading through "A Brief History of the Internet" at
<http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml>.  It has references to
all the milestones in Internet creation, including white papers,
conferences, etc.  

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 






From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec  3 05:54:20 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 06:54:20 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fight in California over gene-altered GloFish pets
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBKEOJCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From CNN: The nation's first genetically altered household pet - a fish that
glows in the dark - is set to begin appearing in stores next month
everywhere except perhaps California, the only state with a ban on
lab-engineered species. On Wednesday, the California Fish and Game
Commission is scheduled to take up an application from Yorktown Technologies
of Austin, Texas, to market the GloFish in California.
State wildlife officials have concluded that the Florida-grown fluorescent
zebra fish poses no danger, and they have recommended that the state exempt
it from the ban. But environmental and public interest groups, along with
commercial fishermen, oppose an exemption.
"What California says is going to make very little difference in the long
run if all the other states are going to allow them," said Peter Jenkins, an
attorney and policy analyst with the Center for Food Safety. Similarly, I
think restrictive laws in the US are going to make very little difference in
the long run if most other countries are going to allow lab-engineered
species.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/b4e12f25/attachment.html>

From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec  3 06:05:57 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 01:05:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE25q5Z3JjQWr00001500@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <002a01c3b963$87acde60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

"Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote,
> Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek out
> new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have
> found some novelty in the World Wide Web during the
> 90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed to
> it).

In 1985 I had networked Macintoshes which had a hypertext browser called
"HyperCard", that allowed hypertext links to bring up cards from remote
networked computers.  This predated Windows-95 by a decade.  This stuff
isn't new and wasn't adopted quickly.  It just didn't gain popularity until
much later.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 






From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec  3 07:24:04 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 08:24:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEOKCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From the New York Times: Sometime in the future, when the distinction
between cosmetologist and molecular biologist has faded and gene shops dot
the seedier urban streets like tattoo parlors, the philosophers, moralists
and historians of science will try to pin down the moment when the new age
began. Science historians will probably say it started with the discovery of
DNA, or the mapping of the human genome. Others will claim it started when
Dolly was cloned and it became clear that the tools of biotechnology had
moved out of the high church of pure research and into the unpredictable
hands of people who bred sheep for profit.
I think the moment is now. And the creature that embodies the escape of
biotechnology into the world at large - a movement that will never be
reversed - is an aquarium fish that glows in the dark. This is the tipping
point, when the world irrevocably turns toward the science-fiction fantasies
of writers like Philip K. Dick and William Gibson, who envision biomedical
technology permeating every corner of the marketplace, from global
corporations on down to small-time illegal operations like stolen-car chop
shops. Imagine if you will, that you could pay to have genes for glowing in
the dark inserted into your own body. How many glowing teenagers would there
be? And who would stop them, once they reached age 18? After all, one's own
body is one's own business.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/658212ef/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec  3 07:44:24 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 08:44:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <002701c3b961$64673ec0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEOLCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

I did. In 1990 I was playing with the idea to start a net access business
for individual end users, and even found someone who was maybe willing to
invest some money. Then I let them talking me out of the idea, "this is too
crazy, there will never be a market for this". Now when I wish to do some
sweet daydreaming I think of what I would do with all the money that I would
have now if I had followed my idea to the end.
Two lessons here: 1 - believe in your ideas - 2 - get your ass off the
armchair and do it.

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Harvey
Newstrom
Sent: 03 December 2003 06:51
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?


Robin Hanson wrote,
> I just read someone who said:
>
> "no one anticipated the explosive diffusion of the Internet
> during the 1990s"
>
> and I figured that this can't be right - surely someone must
> have had the dumb luck to predict such a thing before 1990.
> Can anyone point to a quote?

I suggest reading through "A Brief History of the Internet" at
<http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml>.  It has references to
all the milestones in Internet creation, including white papers,
conferences, etc.



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec  3 10:09:46 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:09:46 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031203000759.36606.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <06eb01c3b91c$8dbd4480$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
	<20031203000759.36606.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031203100946.GI22120@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 04:07:59PM -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek out
> new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have

The "seen it all syndrome" is only in part due to the
actual loss of novelty due to previous exposure. 
It's definitely mostly an aging artifact, similiar 
to the subjectively slower passage of time (both 
can be temporarily disrupted with psychoactive 
substances; e.g. with LSD down to ridiculous extremes 
of subjectively stopped time flow).

Unfortunately, there's no way to "cure" that with 
meds. It is definitely hard to establish a habit of
habit disruption, but it's possibly the only simple
countermeasure that might work. (Oh, and getting
a good night's worth of sleep).

There are exceptions from the rule, though, people who
remain novelty-seekers up to extremely high age. 
(I've met a nanotechnology enthusiast who's well 
past 80, for instance).

> found some novelty in the World Wide Web during the
> 90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed to
> it).  Likewise, one who believes they have experienced
> everything could take a crack at designing, say, a
> nanotech assembler to leave a grand legacy.  (If one

Many professionals can't do the same occupation in their spare 
time as during dayjob. I've talked to some old hand
system designers, but while they are very effective
in what they do they do not revel in novel approaches
(in their craft, it's frequently only for the better).

> has experienced *everything*, this should be simple -
> but, of course, it won't be since there are ways of
> thinking and fields of knowledge one has not truly
> experienced.)

We do need a speciality sustainable nootropic that's low on side effects.
Unfortunately, there's probably no such thing 
save of completely replasticize the brain.
 
> There's always more to learn and do, although one
> might become tired of it and start justifying that
> everything out there is all the same.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/fc41c748/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec  3 10:24:37 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:24:37 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031202234842.10650.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031202214953.GT22120@leitl.org>
	<20031202234842.10650.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031203102437.GJ22120@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 03:48:42PM -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> Sorry, but MB is correct.  I specified "control over
> oneself" - as in, the opportunity to not grow old and
> deterioriate, if desired.  That is not illusiory in

We're talking very nicely in othogonal directions to
each other, but it's no problem, as we occasionally
do manage to connect sometimes.

> the same sense as "control" over other sentient
> beings.

It would be a very good thing to have control over
our physical layer. What I'm objecting is a belief
of having a control over your own mind by equivalent
of waving a dead chicken (Freud, Jung & Co). I have
similiar scathing opinion of AI people who think
philosophy and introspection will result in actual
application leads. 

More specifically, realization that you can't control
everything is liberating to the borderline
obsessive-compulsive amongst us, and can lead to
actual increase in control. It's the equivalent of
attemting to micromanage your life.
 
> You are correct in what you did say: people who
> currently have withered bodies, or who believe that
> the only path to old age is to wither, might not want
> to live forever given what they think it must mean.

We've donned our Ministry of Propaganda hat here, 
I presume.

> But that is not what we are discussing.  We are
> discussing the ability to live forever in relatively

Forever is a bit misleading. According to this week's
version of physics, nothing is eternal. In a Darwinian
scenario there's always a nonzero probability that you'll
become a loser in the next round, though a tiny fraction
of original individuals will have extremely long time
spans. 

> good health.  (Frankly, it might be technically more
> difficult to achieve immortality in a withered shell
> than in a perpetually healthy shell, even if there
> was not the desirability issue.  Were I to wither at
> current rates, yet survive to 100, I might seriously
> contemplate whether cryonic suspension might give me a
> better chance of seeing the far future than continued
> life.)

You of course realize that the vast majority of people
in the industrialized countries die demented. Not much
left to suspend there, alas.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/c8a4d7c6/attachment.bin>

From charlie at antipope.org  Wed Dec  3 10:57:06 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:57:06 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031202175419.01e7b5a0@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <20031201161346.GM22650@leitl.org>
	<20031201221612.77696.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031202102400.GJ13516@leitl.org>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312020915560.-298187@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031202175419.01e7b5a0@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <6F50E5F1-257F-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 2 Dec 2003, at 22:55, Robin Hanson wrote:

> I just read someone who said:
>
> "no one anticipated the explosive diffusion of the Internet during the 
> 1990s"
>
> and I figured that this can't be right - surely someone must have had 
> the dumb luck to predict such a thing before 1990.  Can anyone point 
> to a quote?

Surely "True Names" by Vernor Vinge counts? He had the net as a 
ubiquitous service, certainly, and that was published in 1980. And I'm 
pretty certain it was explicitly the internet -- or an n'th generation 
descendant -- that he was talking about.

Caveat: fictional source, rather than academic paper.



-- Charlie



From charlie at antipope.org  Wed Dec  3 11:03:37 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:03:37 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <20031203024143.25933.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031203024143.25933.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <58479C34-2580-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 3 Dec 2003, at 02:41, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Well, I assume you like SF. Neal Stephenson wrote a book called Snow
> Crash which you might be familiar with. A lot of the basic ideas he
> used in fleshing out his plot device of root language viral programming
> of humans is based on Jaynes' work. Of course, he does take it to a
> rather absurd conclusion... but that was the book that actually
> motivated me to read Jaynes, to get the straight scoop.

It's worth noting that Jaynes' book has been more than somewhat 
discredited in the field; he is to evolutionary biology pretty much 
what Immanuel Velikovsky is to planetography.

There's a reason some SF authors like his ideas; it's because they make 
for a great fictional playground-setting. That's not exactly the same 
thing as liking them because the evidence supports them ....



-- Charlie



From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Dec  3 13:07:26 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 13:07:26 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
Message-ID: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Tue Dec 02, 2003 05:07 pm  Adrian Tymes wrote:
> There's always more to learn and do, although one
> might become tired of it and start justifying that
> everything out there is all the same.


On Tue Dec 02, 2003 09:11 pm MB wrote:
> There's stuff out there. You can find it. It may not be what
> you expect. It may be sort of out of your field, but nothing
> wrong with that.


These sentiments strike me as having the flavor of youthful enthusiasm.
When you are younger, everything is new and exciting, you are healthy
and fit and full of energy and you want to 'go boldly beyond the frontiers'.

There are relatively few people who manage to retain an interested,
inquiring, searching outlook on life into old age. It is very difficult
for people in their 20s and 30s to imagine what they will feel like in
their 60s and older. It is not just the physical deterioration which
makes actual movement more difficult, but for old people the world
appears to be a much more dangerous place. If a young person trips and
falls or is pushed over, they just sprung back up onto their feet. For
an old person it can mean months in hospital.

On the mental side, the 'seen it all before' syndrome is also very real.
Computer techies will have seen the 'burn-out' effect on whiz-kids who
just can't do it any more. The people who are the big achievers are all
'driven' by their own various demons.

As the human race becomes longer-lived they will face two problems. The
obvious one is keeping themselves in good physical health. There is a
vast field of medical research that is required for life-extension.

The more subtle problem will be mental. The young researchers cannot
appreciate that their fresh, inquiring minds could ever change. But they
will. Every experience that is assimilated will change them, until after
60 or 70 years they will be very different. All the exciting dramas of
youth will become less important. An older person will be more likely to
respond with 'Jeez, not that again!'.

This point has come up before, where some people are of the opinion that
a civilization where everyone is thousands of years old will be a
civilization that does not go out exploring the universe.
i.e. the 'What's the point?' attitude.

 From our present point of view, the immortals will have to do
'something' with their time. If we bring in intelligence enhancement as
well, then it becomes even more unlikely that we can find out or
appreciate what that 'something' will be.

If that 'something' is mental, virtual-worlds or nano-worlds based, then
actual physical travel out in the universe will be unlikely. Even if by
then humanity is still based in physical bodies in which to do the
traveling.

So how do you plan to spend the next 7,000 years?


BillK



From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Wed Dec  3 14:06:58 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:06:58 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>

BillK wrote:

> On the mental side, the 'seen it all before' syndrome is also very real.
> Computer techies will have seen the 'burn-out' effect on whiz-kids who
> just can't do it any more. The people who are the big achievers are all
> 'driven' by their own various demons.


Oh yeah, that is so true. I can allready feel it myself at the tender 
age of 38. I have allways been an "extreme" techie. But computers are 
getting more and more boring every day. Solving the same old problems in 
slightly different ways.

On the other side, I find quality in my life increasingly important, and 
there are many examples of people living good lives at a high age. 
People at the age of 50 usually tell that they are living out the best 
part of their life. Free of the stresses of homebuilding and kids.

We can also hope that a exponential growth in technology can make up for 
the "seen it all before" feeling.

Or perhaps side-effect-free recreational drugs will make it all moot.


regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec  3 14:42:19 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:42:19 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
	<3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <20031203144219.GB1229@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 03:06:58PM +0100, Max M wrote:

> Oh yeah, that is so true. I can allready feel it myself at the tender 
> age of 38. I have allways been an "extreme" techie. But computers are 
> getting more and more boring every day. Solving the same old problems in 
> slightly different ways.

Me three, at 37. Getting ready to move on to make my hands
dirty in a different field. Not exactly easy, given my current
location and economic climate (drug discovery and bio
startups have been ailing for some time, and ROI is as
far removed as ever, so I expect them to start crashing
en masse quite soon -- so far they've been just not hiring
for a couple of years, or so). 

I'm quite interested to discuss personal plans (job, financial,
relocation) with other european transhumanists, as most of EU
is basically in the same situation.
 
> On the other side, I find quality in my life increasingly important, and 
> there are many examples of people living good lives at a high age. 

Absolutely.

> People at the age of 50 usually tell that they are living out the best 
> part of their life. Free of the stresses of homebuilding and kids.

Heard that, too. Latter stresses seem to be yet in front of me, though :)
 
> We can also hope that a exponential growth in technology can make up for 
> the "seen it all before" feeling.

So far it's not managing very well.
 
> Or perhaps side-effect-free recreational drugs will make it all moot.

Have you ever seen a side-effect-free drug? It's too coarse a tool by
far. I'm afraid we'll have really to wait for personal molecular medicine,
which might take too long (and be too expensive) for our age group.

Is the first immortal generation born already? Maybe, but it's pretty
impossible to tell yet. 

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/960277a3/attachment.bin>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Wed Dec  3 14:55:13 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 09:55:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312030924410.-37899@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


Yes, there is a flavor of youthful enthusiasm here, but it
is not intentional (on my part). What I was trying to point
out is that one spends 25+ years "working" (often on someone
else's projects) and not playing. And finally, if one is
blessed with decent health, one can try playing.

I gave an example of my brother, and he's in his mid 70s.

My other brother is pushing 80. He does ice skating, model
building, studying German (he always wanted to learn the
language after he was there in WW2), reading, website
building for friends - and travel. He sleeps a lot, and my
sister in law says she thinks he may have been without
sufficient sleep all his working life. But he is busy and
AFAIK happy. The work he does now is not what he did in his
job, but he still has connections there.

I myself am only hitting this wall now, and I do wonder
"what's the point?" I don't feel very good, aches and pains.
I'm not as strong as I was, and I need more support system.
:( It's most irritating. But there are new things out there.
I've built a website for a non-profit a friend of mine
suggested, I do a bit of database work for a former boss, I
help some older less able friends to get around, and I've
taken up Shaped Note Singing. I also have become interested
in snakes and I roller skate with friends. And I have more
time (which is a darn good thing, as I have less strength!)
for my garden.

This is mostly new stuff for me, as I simply didn't have
time when I was working and raising my family.

However.... I admit, I'm not at all sure I'd want to look at
another 100 or so years of it. My health isn't what I'd
desire.

That said, I think the *real* problem is elsewhere. It is
within my mind.  My brothers have more internal drive than I
do, they are ...  smarter. They've always been that way.

None of us watch TV (except my oldest brother watches the
iceskating).  I'd rather sleep! :)))

I still think there's more neat stuff for me out there, I
just haven't found it yet.

That's one reason I (usually) lurk on this list. It's
interesting. And full of new stuff.

And my email was meant to be an encouragement.

Regards,
MB
ps. There's also a sort of mid-life thing that some men go
through - having spent all their energies on "the job".
Perhaps this is part of the original poster's trouble?

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, BillK wrote:

> On Tue Dec 02, 2003 05:07 pm  Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > There's always more to learn and do, although one
> > might become tired of it and start justifying that
> > everything out there is all the same.
>
>
> On Tue Dec 02, 2003 09:11 pm MB wrote:
> > There's stuff out there. You can find it. It may not be what
> > you expect. It may be sort of out of your field, but nothing
> > wrong with that.
>
>
> These sentiments strike me as having the flavor of youthful enthusiasm.
> When you are younger, everything is new and exciting, you are healthy
> and fit and full of energy and you want to 'go boldly beyond the frontiers'.
>


From twodeel at jornada.org  Wed Dec  3 14:56:25 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 06:56:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312030656090.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Max M wrote:

> We can also hope that a exponential growth in technology can make up for
> the "seen it all before" feeling. Or perhaps side-effect-free
> recreational drugs will make it all moot.

I would think that combining these last two ideas would be a good
solution.  Hopefully we will eventually have the technology to get rid of
feelings of boredom whenever they occur and keep that spicy
zest-for-new-things feeling around all the time to drive us onward ...
whether it is implemented as a chemical you ingest, or a device that is
worn or injected or something, or a fundamental re-engineering of our
mental hardware.



From hemm at openlink.com.br  Wed Dec  3 15:07:51 2003
From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:07:51 -0200
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
	<LAW10-OE41pQq5pneeF00000f39@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <012801c3b9af$399446e0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>

Well, I'm not thinking only about intercontinental flights, but also our day-by-day transport, such as automobiles. You can put a hybrid engine in your car, you can use stem cells, you can put any kind of electronics in it, but it's still a car and will be stuck in the same traffic jam with all the other less advanced cars. You can make planes faster, but you'll still need to go to the airport and check-in and pass through the same metal detectors and deal with the same overbooking and wait lists.
What I mean is that todays means of transportation follow the same old paradigm of fifty years ago. They improved, of course, but they are still intrinsically the same. The most advanced jet and the first airplane use exactly the same principles to fly.

HeMM

-----Mensagem Original----- 
De: <kevinfreels at hotmail.com>
Para: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Enviada em: ter?a-feira, 2 de dezembro de 2003 16:20
Assunto: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


| I think that this has occurred simply because the masses have decided that
| what we have is good enough. The market has stabilized and the cost-benefit
| is about equal. The airlines already struggle with making profits because of
| this. If they raise the price of tickets, more people choose to drive to
| their destination. Faster flights and more exclusive, dedicated service to
| streamline the waiting would only increase the cost which most people are
| simply not willing to pay.
| This doesn;t mean that the technology hasn't improved however. If you look
| at the last 50 years (1953 to today) there are many breakthroughs fololowing
| Yeager's 1947 mach 1 flight in a single-man rocket with wings. Concorde
| travels at 1350 mph, SR-71 travels at mach 3.3. We went to the moon in 1969
| (speeds averaging 25,000 mph). Aurora (if it exists) is supposed to cruise
| between mach 5 and mach 8. Nasa's X-43 HyperX is supposed to travel between
| mach 7 and mach 10. The shuttle re-enters about mach 23 (i think)
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Brian Lee" <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com>
| To: <hemm at br.inter.net>; <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
| Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 12:22 PM
| Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
| 
| 
| > I've thought a bit on this lately and am a little let down with the pace
| of
| > transportation. If you look at air travel over the last 50 years there are
| > few major breakthroughs. 75 years ago, it took weeks to travel around the
| > world and then with commercial air travel, that was cut down to a day or
| > merely hours. 50 years later, we're still pretty much at the same flight
| > times. We have more routes and scheduled and tvs in the seats but flights
| > are still about the same length. Perhaps they are even longer if you take
| > security waits into the equation.
| >
| > I think the main reason why air travel tech has stalled is lack of
| > competition. There's really only two companies making planes-Airbus and
| > Boeing- and both are heavily subsidized by their respective governments.
| Air
| > travel is subsidized by local governments and businesses who don't have
| much
| > incentive to decrease travel time.
| >
| > For ground travel, in the US at least, road trips take less time because
| the
| > speed limit has been increased from 55 to 70-75 on interstates. It's nice
| to
| > be save 2 hours from an Atlanta to Miami trip, but I'm still waiting for
| 15
| > minute NY-London trips and flying cars.
| >
| > How long until the science fiction breakthroughs come on line?
| Transporters,
| > etc.
| >
| > I've done a bit of teleconferencing and videoconferencing and while it is
| > sufficient for basic communication, it's not yet replacing meatspace.
| >
| > BAL
| > >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at br.inter.net>
| > >To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
| > >Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
| > >Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:57:22 -0200
| > >
| > >Hello extropians,
| > >
| > >I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. The
| > >first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems to be
| stalled.
| > >Is it related? Are we concentrating our resourses in evolving our
| > >communication means because our transportation means are poor, or does de
| > >current pace of developments on comms in fact causes less effort on
| > >advancing transportation? Just thinking. Sorry for the bad english, but
| > >it's not my native language and I am still learning.
| > >_______________________________________________
| > >extropy-chat mailing list
| > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
| > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
| >
| > _________________________________________________________________
| > Is there a gadget-lover on your gift list?  MSN Shopping has lined up some
| > good bets!  http://shopping.msn.com
| >
| > _______________________________________________
| > extropy-chat mailing list
| > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
| > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
| >
| _______________________________________________
| extropy-chat mailing list
| extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
| http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
| 


From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec  3 15:23:16 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:23:16 GMT
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
Message-ID: <E1ARYqS-0001zc-MI@fetch-bak.runbox.com>

I think when the physical problems of old age (including hormonal and neurochemical changes) are solved, the rest will follow. There is no reason why you cannot keep a fresh and interested outlook on life while gaining experience. Many people in their 70s would be happy to do sometimes the same stupid things they did in their teens. The bad side of aging is a phisical thing.

> As the human race becomes longer-lived they will face two problems. The
> obvious one is keeping themselves in good physical health. There is a
> vast field of medical research that is required for life-extension.
> 
> The more subtle problem will be mental. The young researchers cannot
> appreciate that their fresh, inquiring minds could ever change. But they
> will. Every experience that is assimilated will change them, until after
> 60 or 70 years they will be very different. All the exciting dramas of
> youth will become less important. An older person will be more likely to
> respond with 'Jeez, not that again!'.


From hemm at openlink.com.br  Wed Dec  3 15:31:31 2003
From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:31:31 -0200
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com><LAW10-OE41pQq5pneeF00000f39@hotmail.com>
	<012801c3b9af$399446e0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <013e01c3b9b2$87404800$fe00a8c0@HEMM>

I mean fuel cell... stupid me :) 

-----Mensagem Original----- 
De: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at openlink.com.br>
Para: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 3 de dezembro de 2003 13:07
Assunto: Re: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


Well, I'm not thinking only about intercontinental flights, but also our day-by-day transport, such as automobiles. You can put a hybrid engine in your car, you can use stem cells, you can put any kind of electronics in it, but it's still a car and will be stuck in the same traffic 


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec  3 15:37:10 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:37:10 +0100
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <012801c3b9af$399446e0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
	<LAW10-OE41pQq5pneeF00000f39@hotmail.com>
	<012801c3b9af$399446e0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <20031203153710.GE1229@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 01:07:51PM -0200, Henrique Moraes Machado wrote:

Can you please wrap your lines? You're difficult
to quote otherwise.

> Well, I'm not thinking only about intercontinental flights, but also our day-by-day transport, such as automobiles. You can put a hybrid engine in your car, you can use stem cells, you can put any kind of electronics in it, but it's still a car and will be stuck in the same traffic jam with all the other less advanced cars. You can make planes faster, but you'll still need to go to the airport and check-in and pass through the same metal detectors and deal with the same overbooking and wait lists.
> What I mean is that todays means of transportation follow the same old paradigm of fifty years ago. They improved, of course, but they are still intrinsically the same. The most advanced jet and the first airplane use exactly the same principles to fly.

Intercontinental flights have the largest payoff, because
here the pure flight time counts most. A suborbital
flight is essentially orbit, once you go through the
atmosphere and back. You can't shortcut these much, because
no known material will survive several cycles of that plasma 
bath, nevermind the accelerations required (Shuttle already
is pretty close to what humans can stomach).

You can't do better than orbit, because you need to accelerate
all the way, and you need a nuke drive for that. Things look
much better in vacuum, where you can use large circumsolar hardware
clouds pushing your sail-driven probe at several g for months.
It is not obvious we can do better than this, but our knowledge
of physics might be incomplete in that respect.

Planes yes, so here an individual VTOL can make sense,
even if it's slow and uses a lot of fuel. You don't have to go
to the airfield, and pass security (in fact, there are people
who collectively rent a pilot and a small jet, the advantage is
that they land on small airfields with less security overhead -- 
less hassle can be worth a lot to some people). You certainly
can't do long-distance VTOL without refuelling, and a larger
plane will be always better on longer distance even with
security overhead.

If you look at cars, it's obvious that volume is better
than surface, so an orthogonal matrix-bus based traffic
system in a large volume is pretty optimal (smallest
average distance possible, no blockage at crossing),
but for many reasons people choose suburbia, arguably
the opposite point in design space.

Suburbia might actually have a point, if you consider
that this is _insolated_ surface. Suburbia can become
energy-self reliant, not inner city centers. It's
a question of surface/volume ratio. 
 

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/11314bc7/attachment.bin>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Wed Dec  3 15:46:24 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:46:24 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <002701c3b961$64673ec0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031202175419.01e7b5a0@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031203104058.01e64960@mail.gmu.edu>

I wrote:
 > I just read someone who said:
 > "no one anticipated the explosive diffusion of the Internet
 > during the 1990s"
 > and I figured that this can't be right - surely someone must
 > have had the dumb luck to predict such a thing before 1990.
 > Can anyone point to a quote?

On 12/3/2003 Harvey Newstrom responded:
>I suggest reading through "A Brief History of the Internet" at
><http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml>.  It has references to
>all the milestones in Internet creation, including white papers,
>conferences, etc.

That is a history of who did what when, not of who predicted what when.

Charlie Stross responded:
>Surely "True Names" by Vernor Vinge counts? He had the net as a ubiquitous 
>service, certainly, and that was published in 1980. And I'm pretty certain 
>it was explicitly the internet -- or an n'th generation descendant -- that 
>he was talking about. Caveat: fictional source, rather than academic paper.

Science fiction authors typically resist the interpretation that just 
because they wrote a novel describing a hypothetical future, than they were 
seriously predicting that future would happen within fifteen years.

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 responded:
>I did. In 1990 I was playing with the idea to start a net access business
>for individual end users, and even found someone who was maybe willing to
>invest some money. Then I let them talking me out of the idea, "this is too
>crazy, there will never be a market for this". Now when I wish to do some
>sweet daydreaming I think of what I would do with all the money that I would
>have now if I had followed my idea to the end.

OK, but did you publish your prediction in any way, such as in a mailing 
list archive?

>Two lessons here: 1 - believe in your ideas - 2 - get your ass off the
>armchair and do it.

This first lesson seems overblown.  Presumably all the people who disagreed
with you at the time believed in their ideas as well.  They were wrong and
you were right.  On average how is this evidence that everyone should be
more confident?



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec  3 15:48:54 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 07:48:54 -0800
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <013e01c3b9b2$87404800$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <003901c3b9b4$f51323f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> I mean fuel cell... stupid me :) 
> 
> De: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at openlink.com.br>
> Assunto: Re: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation:
> 
> Well, I'm not thinking only about intercontinental flights, 
> but also our day-by-day transport, such as automobiles. You 
> can put a hybrid engine in your car, you can use stem cells...

No no Henrique, you have typoed into a brillian idea:
stem cells for your car!  You put them in the tank
and they replicate into any defective part.

Repairing worn or ripped leather seats would be the
first application, since those started out as cells
anyway, but then as we get more advanced we could 
have them fix leaks in the radiator, then worn bearings,
then when we get really good, the electronics.

I haven't seen your posts before, so welcome to the
list, imaginative young inventor!  {8-]

spike







From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Dec  3 15:50:33 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:50:33 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <58479C34-2580-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
References: <20031203024143.25933.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<58479C34-2580-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <3FCE0649.2040805@pobox.com>

Charlie Stross wrote:
> 
> On 3 Dec 2003, at 02:41, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
>> Well, I assume you like SF. Neal Stephenson wrote a book called Snow
>> Crash which you might be familiar with. A lot of the basic ideas he
>> used in fleshing out his plot device of root language viral programming
>> of humans is based on Jaynes' work. Of course, he does take it to a
>> rather absurd conclusion... but that was the book that actually
>> motivated me to read Jaynes, to get the straight scoop.
> 
> It's worth noting that Jaynes' book has been more than somewhat 
> discredited in the field; he is to evolutionary biology pretty much what 
> Immanuel Velikovsky is to planetography.
> 
> There's a reason some SF authors like his ideas; it's because they make 
> for a great fictional playground-setting. That's not exactly the same 
> thing as liking them because the evidence supports them ....

FYI all:  They're talking about Julian Jaynes (I think) and "The Bicameral 
Mind".  The Jaynes I talk about is E.T. Jaynes and "Probability Theory: 
The Logic of Science".  No relation AFAIK.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence



From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Dec  3 16:06:13 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:06:13 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031203104058.01e64960@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031202175419.01e7b5a0@mail.gmu.edu>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031203104058.01e64960@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <3FCE09F5.2010709@pobox.com>

Eric Drexler in "Engines of Creation" went on at some length about the 
importance of hypertext; this anticipates the Web, I suppose, and actually 
helped build the Web, historically speaking; but not the Net.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec  3 16:10:30 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:10:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

BillK wrote,
> On the mental side, the 'seen it all before' syndrome is also 
> very real. Computer techies will have seen the 'burn-out' 
> effect on whiz-kids who just can't do it any more. The people 
> who are the big achievers are all 'driven' by their own 
> various demons.

I have this.  I get sick of seeing all these "new" ideas that are rehashes
of stuff we did decades ago.  Most of these fail or have the same problems
that were encountered earlier.  (Those who don't know history are doomed to
repeat it, etc....)  That's why I am so pessimistic all the time.  It's easy
to have irrational exuberance in youth.  But after you go through the same
thing dozens of times, you learn not to be so na?ve the next time around.

I also just realized that I am a professional pessimist.  As a security
expert, auditor, debugger, investigator, hacker, etc., my job is to see the
problems that no one else sees.  I literally get paid for, and spend 60
hours per week trying to brainstorm how things can go wrong rather than how
they can go right.  I see obvious flaws that everybody else seems oblivious
to.  Other engineers explain how great their projects can be, whereas my job
is to explain how horribly they can go wrong.  I really do not believe I am
being unrealistically negative.  I really see real problems that everyone
else ignores.  I am very good at my job.  However, it means that I see a
much darker and more dangerous world where technology is not as stable as
people think.

> The more subtle problem will be mental. The young researchers 
> cannot appreciate that their fresh, inquiring minds could 
> ever change. But they will. Every experience that is 
> assimilated will change them, until after 60 or 70 years they 
> will be very different. All the exciting dramas of youth will 
> become less important. An older person will be more likely to 
> respond with 'Jeez, not that again!'.

Exactly!

However, I think the enthusiasm of youth is automatic because things are new
and different.  Transhumanism used to be new and different.  But after being
on these lists for over a decade, there aren't very many new ideas going
around.  Older people also feel like they are running out of time.  Ten
years ago, people were predicting the singularity, moon bases and
immortality in a decade or two.  Now that we are half way there, the goals
don't seem any closer, yet time is running out.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From charlie at antipope.org  Wed Dec  3 16:37:03 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:37:03 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <ECA5B4E2-25AE-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 3 Dec 2003, at 16:10, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> BillK wrote,
>> On the mental side, the 'seen it all before' syndrome is also
>> very real. Computer techies will have seen the 'burn-out'
>> effect on whiz-kids who just can't do it any more.
> I have this.  I get sick of seeing all these "new" ideas that are 
> rehashes
> of stuff we did decades ago.  Most of these fail or have the same 
> problems
> that were encountered earlier.  (Those who don't know history are 
> doomed to
> repeat it, etc....)  That's why I am so pessimistic all the time.

Me too. 39, burned-out as a programmer. (Luckily I've found a second -- 
third? -- full-time career as an SF writer.)

>  I am a professional pessimist.  As a security
> expert, auditor, debugger, investigator, hacker, etc., my job is to 
> see the
> problems that no one else sees.  I literally get paid for, and spend 60
> hours per week trying to brainstorm how things can go wrong rather 
> than how
> they can go right.  I see obvious flaws that everybody else seems 
> oblivious
> to.  Other engineers explain how great their projects can be, whereas 
> my job
> is to explain how horribly they can go wrong.  I really do not believe 
> I am
> being unrealistically negative.  I really see real problems that 
> everyone
> else ignores.  I am very good at my job.  However, it means that I see 
> a
> much darker and more dangerous world where technology is not as stable 
> as
> people think.

There's nothing quite like subscribing to COMP.RISKS for a few years to 
take the edge off your enthusiasm for novelty for its own sake!

> However, I think the enthusiasm of youth is automatic because things 
> are new
> and different.  Transhumanism used to be new and different.  But after 
> being
> on these lists for over a decade, there aren't very many new ideas 
> going
> around.  Older people also feel like they are running out of time.  Ten
> years ago, people were predicting the singularity, moon bases and
> immortality in a decade or two.  Now that we are half way there, the 
> goals
> don't seem any closer, yet time is running out.

If we achieve physiological cures for senescence we'll need to find new 
strategies for dealing with a surfeit of experience. Memory excision? 
Facilitated un-learning?

It may be that natural forgetfullness will save us from our own sense 
of anomie over deep time (for values of deep time measured in decades 
to centuries), but I suspect we'll need something a lot better -- 
especially once memory prostheses become available and widely used. 
We've also got the problem that our legal and information systems 
aren't designed to forget over time. A person who is public enemy #1 in 
their first century may well be someone completely different in their 
third. How do we deal with this?


-- Charlie



From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Dec  3 17:10:59 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:10:59 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> 
> However, I think the enthusiasm of youth is automatic because things are new
> and different.  Transhumanism used to be new and different.  But after being
> on these lists for over a decade, there aren't very many new ideas going
> around.  Older people also feel like they are running out of time.  Ten
> years ago, people were predicting the singularity, moon bases and
> immortality in a decade or two.  Now that we are half way there, the goals
> don't seem any closer, yet time is running out.

I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems to be doing 
so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow my lead doesn't seem to 
help people, either - or helps only insofar as they are moved to study 
tractable interesting subjects.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec  3 17:27:33 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:27:33 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com>
References: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20031203172733.GL1229@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:10:59PM -0500, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:

> I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems to be doing 
> so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow my lead doesn't seem to 

Ur, do you realize how this sounds?

> help people, either - or helps only insofar as they are moved to study 
> tractable interesting subjects.

I'm not sure you're using your resources very wisely. 
AI is a high risk/high tradeoff field, but an academic and/or
industrial career would have provided you far more leverage 
than you currently have. 

By now I'm 99% certain that a sustainably visible online
persona is incompatible with getting things done. I'd be out of
here long ago if I wasn't so hooked.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/1e82e679/attachment.bin>

From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec  3 17:28:09 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:28:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031203104058.01e64960@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <00c401c3b9c2$d7679670$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> On 12/3/2003 Harvey Newstrom responded:
> >I suggest reading through "A Brief History of the Internet" at 
> ><http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml>.  It has references 
> >to all the milestones in Internet creation, including white papers, 
> >conferences, etc.
> 
> That is a history of who did what when, not of who predicted what when.

Wow.  Remind me not to have you do any research for me!  :-)

You think that the Internet was based on past network usage and not build on
wide-spread predictions of how the future network would be used and what it
had to support?  All requirements documents are based on future predictions.
There are technical predictions of load, spread, and acceptance.  There are
social predictions about home use, cultural changes, and usefulness.  There
were business predictions of privatization, business use and international
commerce.  There were persuasion papers trying to gain funding, convince
congress, and gain corporate support.  Of *course* they are chock full of
predictions about how great and widespread the internet was going to be in
the future!

Some quick examples of documents listed in the reference you dismissed:

In 1962: J.C.R. Licklider of MIT writes a paper describing a globally
connected "Galactic Network" of computers.  He predicts what they can do and
how they will be used.

The congressional record of 1986 quotes Al Gore as saying, "America's
Highways transport people and materials across the country.  Federal
freeways connect with state highways which connect in turn with county roads
and city streets.  To transport data and ideas, we will need a
telecommunications highway connecting users coast to coast, state to state,
city to city.  The study required in this amendment will identify the
problems and opportunities the nation will face in establishing that
highway."

In 1988, the NSF sponsors a series of workshops at Harvard on the
commercialization and privatization of the Internet.  They predicted what it
would be like and how it could occur.

Also in 1988, Kahn et al. write a paper "Towards a National Research
Network."  It predicted the future of the Internet.

In 1988, the congressional record Gore proposing a bill to create the
internet, "The act would provide for a 3-gigabit-per-second national
network, develop federal standards, take into account user views, examine
telecommunications policy, build an information infrastructure composed of
databases and knowledge banks, create a national software corporation to
develop important software programs, establish a clearinghouse to validate
and distribute software, promote artificial intelligence databases, increase
research and development projects, study export controls affecting
computers, review procurement policies to stimulate the computer industry,
and enhance computer science education programs."

The Dec. 29, 1988 edition of the New York Times predicted, "Computer
scientists and Government officials are urging the creation of a nationwide
"data superhighway" that they believe would have a dramatic economic impact,
rivaling that of the nation's interstate highway system.  This highway would
consist of a high-speed fiber-optic data network joining dozens of
supercomputers at national laboratories and making them available to
thousands of academic and industry researchers around the country...."

Legislation introduced in October by Senator Albert Gore, Democrat of
Tennessee, included initial financing for development and construction of a
National Research Network. Backers of the measure say that Federal financing
for the project is necessary to develop the technology and convince industry
that vastly speedier computer networks are commercially viable.

In 1989, Gore told a House committee, "I genuinely believe that the creation
of this nationwide network and the broader installation of lower capacity
fiber optic cables to all parts of this country, will create an environment
where work stations are common in homes and even small businesses with
access to supercomputing capability being very, very widespread. It's sort
of like, once the interstate highway system existed, then a college student
in California who lived in North Carolina would be more likely to buy a car,
drive back and forth instead of taking the bus. Once that network for
supercomputing is in place, you're going to have a lot more people gaining
access to the capability, developing an interest in it. That will lead to
more people getting training and more purchases of machines."  (Inventing Al
Gore, p. 217).

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 17:29:22 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 09:29:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <58479C34-2580-11D8-AF95-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031203172922.14718.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> 
> On 3 Dec 2003, at 02:41, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Well, I assume you like SF. Neal Stephenson wrote a book called
> Snow
> > Crash which you might be familiar with. A lot of the basic ideas he
> > used in fleshing out his plot device of root language viral
> programming
> > of humans is based on Jaynes' work. Of course, he does take it to a
> > rather absurd conclusion... but that was the book that actually
> > motivated me to read Jaynes, to get the straight scoop.
> 
> It's worth noting that Jaynes' book has been more than somewhat 
> discredited in the field; he is to evolutionary biology pretty much 
> what Immanuel Velikovsky is to planetography.
> 
> There's a reason some SF authors like his ideas; it's because they
> make 
> for a great fictional playground-setting. That's not exactly the same
> thing as liking them because the evidence supports them ....

Well, they primarily don't like him because he is a pshrink, not a
biologist or an anthropologist or an archaeologist. Considering the
stories anthropologists are known to weave from the most specious of
evidence, the only thing that saves them from similar derision is that
there is so little evidence to begin with.


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec  3 17:37:26 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:37:26 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <00c501c3b9c4$217e4dc0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote,
> I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems 
> to be doing so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow
> my lead doesn't seem to > help people, either - or helps only
> insofar as they are moved to study tractable interesting subjects.

You're young and naive.  Wait until you are middle-aged, pot-bellied and
balding, and there is still no singularity or general AI.  How will you feel
then?

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 17:39:41 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:39:41 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
References: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <010501c3b9c4$70899820$d5994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems to be doing
> so wrong.

What you're doing right is being younger than 25. Good choice! Keep it up!

Damien Broderick
[younger than 60, but only just]



From max at maxmore.com  Wed Dec  3 18:01:40 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:01:40 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203114551.05beab00@mail.earthlink.net>

At 10:10 AM 12/3/2003, Harvey wrote:

>I also just realized that I am a professional pessimist.

I shouldn't encourage you, but...

Delusions of Success: How Optimism Undermines Executives' Decisions
by Dan Lovallo; Daniel Kahneman
Harvard Business Review, Editor reviewed on 07/07/03, originally published 
on 07/01/03
http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.asp?coid=CO77031947495


>   As a security
>expert, auditor, debugger, investigator, hacker, etc., my job is to see the
>problems that no one else sees.  I literally get paid for, and spend 60
>hours per week trying to brainstorm how things can go wrong rather than how
>they can go right.  I see obvious flaws that everybody else seems oblivious
>to.  Other engineers explain how great their projects can be, whereas my job
>is to explain how horribly they can go wrong.  I really do not believe I am
>being unrealistically negative.  I really see real problems that everyone
>else ignores.  I am very good at my job.  However, it means that I see a
>much darker and more dangerous world where technology is not as stable as
>people think.

 From my review at the above URL:
"The pervasive human tendency for over-optimism ? with all its costly 
consequences in business decisions ? can be highly beneficial when confined 
to the right places. To the extent that your company can cleanly separate 
functions and positions that involve or shape decision-making and those 
that promote or guide action, optimism can be left untouched in the latter 
but not the former. As the authors note, an optimistic CFO is a disaster 
waiting to happen, but optimism in a sales force or in some aspects of R&D 
should be healthy."

[...]
Because we naturally adopt an ?inside view? of the situation and decision 
to be made, we nevertheless greatly overestimate our chances of success. 
Economists are no help; those not well versed in the dark arts of 
behavioral finance will only feed our optimism with academic cocaine that 
explains all those hugely costly mistakes as risky but rational decisions. 
Lovallo and Kahneman will have none of this exculpatory nonsense. They 
locate the problem in several factors: A combination of cognitive biases 
including attribution errors, anchoring and competitor neglect, along with 
organizational pressures including stretch goals, discouragement of 
?disloyal? pessimism, and the pressure to present proposals in the best 
possible light in order to secure funding and support.

All is not lost. Lovallo and Kahneman explain how taking ?the outside view? 
can counter endemic over-optimism. [...]

Some other pieces on this topic (linked from the above review):

Risk Taking: A Tale of Two Biases

Predictable Surprises: The Disasters You Should Have Seen Coming

Make Room for Gloom

Rationality: The Next Competitive Advantage

Why So Many People (Not You, Of Course) Made So Many Brain-Dead Investments 
(And How Not to Make Them Again)


>However, I think the enthusiasm of youth is automatic because things are new
>and different.

This accounts for much of it, no doubt. But some of it seems to be a matter 
of individual differences in temperament. As I close in on my 40th birthday 
I continue to find an enormous range of things fascinating. One of my 
biggest time management challenges is containing my interest in so many 
things. Age usually affects this part of temperament, probably by killing 
off dopamine neurons, etc. Anti-aging research will certainly need to 
tackle this aspect of degeneration.

>  Transhumanism used to be new and different.  But after being
>on these lists for over a decade, there aren't very many new ideas going
>around.  Older people also feel like they are running out of time.  Ten
>years ago, people were predicting the singularity, moon bases and
>immortality in a decade or two.  Now that we are half way there, the goals
>don't seem any closer, yet time is running out.

I don't recall anyone being optimistic about moon bases -- most of us have 
been unhappily aware of the slow progress with space technology. Other 
ideas *are* coming about -- idea futures, for example. It would be 
interesting to dig out the issue of Extropy that featured a range of 
predicted dates for various events. I recall that Eric Drexler had highly 
optimistic projections, but others looked to 100+ years for many of the 
items listed. I think I was somewhere in the middle. If anyone has the 
issue at hand along with an OCR scanner, it would provide some interesting 
data points.

Max



_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
_______________________________________________________




From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  3 18:13:55 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:13:55 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEOKCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE61nQ13eZZfm00001f74@hotmail.com>

Does anyone know if this glow-in-the-dark gene gets passed on to it's offspring? I would assume so. Imagine the interest that children will suddenly have in genetics when they can breed yellow glo-fish with maybe a red glo-fish and get some red, yellow, and orange glo-fish. 
And what of those glowing teenagers? Will they mate and give birth to glo-babies? 
This could have serious implications for the military. What if all 18 yr old men decided to glow in the dark? Night engagements could get really risky > :-P
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 
  To: hit ; extropy-chat 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:24 AM
  Subject: [extropy-chat] More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?


  From the New York Times: Sometime in the future, when the distinction between cosmetologist and molecular biologist has faded and gene shops dot the seedier urban streets like tattoo parlors, the philosophers, moralists and historians of science will try to pin down the moment when the new age began. Science historians will probably say it started with the discovery of DNA, or the mapping of the human genome. Others will claim it started when Dolly was cloned and it became clear that the tools of biotechnology had moved out of the high church of pure research and into the unpredictable hands of people who bred sheep for profit. 
  I think the moment is now. And the creature that embodies the escape of biotechnology into the world at large - a movement that will never be reversed - is an aquarium fish that glows in the dark. This is the tipping point, when the world irrevocably turns toward the science-fiction fantasies of writers like Philip K. Dick and William Gibson, who envision biomedical technology permeating every corner of the marketplace, from global corporations on down to small-time illegal operations like stolen-car chop shops. Imagine if you will, that you could pay to have genes for glowing in the dark inserted into your own body. How many glowing teenagers would there be? And who would stop them, once they reached age 18? After all, one's own body is one's own business.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/67a3dd0f/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Wed Dec  3 18:22:53 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:22:53 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanogen's new patents in nanotech and
	nanomanufacturing
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203122201.06059b40@mail.earthlink.net>


Nanogen shares soar on patent
Newly issued patent broadens its proprietary position in nanotechnology and 
nanomanufacturing areas.
December 3, 2003: 11:30 AM EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shares of Nanogen Inc. jumped more than 50 percent 
Wednesday after the company said it received a U.S. patent related to the 
fledgling field of nanotechnology and nanomanufacturing.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/12/03/technology/nanogen.reut/index.htm


_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
_______________________________________________________




From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 18:40:37 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:40:37 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Planck life and `thought bubbles'
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031203114551.05beab00@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <001801c3b9cc$f4f6fc80$d5994a43@texas.net>

Physics Nobelist Brian Josephson in fine form:

http://arxiv.org/html/physics/0312012



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 18:40:02 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:40:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE61nQ13eZZfm00001f74@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031203184002.83995.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- kevinfreels at hotmail.com wrote:
> Does anyone know if this glow-in-the-dark gene gets passed on to it's
> offspring? I would assume so. Imagine the interest that children will
> suddenly have in genetics when they can breed yellow glo-fish with
> maybe a red glo-fish and get some red, yellow, and orange glo-fish. 
> And what of those glowing teenagers? Will they mate and give birth to
> glo-babies? 
> This could have serious implications for the military. What if all 18
> yr old men decided to glow in the dark? Night engagements could get
> really risky > :-P

There are both body paints and ingestible pigments that could block the
glo pigment. There are actually federal laws prohibiting intentionally
making yourself medically unfit for military service. Ostensibly it is
an act of sabotage that aids and abets the enemy.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From hal at finney.org  Wed Dec  3 18:40:23 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:40:23 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
Message-ID: <200312031840.hB3IeNn18771@finney.org>

I remember when I was young and just getting started working, I noticed
there were different ways that older people approached their jobs, as well
as life itself.  The more common attitude was a kind of bitter fatalism,
a sense of disappointment.  Things were going badly and getting worse.
They were grumpy and unhappy, warning against mistakes but mostly being
ignored.

Generally these were people who had not been all that succeessful, who
were doing the same work that they had done 20 years before.  So it is
understandable that they might be bitter and unhappy.

I also ran into a few old people who were quite different, who were
optimistic and energetic, full of ideas and enthusiasm.  These were
mostly people who had been successful in their careers, who had advanced
to relatively important positions.  Another group like this were older
college professors who were still active and pursuing their research.

It is not easy to distinguish cause and effect here.  Were people happy
or unhappy because of their success or lack of it?  Or were their basic
approaches to problems influencing their career paths?

As I get older, I can see how cynicism creeps in.  I still have mostly
the same goals and the same basic belief that they are possible, but
more and more I perceive that much of the support for these projects is
based on unfounded optimism and sloppy thinking.  I become impatient
with one-sided perspectives and want to see both the pro and the con
positions represented fairly.

A case in point is the recent online nanotech debate, where the spin from
"our side" is that Drexler whipped Smalley's butt.  I don't perceive it
that way at all.  I thought Drexler was evasive and slippery, and from my
current perspective I see this as a persistent strategy.  You can never
pin him down.  Whenever someone claims that something won't work, he just
calls "strawman" and says if that doesn't work, we'll do it some other
way.  But since he never comes out with a specific, concrete proposal,
he has a perfect defense.  You can't critique what doesn't exist.

I need to write up these thoughts in more detail, but here again I
find myself facing the same barriers which had defeated the older
engineers I observed as a youth.  I know that it will be an enormous
battle, offering pessimism where everyone only wants to hear good news.
I doubt that it will do any good, because even the cautions of a Nobel
prize winner are ignored.  And I question whether I have the energy to
engage in the kind of hard debate which would be necessary to give these
issues the kind of hearing that they deserve.

Those old men I knew had given up.  They were convinced that our
plans and projects would mostly fail, but they were unable to make
persuasive arguments.  Too many times in the past they had tried and
failed, had gained reputations as naysayers, as not being team players.
These reputations had probably helped to mire them in their dead end jobs.
And by then they had nothing left but bitterness, pro forma objections,
and head-shaking predictions of doom.

I don't think any of us wants to end up like that.  I certainly don't,
and yet I feel myself creeping in that direction.  What can we do about
it?

I have a couple of ideas.  The first, and simpler, is to try to couple
pessimism with optimism.  This is basically the idea of what Max called
Dynamic Optimism.  Dynamic optimism is realistic.  It's not a matter of
wearing rose colored glasses.  You see the problems, but you also try
to look at them as challenges rather than obstacles.  Rather than just
opposing what won't work, figure out what will give the best shot at
working, and become a proponent of that alternative.  This way you are,
in a sense, a leader rather than dead weight.  Maybe nobody is following
you at the moment, but it is a crucial difference in perspective.

But sometimes this approach is difficult.  You have a situation where
every path seems doomed, and you can't imagine a solution that will work.
Pessimism is pervasive, even becoming depression.  In this case the second
idea comes in, which is based on a philosophy I have long believed in,
of being faithful to oneself.  Try to think of yourself not as a person
living in a moment of time, but as a being who spans an entire lifetime.
Give credit to the person you were in the past.  Think of his goals as
well as your own, and try to honor both of them.  Remember how you felt
when you were young, and even if you don't feel that way now, try to
act in a manner which respects those feelings.

As you feel the pessimism of age encroaching, understand that this is
not necessarily a matter of wisdom and experience.  It can be hormones
and neuroanatomy.  Your brain is changing, your body is changing.
Don't assume that your beliefs now are necessarily more valid than your
old ones.

The idea, then, is to try to hold to a sliver of optimism, even if you
don't believe it in your gut, or in your hormones.  Fight your tendencies
to cynicism.  Admire the optimism and energy of youth rather than pity it.
Give support where you can, and avoid being an obstacle to those who
are moving forward.

So there you have it, Extropianism for the Elderly.  I'm not quite
there yet, but most of us will face these issues eventually.  Give some
thought to how you want to age, and realize that your own mental habits
today are putting you on a path which may be much more ingrained a few
decades from now.

Hal


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 18:45:38 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:45:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <3FCE09F5.2010709@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20031203184538.19106.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

Heinlein in his novel "Friday" envisioned a worldwide hyperlinked
information network as a research tool for private intelligence
agencies. Vinge's story "True Names" envisioned an online metaverse
that even those on welfare could access with inexpensive equipment
while others with more expensive bandwidth and processor capabilities
exerted great power to engage in MIP-sucking as well as DoS and other
attacks.

--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> Eric Drexler in "Engines of Creation" went on at some length about
> the 
> importance of hypertext; this anticipates the Web, I suppose, and
> actually 
> helped build the Web, historically speaking; but not the Net.
> 
> -- 
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec  3 19:31:36 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 11:31:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Planck life and `thought bubbles'
In-Reply-To: <001801c3b9cc$f4f6fc80$d5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031203193136.51729.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>

 

Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:

Physics Nobelist Brian Josephson in fine form:

http://arxiv.org/html/physics/0312012

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
Thanks for the link, Damien. It is truly comforting when one finds a great mind that independantly validate one's own thoughts on a matter. 
 
Cheers,
 


The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/17077343/attachment.html>

From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Dec  3 19:35:37 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 19:35:37 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
Message-ID: <3FCE3B09.6070506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Wed Dec 03, 2003 03:57 am Charlie Stross wrote:
> Surely "True Names" by Vernor Vinge counts? He had the net as a
> ubiquitous service, certainly, and that was published in 1980.
>

Right on the mark.   Quote:
For historians of cyberculture, science fiction author Vernor Vinge
enjoys unimpeachable street cred. Three years before William Gibson
dazzled the SF world with "Neuromancer," Vinge captured the essence of
the online reality to come in his eerily prescient novella "True Names",
published in 1981." "True Names" today reads more like a piece of
reportage than speculative science fiction. William Gibson may get all
the glory for defining the word "cyberspace," but Vinge actually nailed
the details. "True Names" includes online gathering places identical to
the MUDs (multi-user domains) that became the online rage in the late
'80s. Its protagonists guard their real names from the National Security
Agency and other hackers with cryptographic safeguards, just like
today's cryptopunks. And they live solely to log on -- the pathology of
today's Internet addiction is all-too-familiar in "True Names."


Any prediction about the world filled with computers talking to each is
likely to be later than the invention of personal computers themselves.
(approx 1975-1980). When the founders started working on linking
computers in the 1960s, they were talking about linking mainframes via
time-share terminals.

BillK





From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Dec  3 19:46:11 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 14:46:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <20031203172733.GL1229@leitl.org>
References: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>	<3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com>
	<20031203172733.GL1229@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <3FCE3D83.7040607@pobox.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:10:59PM -0500, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>>I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems to be doing 
>>so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow my lead doesn't seem to 
> 
> Ur, do you realize how this sounds?

If it doesn't sound bloody fed up, then I phrased it wrong.

I am not running out of exciting ideas.
I am not running out of new ideas.
I am not sitting on my hands doing nothing.
I am not an optimist.
I am still learning the basics in various fields of study with which I was 
previously unacquainted.

So what are y'all doing wrong?

>>help people, either - or helps only insofar as they are moved to study 
>>tractable interesting subjects.
> 
> I'm not sure you're using your resources very wisely. 
> AI is a high risk/high tradeoff field, but an academic and/or
> industrial career would have provided you far more leverage 
> than you currently have. 

Eugen, an academic and/or industrial career, though it would indeed be 
easier than what I am doing now, will not prevent the coming train crash, 
and is therefore ruled out.  Perhaps the problem is that y'all see what 
you should be doing, then back off and do something easier instead.

> By now I'm 99% certain that a sustainably visible online
> persona is incompatible with getting things done. I'd be out of
> here long ago if I wasn't so hooked.

I shall probably come to a similar conclusion in the not too distant future.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence



From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 20:01:48 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:01:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
Message-ID: <410-22003123320148428@M2W075.mail2web.com>


Robin, I discussed the inceptive, imaginations/conceptions of the Internet
with John Perry Barlow today and and he told me:

"The first prediction I can think of is this: 

'Is it a fact - or have I dreamt it - that, by means of electricity, 
the world of matter has become a great nerve, vibrating thousands of 
miles in a breathless point of time? Rather, the round globe is a 
vast head, a brain, instinct with intelligence!'

That, believe it or not, was Nathanial Hawthorne, from the invocation 
of The House of Seven Gables. 

Then there was Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who predicted, back in the 
50's. that evolution would next create a new layer based on global 
consciousness. 

Also, there was J.C.R. Licklider who was in charge of DARPA when the 
Internet was first conceived. 

My vote goes to Hawthorne, however."

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From barbara_lamar at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 19:31:30 2003
From: barbara_lamar at earthlink.net (Barbara Lamar)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:31:30 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <00c501c3b9c4$217e4dc0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <00ad01c3b9d4$0ec8c5b0$1301010a@Barbara>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Harvey
> Newstrom
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 11:37 AM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
>
>
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote,
> > I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems
> > to be doing so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow
> > my lead doesn't seem to > help people, either - or helps only
> > insofar as they are moved to study tractable interesting subjects.
>
> You're young and naive.  Wait until you are middle-aged,
> pot-bellied and
> balding, and there is still no singularity or general AI.
> How will you feel
> then?

Boredom vs. excitement isn't a matter of chronological age. I know people
who think they've seen and done it all by the age of 30 and others who still
find life exhilarating in their 90's (I've never known anyone older than
this, but I'd guess that such people would still be going strong in their
100's). The people who never get bored are those who continue to be curious
and open to new learning into adulthood. Most people seem to close down
after they grow up, and although they have pleasant moments from time to
time, life is no longer exciting for them. Curious people never grow
mentally old, always find life fresh and interesting.

The people who retain curiosity aren't just curious about major things such
as the meaning of life and making their next million bucks and the nature of
the universe. They're interested in seemingly trivial things as well, such
as what's around the next corner when they're walking, and how a mechanical
vegetable peeler works, and which kind of plants grows in cracks in the
sidewalk.

People have an abundance of curiosity when they're babies and small
children. Most of them lose it by the time they're 30. Those who retain it
past that age seem to keep it forever, or until their bodies completely give
out on them, and it makes all the difference in the way they approach life.
Eliezer comments that following his lead doesn't seem to help people. Maybe
curious people are not followers. I almost wrote that curiosity can't be
taught, but I'm not sure about this.

It's fun to imagine what the world would be like if someone found a way to
teach curiosity, or to reactivate whatever neural processes make children
curious in the first place. If a curiosity training course or treatment were
offered for sale, I wonder how many people would want to buy it.

Barbara










From barbara_lamar at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 19:37:39 2003
From: barbara_lamar at earthlink.net (Barbara Lamar)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:37:39 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <00b001c3b9d4$e9d26170$1301010a@Barbara>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Harvey
> Newstrom
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:11 AM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age

> I also just realized that I am a professional pessimist.

As a lawyer, I am too. Always raining of people's parades, pointing out all
the potential disasters. I've found that my work is much more fun and
interesting if I go beyond this and help people think of ways to overcome or
go around the obstacles. Sometimes this means scrapping what the client
thought was her goal, and identifying a more basic or ultimate goal that
doesn't suffer from the weaknesses of the original plan.

Barbara




From amara at amara.com  Wed Dec  3 19:17:26 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 21:17:26 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
Message-ID: <p05100301bbf3e08100de@[150.146.134.133]>

Eugen* Leitl:

>On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 03:06:58PM +0100, Max M wrote:
>>  Oh yeah, that is so true. I can allready feel it myself at the tender
>>  age of 38. I have allways been an "extreme" techie. But computers are
>>  getting more and more boring every day. Solving the same old problems in
>>  slightly different ways.

>Me three, at 37.

Not me, I suppose (42). I'm mostly exhausted this year from working to make
basic living expenses and dealing with the Italian bureaucracy
and getting past a painful emotional situation that occurred upon
arrival earlier this year.

Usually I have too many interests for my time, and don't suffer that
kind of burnout. I had a burnout after my PhD, but that's normal.
Interests came back in time, I think. Visiting volcanoes and bike
trips helped me with that.


>I'm quite interested to discuss personal plans (job, financial,
>relocation) with other european transhumanists, as most of EU
>is basically in the same situation.


Suggestion: Don't move to Italy. The pay sucks as you probably know
(half the salary of other scientists in Europe). I didn't move here
for the salary, I moved to Italy for my passion, but I didn't
honestly expect the money situation to to be so bad. In addition,
science is not recognized by this government in general, and foreign
scientists have a particularly tough time of it.

This week, I read that there is a new law in discussion in the
Italian parliament for giving immigrants a large number of rights
for voting and representation in their communities, among other
things. Sounded good. The only requirement is a valid
permit-of-stay, and so I choked in my coffee. Why is that? If you
walk into a Questura (police) today, you will likely find a long
queue of foreigners filing permit-of-stay papers or, more likely,
waiting for the permit-of-stay papers that they filed months ago.
You are illegal to live in Italy without a permit-of-stay. If you
have the little receipt that the Questura  gives you that indicates
that they are processing your papers (by law, they are supposed to
do it in 20 days), then, if you travel outside of Italy, you are not
legal when you return, and they could throw you out, jail you,
whatever. Last week when I stood in the queue for the renewal for my
permit-of-stay, I saw one of my scientist friends from the INFN (National
Lab for Nuclear Physics). We had a nice chat, he is Japanese, and needs
a permit-of-stay (all nonEu require one). He has been waiting for
his for 11 months.

To explain where some of my exhaustion is coming from, when dealing
with the Italian government: An example: You walk into the police
department to get an  approval for your new address for some other
official papers and you walk out with a 16 step form with basically
impossible steps to complete. Tomorrow the instructions will be
different, of course.

And if you walk into that same office with an Italian, it's a one or
two step process. Simplice. I don't have Italians to walk into
bureaucrats office with me most of the time, though, the public
administrator or police look at me muttering 'stupid foreigner' or
some such thing and give me the strictest interpretation of the law.
There are an infinite number of interpretations for each law in Italy.
The police, in particular, treat foreigners all like criminals, and
you have to deal with them, otherwise you are not legal to live
here. 99.9% of Italians don't know what it is like for foreigners
('extracommunitari' or nonEU).  When I tell Italians what I have to
do, they usually say 'you are so unlucky', but I know it is not one
unlucky event. My folder of official documents for living and
working in Italy is almost two inches thick now. Every bureaucratic
office works in similar ways towards foreigners.

In approximately two weeks, I become illegal. My permit-of-stay
expires. Oh yes, I filled out the paperwork (with about 12 pieces of
documentation of different kinds for verification), for a renewal
(one would think that a *renewal* would be a simple process, but no)
and gave it to the Questura, but they say that it won't be ready for
about 5 months. Which means probably 8 or 9 months.

I know all of this because last year I went through the same thing.
I gave them a very large stack of papers for my original
permit-of-stay, then got 'fingerprinted' (actually fingerprinted,
handprinted, palmprinted, two sets of each). They told me that it
would take a couple of months to process it. It didn't, it took
five, and so I had to cancel two important business trips in the
Spring because my boss didn't want me to be illegal working here.
It's not trivial to miss my trips: I am involved with three
spacecraft missions: one will be launched in February, another one
is in the building phase and will be launched in about one year, and
another spacecraft arrives at its destination next summer, so not being
able to travel had an impact. More importantly, I could not be with
my mother when she had her lung cancer surgery in March.  I didn't
have a phone until September, so I could not have even a good phone
conversation with her. My mobile from my town always blinks out with
the bad em field and I could only get fragments of her words and she
was crying at that time. In October, when I finally got to travel to
see her, I learned that her heart had stopped three times
immediately after the operation, and the doctors didn't understand
her situation and were making it worse. I told myself that I would
never let an idiot government put me in such a terrible situation
again, that is, not being able to be with my family in an emergency,
and, now, it looks like a potential problem all over again. Except
that I am so disgusted with the Italian government, that I honestly
don't care, anymore, and I decided that I will travel anyway. I have
a stack of other kinds of official papers that prove my residence,
my work in Italy, I pay taxes, I have an Italian identity card, blah
blah blah, and so I will just carry that stack of papers with me when
I travel, for as long as it takes. I'll begin to use my Latvian passport
instead of my US passport when Latvia becomes part of the EU in May,
so that will help me here alot.

Other than the pay and the bureaucratic garbage, the quality of life
in Italy is actually very high. Living in my neighborhood, and
building my friendships is alot like living in a very large and warm
family.

>>  On the other side, I find quality in my life increasingly important, and
>>  there are many examples of people living good lives at a high age.

>Absolutely.

Agree too. My dad is one of my best examples for that.


Amara

-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"The best presents don't come in boxes." --Hobbes


From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec  3 20:27:19 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:27:19 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
References: <410-22003123320148428@M2W075.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <009601c3b9db$dd37bda0$d5994a43@texas.net>


John Perry Barlow sez:
>
> "The first prediction I can think of is this:
>
> 'Is it a fact - or have I dreamt it - that, by means of electricity,
> the world of matter has become a great nerve, vibrating thousands of
> miles in a breathless point of time? Rather, the round globe is a
> vast head, a brain, instinct with intelligence!'
>
> That, believe it or not, was Nathanial Hawthorne, from the invocation
> of The House of Seven Gables.

Nathaniel. His character was talking, of course, about the telegraph, and in
the context of spiritualism:

=====

Chapter 17:

"Within the lifetime of the child already born," Clifford went on, "all this
will be done away. The world is growing too ethereal and spiritual to bear
these enormities a great while longer. To me, though, for a considerable
period of time, I have lived chiefly in retirement, and know less of such
things than most men,--even to me, the harbingers of a better era are
unmistakable. Mesmerism, now! Will that effect nothing, think you, towards
purging away the grossness out of human life?"

"All a humbug!" growled the old gentleman.

"These rapping spirits, that little Phoebe told us of, the other day," said
Clifford,--"what are these but the messengers of the spiritual world,
knocking at the door of substance? And it shall be flung wide open!"

"A humbug, again!" cried the old gentleman, growing more and more testy at
these glimpses of Clifford's metaphysics. "I should like to rap with a good
stick on the empty pates of the dolts who circulate such nonsense!"

"Then there is electricity,--the demon, the angel, the mighty physical
power, the all-pervading intelligence!" exclaimed Clifford. "Is that a
humbug, too? Is it a fact--or have I dreamt it--that, by means of
electricity, the world of matter has become a great nerve, vibrating
thousands of miles in a breathless point of time? Rather, the round globe is
a vast head, a brain, instinct with intelligence! Or, shall we say, it is
itself a thought, nothing but thought, and no longer the substance which we
deemed it!"

"If you mean the telegraph," said the old gentleman, glancing his eye toward
its wire, alongside the rail-track, "it is an excellent thing,--that is, of
course, if the speculators in cotton and politics don't get possession of
it. A great thing, indeed, sir, particularly as regards the detection of
bank-robbers and murderers."

"I don't quite like it, in that point of view," replied Clifford. "A
bank-robber, and what you call a murderer, likewise, has his rights, which
men of enlightened humanity and conscience should regard in so much the more
liberal spirit, because the bulk of society is prone to controvert their
existence. An almost spiritual medium, like the electric telegraph, should
be consecrated to high, deep, joyful, and holy missions. Lovers, day by,
day--hour by hour, if so often moved to do it,--might send their
heart-throbs from Maine to Florida, with some such words as these `I love
you forever!' --`My heart runs over with love!'--`I love you more than I
can!' and, again, at the next message 'I have lived an hour longer, and love
you twice as much!' Or, when a good man has departed, his distant friend
should be conscious of an electric thrill, as from the world of happy
spirits, telling him 'Your dear friend is in bliss!' Or, to an absent
husband, should come tidings thus

`An immortal being, of whom you are the father, has this moment come from
God!' and immediately its little voice would seem to have reached so far,
and to be echoing in his heart. But for these poor rogues, the
bank-robbers,--who, after all, are about as honest as nine people in ten,
except that they disregard certain formalities, and prefer to transact
business at midnight rather than 'Change-hours, --and for these murderers,
as you phrase it, who are often excusable in the motives of their deed, and
deserve to be ranked among public benefactors, if we consider only its
result,--for unfortunate individuals like these, I really cannot applaud the
enlistment of an immaterial and miraculous power in the universal world-hunt
at their heels!"

==========

I'm with the the old gentleman. :)

But Hawthorne might have been the first to predict porn spam, although it's
possible that he got the tone just a little bit wrong:

< An almost spiritual medium, like the electric telegraph, should be
consecrated to high, deep, joyful, and holy missions. Lovers, day by,
day--hour by hour, if so often moved to do it,--might send their
heart-throbs from Maine to Florida, with some such words as these `I love
you forever!' --`My heart runs over with love!' >

Damien Broderick



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec  3 20:27:11 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:27:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCE3D83.7040607@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20031203202711.80289.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:10:59PM -0500, Eliezer
> S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> >>I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone
> else seems to be doing 
> >>so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow my
> lead doesn't seem to 
> > 
> > Ur, do you realize how this sounds?
> 
> If it doesn't sound bloody fed up, then I phrased it
> wrong.
> 
> I am not running out of exciting ideas.
> I am not running out of new ideas.
> I am not sitting on my hands doing nothing.
> I am not an optimist.
> I am still learning the basics in various fields of
> study with which I was 
> previously unacquainted.
> 
> So what are y'all doing wrong?

If it helps - so far as those five statements go, I'm
the same except I am an optimist.  And I, too, get
frustrated with many peoples' reluctance to do new
things, even when the necessity of the new things has
been demonstrated, merely because they are new.

I find it likely that all human beings (barring the
brain damaged) are physically capable of learning new
things.  The fear of the new just because it is new,
along with the fear of math and science, seem like
phobias learned (socialized) well after birth (but
usually before or during puberty), which just happen
to be common in modern society.

> >>help people, either - or helps only insofar as
> they are moved to study 
> >>tractable interesting subjects.
> > 
> > I'm not sure you're using your resources very
> wisely. 
> > AI is a high risk/high tradeoff field, but an
> academic and/or
> > industrial career would have provided you far more
> leverage 
> > than you currently have. 
> 
> Eugen, an academic and/or industrial career, though
> it would indeed be 
> easier than what I am doing now, will not prevent
> the coming train crash, 
> and is therefore ruled out.  Perhaps the problem is
> that y'all see what 
> you should be doing, then back off and do something
> easier instead.

Same thing here - except, the way I see it, I *want*
the "train crash" to happen.  Except slightly
differently: I want it to happen in a way that will
help everyone, not wind up with all of humanity
deleted overnight.  So, I try to introduce things
that will ameliorate the sudden effects, or try to
get people familiar with the tools they'll need to
ensure their own prosperity before they need 'em.
(For instance, one of the reasons for my patent:
experiments in malleable matter.  If the avearge
person, not just a few well-educated folk, has
internalized the concept of near-absolute control
over their surroundings, an AI using that tool won't
panic 'em as much.)

Granted, my current day job does not allow me to
pursue this.  But at least I am actively attempting
to rectify that situation - and my present setup
ensures that I will be in a position to try again in
several months if my current efforts do not allow me
to switch by then, even if having a separate day job
means less time to put towards the efforts, resulting
in a lower chance of immediate success.  (I don't
care so much about where I'll be tomorrow, as where
I'll be in 10 years.  But I do realize that the 10
year path I wish to follow requires that I eat
tomorrow, and today.)

> > By now I'm 99% certain that a sustainably visible
> online
> > persona is incompatible with getting things done.
> I'd be out of
> > here long ago if I wasn't so hooked.
> 
> I shall probably come to a similar conclusion in the
> not too distant future.

Define "sustainably visible online persona".  Where
above I was mostly the same way, here I depart: I use
this list as a tool - a source of inspiration, a
chance to discuss (and see the flaws and hidden
benefits of) far-out ideas (though I tend to stick to
the ones I might see in the near future), and so
forth.  As such, my presence varies: although I have
not measured this myself, I'm told that, in some
months, I'm one of the more prolific posters; other
months, I'm absent.


From scerir at libero.it  Wed Dec  3 20:38:06 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 21:38:06 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Planck life and `thought bubbles'
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk><5.1.0.14.2.20031203114551.05beab00@mail.earthlink.net>
	<001801c3b9cc$f4f6fc80$d5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <004501c3b9dd$5bc2a620$00b51b97@administxl09yj>

"The problem any such analysis has to face is that of explaining how it is
that, if such a mechanism for ESP or other paranormal processes exists,
these processes manifest themselves only in very specific ways, and in ways
that are not readily controllable."
- Brian D. Josephson (therein)

W. Pauli and N. Bohr were both, and independently, very close to elaborate
concepts like those by Josephson (see "N. Bohr - Collected Works", vol. 10,
Bohr - Pauli correspondence, circa 1955) and maybe something more
'polished'. Not to mention here Wigner, London and Bauer, etc.

For something much more orthodox see the quotation below, very
technical, and very clean too.

"In an experiment the [quantum] state reflects not what is actually
known about the system, but rather what is knowable, in principle,
with the help of auxiliary measurements that do not disturb
the original experiment. By focusing on what is knowable in
principle, and treating what is known as largely irrelevant,
one completely avoids the anthropomorphism and any reference
to consciousness that some physicists have tried to inject
into quantum mechanics."
- Leonard Mandel (Rev. Mod. Phys., 1999, p. S-274)

But going back to that Josephson's quotation, he speaks of
"processes [which] manifest themselves only in very specific ways,
and in ways that are not readily controllable." This is, perhaps,
the point. But, look, it is a 'standard' point in quantum physics.

Behind the curtain, W. Pauli wrote:
"Quite independently of Einstein, it appears
to me that, in providing a systematic foundation
for quantum mechanics, one should start more from
the composition and separation of systems than
has until now (with Dirac, e.g.) been the case.
- This is indeed - as Einstein has correctly felt -
a very fundamental point in quantum mechanics,
which has, moreover, a direct connection with
your reflections about the cut and the possibility
of its being shifted to an arbitrary place."
(W. Pauli, in a letter to W. Heisenberg, just after
the EPR paper has been published).

Composition and separation of systems, hmmm. Conceptual issue 
indeed. This has something to do with Von Neumann who, speaking
of quantum mechanical problems, wrote: "I WOULD LIKE
TO MAKE A CONFESSION WHICH MAY SEEM IMMORAL: I DO NOT
BELIEVE IN HILBERT SPACE ANYMORE." in G.D. Birkhoff, Proceedings
of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, Vol. 2, p. 158, (Ed. R.P. Dilworth),
American Mathematical Society, Rhode Island, 1961.

But, also, i.e., there is another simple, old, and famous problem.
The Young's interference effect, the double slit. Wheeler
(with his delayed choice gedanken exp.) and Zurek & Wootters 
tried many times to break the wall here. The question
is: is there an "uncontrollable" retrocausation?

We know that the two-slit (also the single slit) is just an 
apparatus capable of measuring the positions of photons passing 
through it. Thus it is an apparatus capable of (Heisenberg's
principle here) scattering those photons (which means:
spreading momentum of photons) in a forward directions,
and producing the well known interference pattern on the
screen. The interference is produced by the the probability
function |<p|psi>|^2, where p is momentum of each photon.

We also know (Copenhagen Interpretation, chapter:
Complementasrity Principle; Feynman's discussion; etc.) 
that the interference pattern disappears when the path of each 
photon (say through slit one, or trough slit two) becomes 
distinguishable.

As Anton Zeilinger writes (Rev. Mod. Phys., 1999, page S-288)
"The superposition of amplitudes is only valid if there
is no way to know, even in principle, which path the particle
took. It is important to realize that this does not imply
that an observer actually takes note of what happens.
It is sufficient to destroy the interference pattern,
if the path information is accessible in principle from
the experiment or even if it is dispersed in the environment
and beyond any technical possibility to be recovered, but
in principle "still out there".
 
Now, imagine we have a Damien's screen, which 'feels' the path 
of each photon (say through slit one, or through slit two).
Impossible? Well, not so impossible. But let us skip this 
'material' point, for the moment.

So, if we substitute, in the two-slit apparatus, 
that Damien's screen for the usual screen, after those
photons have already passed through the slit(s), the 
interference pattern must vanish. (If the above principle
by Bohr, Feynman, Zeilinger, etc. is ok).

Now, what does it mean? What does it mean in terms of 
the quantum theoretical description? Interference 
means a certain kind of scattering, specifically
it means that the interference is produced by the the
probability function |<p|psi>|^2, where p is momentum
of each photon. No interference means a different kind 
of scattering, specifically it means that the interference 
is produced by a probability function |<p|psi>|^2 which  
lost the interference term.

Ok? Ok. Let us go on. If we set the usual screen we get
interference (pattern). If we set the Damien's screen
we get no interference (pattern). But how the
interference was created? By the scattering. Thus
by the position measurement performed at the
two-slit level. Thus: at the two-slit.

If we substitute the Damien's screen for the usual
screen (after the photons passed the two-slit) we change 
the scattering, which happened at the two-slit, that
is to say: in a different place, and at an earlier time.

Retrocausation? Who knows? Anyway not much different from
those para-psycho-effects, and from those bubble-models.







From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec  3 20:40:08 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 12:40:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <00ad01c3b9d4$0ec8c5b0$1301010a@Barbara>
Message-ID: <20031203204008.49499.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Barbara Lamar <barbara_lamar at earthlink.net> wrote:
> It's fun to imagine what the world would be like if
> someone found a way to
> teach curiosity

You mean similar to monks (Christian, Buddhist,
Shaolin, et cetera), but instead of contemplating
spirituality, encouraging insight into and exploration
(both physical and metaphorical) of the world so as to
discover its true properties?  Monastaries were where
most science (at least, what we'd recognize today as
science) was done in medeval times.

> If a curiosity training
> course or treatment were
> offered for sale, I wonder how many people would
> want to buy it.

It'd probably depend on how it was marketed.  "Hey,
you, got those seen-it-all, I'm-70-and-waiting-to-rot
blues?  Come on down to Uncle Zen's Curiosity
Meditations!  Shake off your I-don't-wannas, and
rediscover the joys of learning and doing new things!
Amaze your friends by understanding what those young
whippersnappers are up to, or maybe even amaze those
young whippersnappers by doing it better than they
can!  Clinically proven to improve general health and
add years to one's life expectancy in most cases."

Or what if it were offered for free, a la MIT's Open
CourseWare program?


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec  3 20:39:14 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (kevinfreels at hotmail.com)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:39:14 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
References: <20031203184002.83995.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE54ljD2E20440000215c@hotmail.com>

>There are actually federal laws prohibiting intentionally
> making yourself medically unfit for military service. Ostensibly it is
> an act of sabotage that aids and abets the enemy.

THAT is interesting! I had no idea. How would this law effect  people who
wanted to upload at an early age? Hmmm. Something to ponder.........



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec  3 20:44:23 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 21:44:23 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <3FCE3D83.7040607@pobox.com>
References: <008901c3b9b7$f996f700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<3FCE1923.6030805@pobox.com> <20031203172733.GL1229@leitl.org>
	<3FCE3D83.7040607@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20031203204423.GR1229@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:46:11PM -0500, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:

> If it doesn't sound bloody fed up, then I phrased it wrong.
> 
> I am not running out of exciting ideas.
> I am not running out of new ideas.
> I am not sitting on my hands doing nothing.
> I am not an optimist.
> I am still learning the basics in various fields of study with which I was 
> previously unacquainted.

Good. Unless you want to start your own company,
I suggest you get credits for this, though.
 
> So what are y'all doing wrong?

Damien got it all in one sentence. We're aging ahead of you.
 
> >>help people, either - or helps only insofar as they are moved to study 
> >>tractable interesting subjects.
> >
> >I'm not sure you're using your resources very wisely. 
> >AI is a high risk/high tradeoff field, but an academic and/or
> >industrial career would have provided you far more leverage 
> >than you currently have. 
> 
> Eugen, an academic and/or industrial career, though it would indeed be 
> easier than what I am doing now, will not prevent the coming train crash, 

You could be an assistant prof, getting a modest salary, working on
what you're working now but for small interruptions due to teaching duties, 
have access to good resources and computing infrastructure, having 
several publications and letters before your name (which, strangely 
enough, people tend to notice, resulting in greater credibility) and 
would directly interact with bright young people. Giving them ideas,
you know.

There are worse fates than that, yes.

> and is therefore ruled out.  Perhaps the problem is that y'all see what 
> you should be doing, then back off and do something easier instead.

As to coming train crash:

Not everybody is sharing your sense of urgency, because not 
everybody is sharing the same threat model. Even less the 
proposed countermeasure.

I agree I personally should have been doing something else: nanotechnology.
I blew it by virtue of goofing off on the Internet, and not working
hard enough during critical years. You don't have to make a similiar
mistake, though. Projects have teams, have budgets. It's virtually
impossible to get money by sheer persuasion, without an accomplishment
track in your back. You might think it's a sidetrack, but let's
see whether you still think that a decade downstream.
 
> >By now I'm 99% certain that a sustainably visible online
> >persona is incompatible with getting things done. I'd be out of
> >here long ago if I wasn't so hooked.
> 
> I shall probably come to a similar conclusion in the not too distant future.

Very good. This stuff can eat up whole careers. Evil.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/d89baf53/attachment.bin>

From test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu  Wed Dec  3 21:14:49 2003
From: test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu (Bill Hibbard)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:14:49 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <200312031815.hB3IFOH28638@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312031510450.14544-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> However, I think the enthusiasm of youth is automatic because things are new
> and different.  Transhumanism used to be new and different.  But after being
> on these lists for over a decade, there aren't very many new ideas going
> around.  Older people also feel like they are running out of time.  Ten
> years ago, people were predicting the singularity, moon bases and
> immortality in a decade or two.  Now that we are half way there, the goals
> don't seem any closer, yet time is running out.

There is Donald Norman's great quote that people tend to
overestimate the short-term progress of technological
change and underestimate the long-term effects. We need
to work hard and be patient, but the rewards will exceed
our expectations.

The same comment applies to your pessimism. If you look
at short-term events in the world it is easy to think its
all screwed up (it is). But compare the present to the
distant past and its much better now.

I'm 55. It is true that my enthusiasm isn't aroused as
easily it once was, but now its more focused on the
things that really matter. Some of these are purely
personal (health and happiness of family) but also for
example the singularity. I don't expect it within the
next 40 years and hence probably not within my lifetime,
but I am very hopeful of living to see amazing progress
in neuroscience and AI research. Also, I am working hard
to live healthy and long, so I can live to see as much
as possible.

My role model is Verner Suomi, who literally invented
weather satellites (everyone who watches satellite
animations on TV weather shows uses his invention). I
went to work for him in 1978. When he died at about age
85 in 1995 he had employees in his hospital room working
on a radically new kind of ocean buoy for measuring sea
surface heat flux. He made the lives of everyone around
him better.

Cheers,
Bill
----------------------------------------------------------
Bill Hibbard, SSEC, 1225 W. Dayton St., Madison, WI  53706
test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu  608-263-4427  fax: 608-263-6738
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/vis.html



From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Dec  3 21:34:23 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:34:23 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
Message-ID: <3FCE56DF.1070309@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Wed Dec 03, 2003 01:44 pm Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Very good. This stuff can eat up whole careers. Evil.
>

Well, the over 65s seem to be the fastest-growing segment of the
Internet population at present. (Probably catching-up with all the
younger age groups already on the Net).
And they have time to play here with no career pressures to tell them
otherwise.

The present necessity to earn a living and build a career is obviously a
strong behavior modifier for younger people. But that (in general)
doesn't apply to retired people with a pension.

When we have advanced life-extension science, can we expect that the
necessity to earn a living will go away? If the nano-Santa, or
Singularity-Santa, provides an income for everyone, how will the human
race spend the following centuries?

The problem I am concerned with is that the very fact of experiencing
life seems to change people over the years. The search for something new
seems to run out of steam after 50 or 60 years for most people.
How many centuries can you play golf for?
Immortals will need different objectives.

BillK







From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Dec  3 22:17:42 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 17:17:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEOLCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
References: <002701c3b961$64673ec0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203111126.02b06008@mail.comcast.net>

At 08:44 AM 12/3/2003 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:
>I did. In 1990 I was playing with the idea to start a net access business
>for individual end users, and even found someone who was maybe willing to
>invest some money. Then I let them talking me out of the idea, "this is too
>crazy, there will never be a market for this". Now when I wish to do some
>sweet daydreaming I think of what I would do with all the money that I would
>have now if I had followed my idea to the end.
>Two lessons here: 1 - believe in your ideas - 2 - get your ass off the
>armchair and do it.

Those are both great maxims but timing is everything.

My father had quite a few billion-dollar inventions -- like high-speed 
modems, many-focal-point lenses, fax machines, and very-high-resolution 
automated typography -- decades before they eventually boomed.  He was too 
far ahead, and he couldn't convince anyone with money.

It's not always profitable being a prophet.

I've learned consequently to focus my commercial ideas on a couple years 
out:  near enough that you can have a product ready to go just as people 
realize they want it.


-- David Lubkin.




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Dec  3 22:52:27 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 17:52:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <p05100301bbf3e08100de@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203173205.032660f8@mail.comcast.net>

Amara wrote:

>I told myself that I would never let an idiot government put me in such a 
>terrible situation again, that is, not being able to be with my family in 
>an emergency, and, now, it looks like a potential problem all over again. 
>Except that I am so disgusted with the Italian government, that I honestly 
>don't care, anymore, and I decided that I will travel anyway.

It sounds like a very trying period.  I'm sure everyone joins me in hoping 
matters work out well for you, your mother, and your family.

Amara's story reminds me of the idiocies I experienced living in socialist 
Israel as a teenager.  I've often wondered whether my love of liberty comes 
more from having it curtailed by bureaucracies or by my autocratic father.

Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?


-- David Lubkin.




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec  4 00:38:56 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:38:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanogen's new patents in nanotech and
	nanomanufacturing
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203122201.06059b40@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20031204003856.87202.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> Nanogen shares soar on patent
> Newly issued patent broadens its proprietary
> position in nanotechnology and 
> nanomanufacturing areas.
> December 3, 2003: 11:30 AM EST
> 
> NEW YORK (Reuters) - Shares of Nanogen Inc. jumped
> more than 50 percent 
> Wednesday after the company said it received a U.S.
> patent related to the 
> fledgling field of nanotechnology and
> nanomanufacturing.
> 
>
http://money.cnn.com/2003/12/03/technology/nanogen.reut/index.htm

I nominate this story for the most nanoflash/least
nanosubstance press release this month.  (Yes, it is
only the 3rd.  It'll be hard to top.)


From etheric at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 00:42:23 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:42:23 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age : libertarian fervor
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203173205.032660f8@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <000801c3b9ff$7c3a4b20$0200a8c0@etheric>

"Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?"


Self employment experiences
A license for everything  (permission to breathe)
Right to travel "issues"
FDA polices
The drug war
The push for safer working conditions for thugs
The Religious right (wrong)
All those plastic hairdo sociopaths in power

Actually reading the Constitution and BOR

Lysander Spooner
Thomas Paine
T.J.



----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lubkin" <extropy at unreasonable.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> Amara wrote:
>
> >I told myself that I would never let an idiot government put me in such a
> >terrible situation again, that is, not being able to be with my family in
> >an emergency, and, now, it looks like a potential problem all over again.
> >Except that I am so disgusted with the Italian government, that I
honestly
> >don't care, anymore, and I decided that I will travel anyway.
>
> It sounds like a very trying period.  I'm sure everyone joins me in hoping
> matters work out well for you, your mother, and your family.
>
> Amara's story reminds me of the idiocies I experienced living in socialist
> Israel as a teenager.  I've often wondered whether my love of liberty
comes
> more from having it curtailed by bureaucracies or by my autocratic father.
>
> Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?
>
>
> -- David Lubkin.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec  4 00:54:19 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 16:54:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <003901c3b9b4$f51323f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031204005419.91841.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > I mean fuel cell... stupid me :) 
> > 
> > De: "Henrique Moraes Machado"
> <hemm at openlink.com.br>
> > Assunto: Re: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication
> vs transportation:
> > 
> > Well, I'm not thinking only about intercontinental
> flights, 
> > but also our day-by-day transport, such as
> automobiles. You 
> > can put a hybrid engine in your car, you can use
> stem cells...
> 
> No no Henrique, you have typoed into a brillian
> idea:
> stem cells for your car!  You put them in the tank
> and they replicate into any defective part.
> 
> Repairing worn or ripped leather seats would be the
> first application, since those started out as cells
> anyway, but then as we get more advanced we could 
> have them fix leaks in the radiator, then worn
> bearings,
> then when we get really good, the electronics.

I saw this in a game's backstory, some time ago.
(Carrier Command.  It's an interesting exercise in
being many places at once - literally, thanks to the
drone aircraft and tanks you pilot while operating the
main carrier.)  As they put it, the proper structure
of the carrier and all it's components was encoded
into each part of the ship.  When damage deformed the
components, local machinery tried to set things
right, presumably using (and requesting) feedstock
from the ship's central stores.


From etheric at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 01:05:20 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:05:20 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age: pot belly
References: <200312031840.hB3IeNn18771@finney.org>
Message-ID: <001f01c3ba02$b09bb040$0200a8c0@etheric>

" Extropianism for the Elderly"

One of the tricks to enthusiasm is to refuse to succumb to pot belly,  The
negative somatic feedback from ones de-conditioned body has a profound
effect on outlook, It's challenging to be an Eeyore when one is in top
shape.

Another thing I see is the lemming like volition  to trade the illusion of
security and amassing "stuff" for the liberty to mine the cafeteria of
experiences life offers, nothing heals the soul quite as quickly as AIRPORT.





"We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War is a spiritual
war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on
television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods,
and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're
very, very pissed off." -TD

Robert
Trailerpark Transhumanist


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> I remember when I was young and just getting started working, I noticed
> there were different ways that older people approached their jobs, as well
> as life itself.  The more common attitude was a kind of bitter fatalism,
> a sense of disappointment.  Things were going badly and getting worse.
> They were grumpy and unhappy, warning against mistakes but mostly being
> ignored.
>
> Generally these were people who had not been all that succeessful, who
> were doing the same work that they had done 20 years before.  So it is
> understandable that they might be bitter and unhappy.
>
> I also ran into a few old people who were quite different, who were
> optimistic and energetic, full of ideas and enthusiasm.  These were
> mostly people who had been successful in their careers, who had advanced
> to relatively important positions.  Another group like this were older
> college professors who were still active and pursuing their research.
>
> It is not easy to distinguish cause and effect here.  Were people happy
> or unhappy because of their success or lack of it?  Or were their basic
> approaches to problems influencing their career paths?
>
> As I get older, I can see how cynicism creeps in.  I still have mostly
> the same goals and the same basic belief that they are possible, but
> more and more I perceive that much of the support for these projects is
> based on unfounded optimism and sloppy thinking.  I become impatient
> with one-sided perspectives and want to see both the pro and the con
> positions represented fairly.
>
> A case in point is the recent online nanotech debate, where the spin from
> "our side" is that Drexler whipped Smalley's butt.  I don't perceive it
> that way at all.  I thought Drexler was evasive and slippery, and from my
> current perspective I see this as a persistent strategy.  You can never
> pin him down.  Whenever someone claims that something won't work, he just
> calls "strawman" and says if that doesn't work, we'll do it some other
> way.  But since he never comes out with a specific, concrete proposal,
> he has a perfect defense.  You can't critique what doesn't exist.
>
> I need to write up these thoughts in more detail, but here again I
> find myself facing the same barriers which had defeated the older
> engineers I observed as a youth.  I know that it will be an enormous
> battle, offering pessimism where everyone only wants to hear good news.
> I doubt that it will do any good, because even the cautions of a Nobel
> prize winner are ignored.  And I question whether I have the energy to
> engage in the kind of hard debate which would be necessary to give these
> issues the kind of hearing that they deserve.
>
> Those old men I knew had given up.  They were convinced that our
> plans and projects would mostly fail, but they were unable to make
> persuasive arguments.  Too many times in the past they had tried and
> failed, had gained reputations as naysayers, as not being team players.
> These reputations had probably helped to mire them in their dead end jobs.
> And by then they had nothing left but bitterness, pro forma objections,
> and head-shaking predictions of doom.
>
> I don't think any of us wants to end up like that.  I certainly don't,
> and yet I feel myself creeping in that direction.  What can we do about
> it?
>
> I have a couple of ideas.  The first, and simpler, is to try to couple
> pessimism with optimism.  This is basically the idea of what Max called
> Dynamic Optimism.  Dynamic optimism is realistic.  It's not a matter of
> wearing rose colored glasses.  You see the problems, but you also try
> to look at them as challenges rather than obstacles.  Rather than just
> opposing what won't work, figure out what will give the best shot at
> working, and become a proponent of that alternative.  This way you are,
> in a sense, a leader rather than dead weight.  Maybe nobody is following
> you at the moment, but it is a crucial difference in perspective.
>
> But sometimes this approach is difficult.  You have a situation where
> every path seems doomed, and you can't imagine a solution that will work.
> Pessimism is pervasive, even becoming depression.  In this case the second
> idea comes in, which is based on a philosophy I have long believed in,
> of being faithful to oneself.  Try to think of yourself not as a person
> living in a moment of time, but as a being who spans an entire lifetime.
> Give credit to the person you were in the past.  Think of his goals as
> well as your own, and try to honor both of them.  Remember how you felt
> when you were young, and even if you don't feel that way now, try to
> act in a manner which respects those feelings.
>
> As you feel the pessimism of age encroaching, understand that this is
> not necessarily a matter of wisdom and experience.  It can be hormones
> and neuroanatomy.  Your brain is changing, your body is changing.
> Don't assume that your beliefs now are necessarily more valid than your
> old ones.
>
> The idea, then, is to try to hold to a sliver of optimism, even if you
> don't believe it in your gut, or in your hormones.  Fight your tendencies
> to cynicism.  Admire the optimism and energy of youth rather than pity it.
> Give support where you can, and avoid being an obstacle to those who
> are moving forward.
>
> So there you have it, Extropianism for the Elderly.  I'm not quite
> there yet, but most of us will face these issues eventually.  Give some
> thought to how you want to age, and realize that your own mental habits
> today are putting you on a path which may be much more ingrained a few
> decades from now.
>
> Hal
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec  4 01:42:58 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:42:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <20031203102437.GJ22120@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031204014259.33435.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 03:48:42PM -0800, Adrian
> Tymes wrote:
> > Sorry, but MB is correct.  I specified "control
> over
> > oneself" - as in, the opportunity to not grow old
> and
> > deterioriate, if desired.  That is not illusiory
> in
> 
> We're talking very nicely in othogonal directions to
> each other, but it's no problem, as we occasionally
> do manage to connect sometimes.

Agreed.

> What I'm objecting is a belief
> of having a control over your own mind by equivalent
> of waving a dead chicken (Freud, Jung & Co). I have
> similiar scathing opinion of AI people who think
> philosophy and introspection will result in actual
> application leads. 

Ah.  Yes, I agree here, too.  (I think that philosophy
and introspection might possibly be able to aid the
application leads...but result in it by themselves?
No chance.)

> > You are correct in what you did say: people who
> > currently have withered bodies, or who believe
> that
> > the only path to old age is to wither, might not
> want
> > to live forever given what they think it must
> mean.
> 
> We've donned our Ministry of Propaganda hat here, 
> I presume.

I'm disclaiming what I say to make sure the exact
meaning gets across.  This can take the air of
propaganda at times, since propaganda can emphasize
things that are literally true - and yet a slight
misreading would result in something that is very
much desired, whether or not it is actually true.
Similar word patterns, different intents.

> > But that is not what we are discussing.  We are
> > discussing the ability to live forever in
> relatively
> 
> Forever is a bit misleading.

True, but close enough relative to the finite
lifespans of today.

> > (Frankly, it might be technically
> more
> > difficult to achieve immortality in a withered
> shell
> > than in a perpetually healthy shell, even if there
> > was not the desirability issue.  Were I to wither
> at
> > current rates, yet survive to 100, I might
> seriously
> > contemplate whether cryonic suspension might give
> me a
> > better chance of seeing the far future than
> continued
> > life.)
> 
> You of course realize that the vast majority of
> people
> in the industrialized countries die demented. Not
> much
> left to suspend there, alas.

Exactly.


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Dec  4 01:51:29 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:51:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020904200.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <3FCE9321.48980E79@mindspring.com>

Don Dartfield wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > He seemed to me to be using it as a term to describe parallel universes.
> > It is a bit of a stretch though I suppose not out of the realm of
> > artistic license.
> 
> Okay, then yeah, that would be an incorrect usage.  Unless he's trying to
> coin a new "popular usage" meaning for the term.  Perhaps we should ask
> him. <g> It might be handy to have a single word term for an alternate
> universe in my writing, rather than always having to use "parallel
> universe" or "alternate universe" or "from anooooooother
> dimEEEENSSSSSSSion..."

How about "stringworlds."

Terry


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec  4 01:53:07 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:53:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism and non-gender roles
In-Reply-To: <002a01c3b963$87acde60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031204015307.2284.qmail@web80409.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote,
> > Would not a good cure for that be to make or seek
> out
> > new things?  An elder of the 80s would surely have
> > found some novelty in the World Wide Web during
> the
> > 90s (assuming said elder was willing to be exposed
> to
> > it).
> 
> In 1985 I had networked Macintoshes which had a
> hypertext browser called
> "HyperCard", that allowed hypertext links to bring
> up cards from remote
> networked computers.  This predated Windows-95 by a
> decade.  This stuff
> isn't new and wasn't adopted quickly.  It just
> didn't gain popularity until
> much later.

Yeah, but that was just your content.  Seeing that
which thousands of other people build can be
qualitatively, not just quantitatively, different from
seeing that which just one or a few build.


From thespike at earthlink.net  Thu Dec  4 01:59:23 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 19:59:23 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] parallel universes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020904200.9234-100000@hplx.net>
	<3FCE9321.48980E79@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <015801c3ba0a$3f4f3260$d5994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:51 PM

> > It might be handy to have a single word term for an alternate
> > universe in my writing, rather than always having to use "parallel
> > universe" or "alternate universe" or "from anooooooother
> > dimEEEENSSSSSSSion..."
>
> How about "stringworlds."

No, because it's inaccurate.

How about `D-branes'? or just Branes?

I know, it causes sniggers from those who think you're saying `brains'. Um,
how about `alloworlds'? Too much like `hello'. How about `xenoworlds'?

Damien Broderick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 02:09:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:09:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <3FCE9321.48980E79@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031204020914.248.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Don Dartfield wrote:
> > 
> > Okay, then yeah, that would be an incorrect usage.  Unless he's
> trying to
> > coin a new "popular usage" meaning for the term.  Perhaps we should
> ask
> > him. <g> It might be handy to have a single word term for an
> alternate
> > universe in my writing, rather than always having to use "parallel
> > universe" or "alternate universe" or "from anooooooother
> > dimEEEENSSSSSSSion..."
> 
> How about "stringworlds."

Well, 'timeline' is commonly used in many of the genre publications.
Paratime, paratemporal, and parareality are also used. One story I read
a long time back used 'schizm' as well.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 02:20:06 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:20:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age : libertarian fervor
In-Reply-To: <000801c3b9ff$7c3a4b20$0200a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <20031204022007.35427.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> "Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?"

Culmination of many things, but the biggest contributors were:

a) reading Heinlein SF
b) being in the military
c) running my own business and trying to sell a product in a market
tightly regulated by building, electrical and fire codes, heavily
subsidized and market distorted by inanely implemented government
programs, as well as trying to sell a new technology to a government
that did not think of it themselves.
d) fighting the Seattle Light Rail Project
e) being treated as a threat to national security by one of the major
political parties and its last presidential administration...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From hal at finney.org  Thu Dec  4 02:51:58 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:51:58 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline
Message-ID: <200312040251.hB42pw420688@finney.org>

Max More wrote:
> It would be 
> interesting to dig out the issue of Extropy that featured a range of 
> predicted dates for various events. I recall that Eric Drexler had highly 
> optimistic projections, but others looked to 100+ years for many of the 
> items listed. I think I was somewhere in the middle. If anyone has the 
> issue at hand along with an OCR scanner, it would provide some interesting 
> data points.

Coincidentally, someone posted this URL on the FX (idea futures game)
discussion list: http://web.archive.org/web/20030212092807/www.lucifer.com/~sean/N-FX/.
This is a Wayback Machine archive of an article on nanotech timelines,
and it includes a link to the Extropy issue which had that article.
Unfortunately, the archive failed to capture that issue, but the link
does identify it as Extropy #15, which I happen to have, and I can go
ahead and type in the data.

The predictors are Gregory Benford; Steve Bridge; Eric Drexler; FM-2030;
Mark Miller; Max More; and Nick Szabo.  These predictions are from 1995.
Explanatory notes include:

Szabo - "The first number is when something might be possible under ideal
engineering, economic, and politilcal conditions.  'now' means we could
have done it already.  The second number is the practical prediction,
based primarily on the viewpoint of starting a business..."

Bridge - "My answers are based on when something will 'actually happen'
rather than on when it will be possible."

Miller - "I will use the following variables: N = Now, 1995; S =
Singularity; DAF = Design Ahead Factor....  I predict Singularity as
occuring between N+10 and N+40.... I introduce a Design Ahead Factor
which I define as 10/(S-N).  If Singularity occurs in 10 years, DAF is 1.
If Singularity occurs in 40 years, DAF is 1/4."

Here is the table, modulo possible typos.  You will need to use a monospace
font to get the columns to line up:

    Benford             Drexler                 Miller                          Szabo
            Bridge                  FM-2030                         More

Frozen Organ Transplant Is Routine
    2020    2010        never       1990s+      N+20 if (S>N+30)    1999-2008   2020-2030
Two Century Biological Lifespans
    2150    2050/2140   never       2010-2020   never               2015-2040   2040/2100
Indefinite Biological Lifespans
    2300    2080        1967                    S+50                2020-2045   2090/2150
Reanimation for Last Cryonics Suspendee
    2100    2060        2006-2021               S+6*DAF             2025-2055   2050/2200
Reanimation for Current Cryonics Suspendees
    2200    2090        2006-2021   2020        S+10*DAF            2030-2100   2400/2410
Biotech Cures for Most Heart Disease, Cancer & Aging
    2030    2030        never       1990s+      S+10*DAF            2015-2040   2090/2130
Fine-Tuned Mood/Motivation Transformation Drugs
    2010    2020        ?-2021      1990s+      N+10                1998-2010   2040/2050
Genius Drugs (>20 pts permanent IQ increase for most people)
    2030    2020        ?-2021                  S-10 to S+10*DAF    2020-2060   2010/2050

    Benford             Drexler                 Miller                          Szabo
            Bridge                  FM-2030                         More

Human Germ-Line Gene Therapy
    2040    2007/2025               1990s       N+20                2010        now/2010
Human Child Gestated Completely in Artificial Womb
    2020    2050                    2010-2020   S-5 to S-2*DAF      2015-2035   2100/2120
Cloning of a Human Being
    2050    2020                    2010        S-5 to S+4*DAF      2010        now/2010
Completely Genetically Composed Children
    2060    2050                                                    2015-2020   2060/2100
Extinct Species Reanimation (from preserved DNA)
    2100    2025        ?-2021                  N+5 to S+1                      2010/2020

    Benford             Drexler                 Miller                          Szabo
            Bridge                  FM-2030                         More

Cryonics Industry Revenues $1 billion/year
    2035    2015                    2010-2020   N+30 (if S>N+30)    2015-2020   now/2020
Nanotech Factories
    2100    2030/2050   2006-2021   2010-2020   S-3 to S+1          2015-2030   2070/2080
Atomically Detailed Design for Self-Reproducing Drexler-style Assembler
    2070    2015        1998-2010               N+7                 2000-2015   2100/2100
High-Degree of Freedom Cell Repair Nanomachines
    2075    2040/2060   2006/2021   2010        S+2*DAF                         2160/2180
Reproducing Nanotech Assemblers
    2080    2025        2004-2019               S-3 to S+1          2020-2030   2120/2140
Really Cheap Fusion Power
    2100    2040                    2010-2020                       2010-2020   2200/2210
Nukes as Cheap as Tanks
    2105    2015                                                    2040-2050   2100/2150
Nukes as Cheap as Handguns          
    never   never                                                               2200/2250

    Benford             Drexler                 Miller                          Szabo
            Bridge                  FM-2030                         More

Most Publications are Electronic
    2015    2015                    1990s+      N+10 to N+30        1999        2000/2005
Most Intellectual Publications are on Web
    2001    2008                    late 1990s  N+5 to N+30         1999-2002   2000/2005
Information Storage $0.01 per Megabyte
    2010    2020                                N+1 to N+10         2015        2010/2010
Computer Implanted in Brain
    2015    2045                    2010        N+1 to N+10         2020-2050   2010/2020
Human-Brain Equivalent Computers on a Desk
    2030    2030        2004-2019   2010        S-3*DAF             2030        2040/2050
Human-Level A.I.
    2030    2050        2004-2019   2010                            2040-2150   2150/2200
Uploaded Minds
    2060    2125        2006-2021               S+7*DAF             2040-2100   2300/2400
Uploads Running 1000x Faster than Humans
    2080    2125        2006-2021               S-3*DAF             2045-2100   2450/2450

    Benford             Drexler                 Miller                          Szabo
            Bridge                  FM-2030                         More

Big Fraction of Economy Off Earth
    2200    2100        2006-2021               S+20*DAF+20         2100-2200   2150/2200
Big Fraction of Economy out of Solar System
    2800    3000        2011-2026               S+20*DAF+(50-200)   3000        2400/2500
Comet Mining, Javelins, Drugs, etc. (robotic space industry)
    2080    2075        2006-2021                                   2050        2040/2060
First Person on Mars
    2050    2025        2006-2021   2010-2020   N+15 to S+2*DAF     2025        2040/2060
First Person in Another Solar System
    2400    2085        2011-2026   2030-2050   S+10*DAF+20         2150-2400   2200/2400
Reproducing Comet Eaters
            2070                                                                 
Reproducing Asteroid Eaters
    2150    2045        2006-2021                                   2050-2070   2140/2180
Reproducing Starships
    2300    2200        2006-2021               S+2*DAF                         2350/2400

    Benford             Drexler                 Miller                          Szabo
            Bridge                  FM-2030                         More

1,000,000+ People Using Anon. Electronic Cash
    2010    2020                    1990s       N+10toN+30 to never 1999-2006   1997/1999
30%+ of Labor Telecommutes
    2015    2030                    1990s       never               never       2000/2050
Untaxable Economy Using Electronic Cash $100b/year
    2020                                        N+20 to never       2010-2115   1997/2005
Ocean Colonization
    20020   2020/2045                           never               2010-2050   now/2040
Most Education Privatized
    2005    2050                                N+10 to S+50                    now/2040
Most Law Enforcement Privatized
    2010    2095                                S+50 to never                   now/2150
Most Law Choice Privatized
    2020    never on Earth                      S+20*DAF+20tonever              now/2150
National Defense Privatized
    never   never on Earth                      never                           now/2200
Betting Markets a Big Policy Influence
    never    never                              S+20*DAF+20                     2000/2100


Lots of figures here, and it's pretty hard to see the logic behind some
of them.  Benford and Szabo put Reproducing Starships out in the 24th
century, while Drexler could have them coming out the year after next.
Actually, Drexler is kind of a one-note-Charlie here, putting almost
everything in the 2006-2026 time frame, even Big Fraction of Economy out
of Solar System.  I guess he assumes a nanotech singularity scenario.
The interstellar economy would presumably be self-reproducing space probes
zooming away from Earth in all directions and furiously converting nearby
star systems into computronium or some such.

I see Benford and Szabo as the most conservative, with Bridge and More
taking a middle ground, and Drexler and FM-2030 being the most aggressive.
FM's predictions don't make much sense to me but maybe they should be
thought of as somewhat metaphorical or poetic, which is how I perceive
his writing.

Other interesting aspects of the survey include the topic selection,
which is kind of a snapshot of the items of interest to the Extropian
community in the 1995 time frame.  I also note the absence of Eliezer
Yudkowski's influential conception of the Singularity as a sudden
transition to world whose rules, possibly even whose physics, are
determined by AIs of virtually infinite intelligence.

Hal


From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Dec  4 02:57:57 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:57:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] parallel universes
In-Reply-To: <015801c3ba0a$3f4f3260$d5994a43@texas.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020904200.9234-100000@hplx.net>	<3FCE9321.48980E79@mindspring.com>
	<015801c3ba0a$3f4f3260$d5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3FCEA2B5.1010909@pobox.com>

Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> No, because it's inaccurate.
> 
> How about `D-branes'? or just Branes?
> 
> I know, it causes sniggers from those who think you're saying `brains'.
> Um, how about `alloworlds'? Too much like `hello'. How about
> `xenoworlds'?

Surely this problem has been solved again and again...

Coming to mind offhand:

Branch
Dimension
World
Timeline
Worldline
Worldsurface
Ficton
Plane
Layer
Hubblebubble
Process

Depends on usage.  What are you trying to indicate?

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Thu Dec  4 03:25:33 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 22:25:33 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312032220120.-276771@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>



--- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> "Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came
from?"


Discovering that so many things I liked or wanted to do were
either taxed, prohibited, or regulated. That came as quite a
shock to me as I was growing up.

Regards,
MB



From naddy at mips.inka.de  Thu Dec  4 03:04:11 2003
From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 03:04:11 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
References: <20031203184002.83995.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
	<LAW10-OE54ljD2E20440000215c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <bqm87b$269h$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>

<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> >There are actually federal laws prohibiting intentionally
> > making yourself medically unfit for military service. Ostensibly it is
> > an act of sabotage that aids and abets the enemy.
> 
> THAT is interesting! I had no idea. How would this law effect  people who
> wanted to upload at an early age? Hmmm. Something to ponder.........

Are you serious?  Presumably these laws apply to intentional actions
directly aimed at avoiding military service, say, chopping off your
foot after receiving your draft notification or later when in the
trenches.

They don't apply if you tattoo yourself in day-glo or chop off your
foot for personal preferences and it later happens to turn out that
you are unfit for military service due to these body modifications.

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy at mips.inka.de


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Dec  4 03:33:01 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 20:33:01 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Neanderthal art?
Message-ID: <3FCEAAED.D4916707@mindspring.com>

< http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3256228.stm >

Last Updated: Tuesday, 2 December, 2003, 12:21 GMT

Neanderthal 'face' found in Loire
By Jonathan Amos
BBC News Online science staff

A flint object with a striking likeness to a human face may be one of the
best examples of art by Neanderthal man ever found, the journal Antiquity
reports.

The "mask", which is dated to be about 35,000 years old, was recovered on
the banks of the Loire at La Roche-Cotard.

It is about 10 cm tall and wide and has a bone splinter rammed through a
hole, making the rock look as if it has eyes.

Commentators say the object shows the Neanderthals were more sophisticated
than their caveman image suggests.

"It should finally nail the lie that Neanderthals had no art," Paul Bahn,
the British rock art expert, told BBC News Online. "It is an enormously
important object."

Nose and cheeks

It is described in Antiquity by Jean-Claude Marquet, curator of the Museum
of Prehistory of Grand-Pressigny, and Michel Lorblanchet, a director of
research in the French National Centre of Scientific Research, Roc des
Monges, at Saint-Sozy.

The mask was found during an excavation of old river sediments in front of a
Palaeolithic cave encampment. Tool and bone discoveries suggest Neanderthals
used the location to light a fire and prepare food.

Triangular in shape, the object shows clear evidence, the researchers say,
of having been worked - flakes have been chipped off the block to make it
more face-like.

The 7.5-cm-long bone has also been wedged in position purposely by flint
fragments.

Marquet and Lorblanchet tell Antiquity: "We think that this is indeed a
'proto-figurine'; that is, a small flint block whose natural shape evokes a
crudely triangular human face - or a mask if one notes that it is primarily
the upper part of the face that is concerned, like a carnival mask, or,
rather less clearly, an animal face, perhaps a feline?

"It was not only picked up and brought into the habitation, but was also
modified in various ways to perfect its resemblance to a face: the forehead,
the eyes underlined by the bone splinter, the nose stopped at its extremity
by an intentional flake-removal, and the rectified cheeks."

Over and over

The standard view of Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) is that they
lacked the thought processes capable of producing art - certainly to any
real level of sophistication produced by modern humans (Homo sapiens).

Clive Gamble, an expert from Southampton University on the early occupation
of Europe by human species, says science has been reluctant to see
Neanderthals as great conceptual thinkers.

"The great problem with all the Neanderthal art is that they are one-offs.
What is different about the art of modern humans when it appears 35,000
years ago is that there is repetition - animal sculptures and paintings done
over and over again in a recognisable style.

"With Neanderthals, there may have been the odd da Vinci-like genius, but
their talents died with them."

Bahn, on the other hand, believes the Roche-Cotard mask should set the
record straight on Neanderthals' artistic capabilities.

"There are now a great many Neanderthal art objects. They have been found
for decades and always they are dismissed as the exception that proves the
rule."

"This is not just a fortuitous bone shoved into a hole in a rock. Whether
the Neanderthal artist saw a rock that looked like a face and modified it,
or conceived the thing from the start - who knows? Either way it is pretty
sophisticated."

Abstract thought

Perhaps the oldest example of modern human art generally accepted by the
scientific community would be the 77,000-year-old engraved ochre pieces
found in the Blombos Cave in South Africa.

There are claims for even older items, dating back 200,000 years or more,
that comprise mainly rock objects apparently sculpted to look like the human
form.

But many sceptical researchers believe these objects are merely accidents of
geological processes, and doubt they have been intentionally modified in any
way by a human hand.

However, earlier this year, scientists announced the discovery of the oldest
Homo sapiens skulls. These 160,000-year-old fossil bones had been polished
after death.

This mortuary practice suggests at least these early people were abstract
thinkers, capable of analysing ideas of life and death.


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Thu Dec  4 03:35:47 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 22:35:47 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline
In-Reply-To: <200312040251.hB42pw420688@finney.org>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203221744.05506008@mail.comcast.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031203/ea3f3214/attachment.html>

From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Dec  4 03:39:10 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 20:39:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Physicist Explains String Theory
Message-ID: <3FCEAC5E.B89CC25E@mindspring.com>

Source: Daily Nexus - UC Santa Barbara's Student Newspaper

< http://www.ucsbdailynexus.com/news/2003/6192.html >

Physicist Explains String Theory to SB
By Ben Krasnow - Staff Writer

Monday, November 24, 2003 


Physicist Brian Greene taught audience members how to see in 10 
dimensions at the Lobero Theatre Sunday night.

A leading string theorist and a member of UCSB's Kavli Institute 
for Theoretical Physics, Greene recounted the highlights of his 
book, The Elegant Universe. After going over the physics 
background necessary to understand string theory, Greene drew 
audible "wows" from the audience when he explained the core 
underpinnings of string theory, and how our understanding of the 
universe could subsequently change.

Greene was introduced by Chris Carter, producer and writer of 
the TV show, 'The X-Files'. Carter recalled reading Greene's 
book and thinking about the implications of these new ideas in 
physics. Sometimes the reality of what theoretical physics 
predicts is hard to grasp, even for a science fiction writer.

"As strange as 'The X-Files' could be, we never got as far out 
as this guy," Carter said.

Theoretical physics describes a branch of science that tries to 
explain physical phenomena by using mathematics and careful 
thought instead of empirical measurements. Greene hailed Albert 
Einstein as the most influential theoretical physicist in 
history.

"He changed the ideas of space and time," Greene said.

Einstein's first major contribution to the modern understanding 
of physics was the introduction of the ultimate speed limit -
 the speed of light, Greene said. Before this maximum speed 
limit was introduced, scientists thought some things could 
happen instantaneously, like gravity. Newton's law of 
gravitation states that the attraction felt between two objects 
is instantaneous. Einstein stated that this is not possible. 
Nothing - no signal, no information, no influence - can travel 
faster than the speed of light.

Light has been measured to travel at 186,000 miles per second. 
The sun is so far away that even at that tremendous speed, it 
takes nearly eight minutes for the its light to reach the Earth. 
If the sun disappeared right now, we could not possibly know 
until eight minutes had passed. Earth's gravitational attraction 
to the sun holds the planet in orbit. If gravity acted 
instantaneously and light did not, the earth would leave its 
orbit before the darkness accompanying the sun's disappearance 
reached it.

"The fact that there is a speed limit is a problem for Newton's 
Law," Greene said.

Greene said that Einstein's second major contribution was his 
theory of general relativity. This theory provides a way to 
understand how gravity works while still obeying the maximum 
speed limit. In fact, Einstein's calculations proved that the 
speed of gravity should be exactly the same as the speed of 
light. Greene said the reason Einstein has been praised so much 
is because his ideas unified two things - the speed of light and 
the speed of gravity. Physical theories that unify separate 
phenomena are always desirable because they approach the idea 
that there is one singular theory that could explain everything 
in the universe, Greene said.

To explain general relativity, Greene used the analogy of a thin 
horizontal rubber sheet. If the sheet was perfectly flat, a 
marble placed on the sheet would have no tendency to roll in any 
direction. If a bowling ball was placed on the sheet, it would 
form a large depression. The marble would roll down into the 
depression, toward the bowling ball. The heavier the bowling 
ball, the bigger the depression, and the faster the marble will 
would roll toward it. If the bowling ball were removed very 
quickly, the rubber sheet would take a short time to return to 
its flat shape. That amount of time is analogous to the speed of 
gravity.

"Gravity is the fabric of space and time," Greene said. 
"Einstein's theory works just a little better than Newton's."

In the case of the sun disappearing, general relativity states 
that the earth would remain in orbit for eight minutes after the 
sun is gone. This is the time it would take for the gravity wave 
to reach earth and release it from the depression in space that 
is currently holding it the sun's orbit.

Besides relativity, there is another area of physics that has 
changed markedly in the last century. This field is called 
quantum theory, and it describes how physics works on a very 
small scale. Greene said that on a macro scale, the warping of 
space is very smooth, like a smooth depression in a rubber 
sheet. On the micro scale, space is not smooth. It is constantly 
churning and moving, like the surface of boiling water. Quantum 
theory describes this rapid and chaotic motion, and has some 
startling physical conclusions.

"If you fire a particle like an electron at a barrier that 
classically it could not penetrate, quantum theory says there is 
a small chance it can," Greene said.

Greene went on to say that there is even a chance that he could 
walk into a solid stone column and come out on the other side. 
The probability is extremely low, but it is not zero according 
to quantum theory.

String theory provides a way to unify the smoothness of macro 
space and the roughness and chaos of micro space, Greene said. 
The basic concept of string theory is that every piece of matter 
in the universe is composed of very small vibrating loops of 
string. The pattern of vibrations, much like the pattern of 
vibrations on the string of a musical instrument, determines the 
properties of the particle it composes, Greene said.

The dilemma is that the mathematics behind string theory require 
the tiny loops of string to vibrate in 10 dimensions. This is a 
problem because no person has ever seen more than three 
dimensions. This conclusion does not daunt string theorists like 
Greene. He explained one way in which the other seven dimensions 
could be hidden to observers by rolling up a sheet of paper. If 
the flat plane of paper represented space, it has two 
dimensions: top to bottom, and left to right. If the paper is 
rolled up into a cylinder, the left to right [[left-to-right]] 
dimension is unchanged, but the top to bottom [[top-to-bottom]] 
dimension is changed into clockwise or counterclockwise. If the 
paper is rolled tighter, the cylinder will be come very thin, 
and from afar it may look like a simple line with no rolled-up 
clockwise dimension. This may be how the seven other dimensions 
of string theory are hidden.

Greene said that string theory could be strengthened by 
observational data from space. When the universe was young, the 
strings that made up all matter were very energetic. As the 
universe cooled down and expanded, the imprint left from the 
energetic strings may have remained. Thus, there could be large, 
string-shaped artifacts in space waiting be found that would 
provide evidence for string theory.

"Nothing to me would be more poetic; no outcome would be more 
graceful ... than for us to confirm our theories of the 
ultramicroscopic makeup of spacetimea and matter by turning our 
giant telescopes skyward and gazing at the stars," Greene said.


All content, photographs, graphics and design Copyright ? 2000-
2003 Daily Nexus.


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 04:18:34 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 20:18:34 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312032220120.-276771@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <00a001c3ba1d$af139560$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> 
> --- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> > "Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came
> from?"
> 

The most important lessons in libertarianism came from 
elementary school, where it was more convenient for the 
teacher to have the entire class advance together, even if
at the pace of a glacier.

For the students who could actually read, the result
was excruciating boredom most of the time, a criminal
waste of precious time in a young life.  I have never
questioned Eliezer's decision to give up entirely on
mass education as useless.  At an early age, many of
us learned that the gazelles should not be yoked with
the oxen but should be set free to run.  The same rules
simply do not apply to everyone.  All my most important
learning came about in my home with my own books and
those I could borrow from the library.

Governments take over where the elementary school
teachers left off.  Many of us are for limiting government's
influence to common defense, road building and the public 
education which I just got finished disrespecting.

spike



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 04:20:59 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 20:20:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
In-Reply-To: <bqm87b$269h$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
Message-ID: <20031204042059.35021.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Christian Weisgerber <naddy at mips.inka.de> wrote:
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> 
> > >There are actually federal laws prohibiting intentionally
> > > making yourself medically unfit for military service. Ostensibly
> it is
> > > an act of sabotage that aids and abets the enemy.
> > 
> > THAT is interesting! I had no idea. How would this law effect 
> people who
> > wanted to upload at an early age? Hmmm. Something to
> ponder.........
> 
> Are you serious?  Presumably these laws apply to intentional actions
> directly aimed at avoiding military service, say, chopping off your
> foot after receiving your draft notification or later when in the
> trenches.
> 
> They don't apply if you tattoo yourself in day-glo or chop off your
> foot for personal preferences and it later happens to turn out that
> you are unfit for military service due to these body modifications.

Actually, they only really apply if a draft is in effect, something
that I don't think is likely even given todays situation. 

However, if one were enacted, a local draft board will interview those
claiming unfitness. Accidents are obviously excused. Intentional
disfigurement is not. Doing so after receiving a draft notice only
makes it easier for them to prosecute you. If you are dumb enough to
tell a draft board you got your genes altered so you glowed in the dark
specifically to make you unfit for service, I'll bet they'll draft you
anyways and the military would stick you in some hellhole peeling
potatos or slopping out latrines for the duration.

As for uploading at an early age, the military would probably find good
military uses for uploaded minds...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Thu Dec  4 04:51:36 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:51:36 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor
In-Reply-To: <20031204022007.35427.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000801c3b9ff$7c3a4b20$0200a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203230653.02bb4008@mail.comcast.net>


>--- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> > "Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?"

Three people have now posted replies to my question in a way that suggests 
a misattribution.  We all need to be more careful in source attribution for 
the sake of archaeologists and historians in millennia to come....

At 06:20 PM 12/3/2003 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>Culmination of many things, but the biggest contributors were:
>
>a) reading Heinlein SF

It's ironic that in the message where I posed the question I did not 
mention Heinlein, since I've made the point here and in fiction that 
writers often have a more profound impact on one's life than one's 
acquaintances and experiences.

I credit Heinlein for a large chunk of my interests, attitudes, and 
character.  His direct contribution is immense; when I try to add up the 
ripple effects from those influenced by him -- well, I'm not sure I can 
count that high.  Seems like behind every extropian topic are pioneers who 
grew up on his writing.  I think I met all of the people I care most about 
as a consequence.  My daughter would not exist otherwise, and perhaps nor 
would I.

I suppose if he hadn't been, someone else would have been -- but in our 
reality, he was, and so deserves the credit.

And, of course, as he noted, we can't pay him back; we have to pay it forward.


-- David Lubkin.




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Dec  4 05:15:56 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 00:15:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203114551.05beab00@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000401c3ba25$b616a700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Max More wrote,
> At 10:10 AM 12/3/2003, Harvey wrote:
> 
> >I also just realized that I am a professional pessimist.
> 
> I shouldn't encourage you, but...
> 
> Delusions of Success: How Optimism Undermines Executives' 
> Decisions by Dan Lovallo; Daniel Kahneman Harvard Business 
> Review, Editor reviewed on 07/07/03, originally published 
> on 07/01/03 http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.asp?coid=CO77031947495

Excellent article!  This is exactly what I am seeing when I audit.  Some
managers have rose-colored glasses and assume the best about their
organization, in the absence of knowledge.  Just like the pointy-haired boss
in Dilbert, they assume what they don't know about must be easy, what they
haven't verified must be OK, and what they haven't followed up on probably
turned out OK.  When they plan projects, they shrink every task down to the
minimum time they think they can squeeze it to, parallel as many tasks as
could ever be done simultaneously, and predict the lowest cost at every step
of the way.  In the end, they end up with a gigantic project with thousands
of items underestimated.  A single delay or cost overrun on any single item
will destroy the whole project plan, and they always are surprised when it
happens.

I don't run my bank account that way.  I can't spend every single penny at
the beginning of the month and assume that I won't have any unforeseen
expenses.  I don't leave for an appointment at the last possible second and
assume I will make every green traffic light between here and there.  It is
not pessimism, but realism, to predict average-case scenarios instead of
best-case scenarios for everything.  Statistically speaking, the average
scenario is most likely, while the best-case scenario is least likely.
Multiplying all the best-case scenarios together usually give an infinitely
impossible chance that the boss's predictions can all come true and the
project turn out as planned.

P.S.  I also finished David Allen's book _Getting_Things_Done_.  It was as
helpful as you suggested, Max.  It is basic straight-forward organizational
skills for keeping track of a million to-do's, appointments, priorities,
projects, sequences, etc.  My own system is very close to his already, but I
picked up quite a few pointers.  I love checklists and reminders!  I don't
*want* an expert of any kind trying to do everything off the top of their
head by what they can remember.  If they reference a complete
industry-approved standard list, and then show how they meet every point,
then I am much more impressed that simply having a genius-expert say "It
looks alright to me."  Having external checklists, reminders, PDA's,
software, and standard references will make anybody function beyond their
natural human ability.  It is the first step toward transhumanism!

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec  4 05:39:08 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 21:39:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: More on the Glofish: When Fish Fluoresce,
	Can Teenagers Be Far Behind?
In-Reply-To: <20031204042059.35021.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031204053908.93157.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Actually, they only really apply if a draft is in
> effect, something
> that I don't think is likely even given todays
> situation. 
> 
> However, if one were enacted, a local draft board
> will interview those
> claiming unfitness. Accidents are obviously excused.
> Intentional
> disfigurement is not. Doing so after receiving a
> draft notice only
> makes it easier for them to prosecute you. If you
> are dumb enough to
> tell a draft board you got your genes altered so you
> glowed in the dark
> specifically to make you unfit for service, I'll bet
> they'll draft you
> anyways and the military would stick you in some
> hellhole peeling
> potatos or slopping out latrines for the duration.

Nah.  There are times when you want to be seen, say
if you're going to be drawing fire away from the
enemy...or inspiring terror if the enemy is
uber-luddite.

> As for uploading at an early age, the military would
> probably find good
> military uses for uploaded minds...

"When you wake up, there will be ten of you.  One will
be kept safe here.  The rest will be loaded into drone
aircraft being sent on suicide missions.  When all is
done, the you that survives will be as you are now,
and the enemy will have nine well-placed holes."


From thespike at earthlink.net  Thu Dec  4 06:51:27 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 00:51:27 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] the slope and speed of some changes
References: <000401c3ba25$b616a700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <027201c3ba33$1cd18f20$d5994a43@texas.net>

No big surprises, but:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/03/1070351651543.html

< Electronics price cuts jolt buyers
By Lorna Edwards


If you forked out for a swish new DVD player when they first hit the market
six years ago, you would have paid up to $1400.

These days, you can buy what has become one of the fastest-selling consumer
items in history from about $80.

Falling prices such as this have fuelled an electronics spending spree, with
DVD players and digital cameras topping Christmas shopping lists.

It took nine years for VCR players to make their way into 47 per cent of
Australian homes after their 1978 introduction to this country but the DVD
has reached the same popularity in only six years. [etc] >




From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 07:09:52 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:09:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] the slope and speed of some changes
In-Reply-To: <027201c3ba33$1cd18f20$d5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <001901c3ba35$9d04b3f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Damien Broderick
> Subject: [extropy-chat] the slope and speed of some changes
> 
> 
> No big surprises, but:
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/03/1070351651543.html
> 
> < Electronics price cuts jolt buyers
> By Lorna Edwards...

Is this a way cool time to be living, or what?  {8-]

Of course I am still high from the new record prime,
but even after that wears off, this will *still* be
a way cool time to be alive.  Even poor people can
have rad stuff.  I bought an MP3 player for 70 bucks,
holds about 4 CDs of tunes, sounds great, fits in a
shirt pocket, runs on one aaa battery, hell of a deal.  
You can take out an insert, place it in a USB port on 
the PC and it looks just like another 128 MB drive.  
Remember how big and expensive a 128 was only a few 
years ago?  Kewall!  {8^D  

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 07:23:06 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:23:06 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] slain by one finger
In-Reply-To: <200312031840.hB3IeNn18771@finney.org>
Message-ID: <001b01c3ba37$7687e150$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


Doctors kill men.

There was an article in the Merc about how men live 
shorter than women because they won't go to the doctor.
Well, they won't go to the doctor because they don't 
want a finger up the old kazoo.  Duh!  A most distasteful
sensation is this, it feels like getting raped.  

If all doctors would *promise* not to do that, then
more guys might get yearly checkups, thus saving lives.  
Of course men would still perish from prostate cancer,
but the doctors might notice other symptoms in
time to save more guys.  So doctors kill men.

spike

  



From twodeel at jornada.org  Thu Dec  4 07:26:33 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:26:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] slain by one finger
In-Reply-To: <001b01c3ba37$7687e150$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312032325390.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> There was an article in the Merc about how men live shorter than women
> because they won't go to the doctor. Well, they won't go to the doctor
> because they don't want a finger up the old kazoo.  Duh!  A most
> distasteful sensation is this, it feels like getting raped.

Yes, it's rather unpleasant having a doctor do this.  Men should be 
encouraged to self-examine just like women do for breast cancer.

:)



From twodeel at jornada.org  Thu Dec  4 07:31:14 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:31:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312032220120.-276771@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312031936050.9234-100000@hplx.net>

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003, David Lubkin wrote:

> Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?

>From the discovery that the drug laws, designed to prevent people from
doing what they want in the first place, have frightened doctors into not
prescribing proper pain medication for treatment of chronic pain even when
it is very obviously warranted, for fear of becoming another casualty in
the War on Drugs.

That was what got me started, at least, and motivated me to register as a
Libertarian.  Lately, though, I've drifted away somewhat, because I've
realized that I'm not a complete libertarian like many of the other
libertarians whose articles I read seem to be.  For instance, I have yet
to be convinced that private ownership of roads would be better than our
current system.

Somewhat similar to Larry Niven's whole "Why I Am Not a Libertarian" thing
that he wrote a story about ... what was it ... oh yeah, "Cloak of
Anarchy."  But in any case, I still consider myself to be more libertarian
than anything else.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 07:39:14 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:39:14 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
In-Reply-To: <200312031840.hB3IeNn18771@finney.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3ba39$b75acfb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


King Heiron asked Archimedes if he could determine if 
his new crown were pure gold.  While bathing, he realized
that the water he displaced would have the same mass as 
his body; therefore, he could measure the water displaced 
by the crown against that displaced by an equal amount 
of gold, determined that the king had indeed been 
defrauded by his jeweler, streaked, shouting eureka! 
and you know the story.

But it occurred to me that a number of small, nearly invisible
air bubbles may have adhered to the irregular surfaces of
the crown, plus it likely had greater surface area than the 
pure lump of gold, thus making the crown displace more water
than it would otherwise.  Archimedes might have been
responsible for getting a possibly honest man executed.

Akerue!

spike



From scerir at libero.it  Thu Dec  4 09:25:36 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:25:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <20031201140907.49595.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com><184DD522-240A-11D8-9B19-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
	<01b801c3b823$ce7276c0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <001801c3ba48$9a2b5a90$84bf1b97@administxl09yj>

From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" 
I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. 
The first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems 
to be stalled. 

-----------

"And despite putting in billions and billions and billions of dollars, 
the net return to owners from being in the entire airline industry, 
if you owned it all, and if you put up all this money, is less than 
zero. If there had been a capitalist down there [at Kitty Hawk the day 
the Wright brothers made their first flight] the guy should have shot 
down Wilbur! I mean . [audience laughter]. You know. one small step 
for mankind, and one huge step backwards for capitalism!"
- Warren Buffett 
http://www.geocities.com/peopleplanes/Carrier/WB.html 

What's wrong with this?
For sure the expression 
"one small step for mankind" :-)
s.  




From dirk at neopax.com  Thu Dec  4 09:29:09 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:29:09 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312031936050.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <000501c3ba49$12597f60$2bb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 7:31 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor


> On Wed, 03 Dec 2003, David Lubkin wrote:
>
> > Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?
>
> >From the discovery that the drug laws, designed to prevent people from
> doing what they want in the first place, have frightened doctors into not
> prescribing proper pain medication for treatment of chronic pain even when
> it is very obviously warranted, for fear of becoming another casualty in
> the War on Drugs.
>
> That was what got me started, at least, and motivated me to register as a
> Libertarian.  Lately, though, I've drifted away somewhat, because I've
> realized that I'm not a complete libertarian like many of the other
> libertarians whose articles I read seem to be.  For instance, I have yet
> to be convinced that private ownership of roads would be better than our
> current system.
>
> Somewhat similar to Larry Niven's whole "Why I Am Not a Libertarian" thing
> that he wrote a story about ... what was it ... oh yeah, "Cloak of
> Anarchy."  But in any case, I still consider myself to be more libertarian
> than anything else.

Ticket to Tranai

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Thu Dec  4 09:41:33 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:41:33 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
References: <00c501c3b9c4$217e4dc0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <005f01c3ba4a$cd8a3940$2bb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:37 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote,
> > I wish I knew what I was doing right that everyone else seems
> > to be doing so wrong.  The problem is that trying to follow
> > my lead doesn't seem to > help people, either - or helps only
> > insofar as they are moved to study tractable interesting subjects.
>
> You're young and naive.  Wait until you are middle-aged, pot-bellied and
> balding, and there is still no singularity or general AI.  How will you
feel
> then?


Well, I'm a bored exception then.
I'm 50, in very good physical condition and still no singularity or AI.
Stiil, I'm an optimist who believes that there will be BIG breakthroughs in
anti-ageing treatments within the next ten yrs.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Thu Dec  4 09:44:09 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:44:09 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
References: <E1ARYqS-0001zc-MI@fetch-bak.runbox.com>
Message-ID: <007a01c3ba4b$2af308f0$2bb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <gpmap at runbox.com>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> I think when the physical problems of old age (including hormonal and
neurochemical changes) are solved, the rest will follow. There is no reason
why you cannot keep a fresh and interested outlook on life while gaining
experience. Many people in their 70s would be happy to do sometimes the same
stupid things they did in their teens. The bad side of aging is a phisical
thing.


I disagree.
I am easily as capable physically now (at 50) as I was at 20.
And certainly a lot stronger.
It's not a physical thing.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Thu Dec  4 09:46:10 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:46:10 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
	<3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <008f01c3ba4b$72dbb220$2bb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Max M" <maxm at mail.tele.dk>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> BillK wrote:
>
> > On the mental side, the 'seen it all before' syndrome is also very real.
> > Computer techies will have seen the 'burn-out' effect on whiz-kids who
> > just can't do it any more. The people who are the big achievers are all
> > 'driven' by their own various demons.
>
>
> Oh yeah, that is so true. I can allready feel it myself at the tender
> age of 38. I have allways been an "extreme" techie. But computers are
> getting more and more boring every day. Solving the same old problems in
> slightly different ways.
>
> On the other side, I find quality in my life increasingly important, and
> there are many examples of people living good lives at a high age.
> People at the age of 50 usually tell that they are living out the best
> part of their life. Free of the stresses of homebuilding and kids.
>
> We can also hope that a exponential growth in technology can make up for
> the "seen it all before" feeling.

The problem though seems to be that exponetial tech is required to maintain
a linear change.

> Or perhaps side-effect-free recreational drugs will make it all moot.

LSD gave me a big boost in my 30s.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  4 12:37:09 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 04:37:09 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] parallel universes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020904200.9234-100000@hplx.net><3FCE9321.48980E79@mindspring.com>
	<015801c3ba0a$3f4f3260$d5994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE30zAfquTT7u000028b7@hotmail.com>

Why not coin an entirely new word like "Lomgakwoos" or maybe
"smearniverses"? I a similar problem recently while referring to the event
where you bite into a sandwich, pizza, or other multi-layered food and a
pickel, pepperoni, or something slides out of the food, but is still between
your teeth and it slops down onto your chin. In my household, this is now
known as slerbeling. I slerbeled a pickel just today!
Come to think of it, maybe "slerbelverse" would suffice.? :-)


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:59 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] parallel universes


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:51 PM
>
> > > It might be handy to have a single word term for an alternate
> > > universe in my writing, rather than always having to use "parallel
> > > universe" or "alternate universe" or "from anooooooother
> > > dimEEEENSSSSSSSion..."
> >
> > How about "stringworlds."
>
> No, because it's inaccurate.
>
> How about `D-branes'? or just Branes?
>
> I know, it causes sniggers from those who think you're saying `brains'.
Um,
> how about `alloworlds'? Too much like `hello'. How about `xenoworlds'?
>
> Damien Broderick
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  4 12:44:44 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 04:44:44 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Neanderthal art?
References: <3FCEAAED.D4916707@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE529jtcEko8P000028b9@hotmail.com>

Hooray! Once again we see they were smarter than we give them credit for!
It's crazy how our perception that they didn't have artistic abilities
relies on the fact that most of their art didn;t survive for tens of
thousands of years. I wonder how many original Dali paintings will be around
in 50,000 years.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com>
To: <Extropy-chat at extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:33 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Neanderthal art?


> < http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3256228.stm >
>
> Last Updated: Tuesday, 2 December, 2003, 12:21 GMT
>
> Neanderthal 'face' found in Loire
> By Jonathan Amos
> BBC News Online science staff
>
> A flint object with a striking likeness to a human face may be one of the
> best examples of art by Neanderthal man ever found, the journal Antiquity
> reports.
>
> The "mask", which is dated to be about 35,000 years old, was recovered on
> the banks of the Loire at La Roche-Cotard.
>
> It is about 10 cm tall and wide and has a bone splinter rammed through a
> hole, making the rock look as if it has eyes.
>
> Commentators say the object shows the Neanderthals were more sophisticated
> than their caveman image suggests.
>
> "It should finally nail the lie that Neanderthals had no art," Paul Bahn,
> the British rock art expert, told BBC News Online. "It is an enormously
> important object."
>
> Nose and cheeks
>
> It is described in Antiquity by Jean-Claude Marquet, curator of the Museum
> of Prehistory of Grand-Pressigny, and Michel Lorblanchet, a director of
> research in the French National Centre of Scientific Research, Roc des
> Monges, at Saint-Sozy.
>
> The mask was found during an excavation of old river sediments in front of
a
> Palaeolithic cave encampment. Tool and bone discoveries suggest
Neanderthals
> used the location to light a fire and prepare food.
>
> Triangular in shape, the object shows clear evidence, the researchers say,
> of having been worked - flakes have been chipped off the block to make it
> more face-like.
>
> The 7.5-cm-long bone has also been wedged in position purposely by flint
> fragments.
>
> Marquet and Lorblanchet tell Antiquity: "We think that this is indeed a
> 'proto-figurine'; that is, a small flint block whose natural shape evokes
a
> crudely triangular human face - or a mask if one notes that it is
primarily
> the upper part of the face that is concerned, like a carnival mask, or,
> rather less clearly, an animal face, perhaps a feline?
>
> "It was not only picked up and brought into the habitation, but was also
> modified in various ways to perfect its resemblance to a face: the
forehead,
> the eyes underlined by the bone splinter, the nose stopped at its
extremity
> by an intentional flake-removal, and the rectified cheeks."
>
> Over and over
>
> The standard view of Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) is that they
> lacked the thought processes capable of producing art - certainly to any
> real level of sophistication produced by modern humans (Homo sapiens).
>
> Clive Gamble, an expert from Southampton University on the early
occupation
> of Europe by human species, says science has been reluctant to see
> Neanderthals as great conceptual thinkers.
>
> "The great problem with all the Neanderthal art is that they are one-offs.
> What is different about the art of modern humans when it appears 35,000
> years ago is that there is repetition - animal sculptures and paintings
done
> over and over again in a recognisable style.
>
> "With Neanderthals, there may have been the odd da Vinci-like genius, but
> their talents died with them."
>
> Bahn, on the other hand, believes the Roche-Cotard mask should set the
> record straight on Neanderthals' artistic capabilities.
>
> "There are now a great many Neanderthal art objects. They have been found
> for decades and always they are dismissed as the exception that proves the
> rule."
>
> "This is not just a fortuitous bone shoved into a hole in a rock. Whether
> the Neanderthal artist saw a rock that looked like a face and modified it,
> or conceived the thing from the start - who knows? Either way it is pretty
> sophisticated."
>
> Abstract thought
>
> Perhaps the oldest example of modern human art generally accepted by the
> scientific community would be the 77,000-year-old engraved ochre pieces
> found in the Blombos Cave in South Africa.
>
> There are claims for even older items, dating back 200,000 years or more,
> that comprise mainly rock objects apparently sculpted to look like the
human
> form.
>
> But many sceptical researchers believe these objects are merely accidents
of
> geological processes, and doubt they have been intentionally modified in
any
> way by a human hand.
>
> However, earlier this year, scientists announced the discovery of the
oldest
> Homo sapiens skulls. These 160,000-year-old fossil bones had been polished
> after death.
>
> This mortuary practice suggests at least these early people were abstract
> thinkers, capable of analysing ideas of life and death.
>
>
> -- 
> "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank
Rice
>
>
> Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
>      Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
> Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
> Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
>       U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
> ------------
> Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
>    TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
> Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From jacques at dtext.com  Thu Dec  4 10:51:30 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 11:51:30 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203221744.05506008@mail.comcast.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203221744.05506008@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <3FCF11B2.1000308@dtext.com>

David Lubkin wrote:
>
> The nevers surprise me, particularly for "Two Century Biological Lifespans."

Apparently what they meant is we would go straight from lifespans 
shorter than two centuries to indefinite lifespans. (Drexler even gives 
1967 for indefinite lifespan.)

Thanks Hal for providing this!

Jacques



From jacques at dtext.com  Thu Dec  4 11:09:30 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:09:30 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
In-Reply-To: <008f01c3ba4b$72dbb220$2bb26bd5@artemis>
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>	<3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>
	<008f01c3ba4b$72dbb220$2bb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <3FCF15EA.8070508@dtext.com>

Dirk Bruere wrote:

> LSD gave me a big boost in my 30s.

Can you say a bit more?

Jacques




From neptune at superlink.net  Thu Dec  4 11:50:08 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 06:50:08 -0500
Subject: POL: Re: [extropy-chat] libertarian fervor
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312031936050.9234-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <003c01c3ba5c$c552c780$0dcd5cd1@neptune>

On Thursday, December 04, 2003 2:31 AM Don Dartfield twodeel at jornada.org
wrote:
> That was what got me started, at least, and
> motivated me to register as a Libertarian.
> Lately, though, I've drifted away somewhat,
> because I've realized that I'm not a complete
> libertarian like many of the other libertarians
> whose articles I read seem to be.  For
> instance, I have yet to be convinced that
> private ownership of roads would be better
> than our current system.

I have yet to be convinced the current system is worth keeping.:)  A
better approach to this, though, might not be the typical rationalistic
one of arguing from first principles.  Instead, look at the work Daniel
Klein has done on private roads and mixed systems.  See his papers at:

http://lsb.scu.edu/~dklein/papers/default.htm

> Somewhat similar to Larry Niven's whole "Why
> I Am Not a Libertarian" thing that he wrote a
> story about ... what was it ... oh yeah, "Cloak of
> Anarchy."  But in any case, I still consider
> myself to be more libertarian than anything else.

"Cloak of Anarchy" was a neat little tale, but there are three problems
with it.  One, not all libertarians are anarchists.  I am both, but many
libertarians are not.  Two, Niven really stacks cards in it.  All the
things that happen when the power goes out -- and I've been in a number
of such outages and not seen anything remotely like that:) -- still
exist under governments now and, no doubt, will still exist under
governments in the future.  (I'm not only talking about unorganized
crime, which will probably exist in any society, but also organized
crime -- some of which is the direct result of government intervention
(drug laws, gambling laws, etc.) and some of which is the government
(taxation, conscription, etc.).)  Three, the actual history of anarchic
societies -- such as those of Ancient Iceland, Medieval England, the Old
West in the US, etc. -- shows something quite different.

No on this list point, one might say that that's all ancient history and
it could never work in today's world.  That's a matter for debate, I
admit.  (My opinion is that terrestrial societies, as long as there's no
large frontier, will continue to be archic ones and that government
intervention will, from here on, oscillate inside the ambit of the
centralized welfare states.  There will be times of reform in the
direction of freedom, but there will also be periods of government
expansion.  If humans or posthumans, however, begin the settle space, I
believe the political, economic, and military conditions will spell the
end of centralized government -- at least on a civilization encompassing
scale as we see it now.  (I mean there will, undoubtedly, be localized
central governments, but the social forces will not allow for anything
much larger than loose confederations above that.))

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From james at lab6.com  Thu Dec  4 11:43:29 2003
From: james at lab6.com (James)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 11:43:29 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Word coinage (was: parallel universes)
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE30zAfquTT7u000028b7@hotmail.com>
References: <015801c3ba0a$3f4f3260$d5994a43@texas.net>
	<Law10-OE30zAfquTT7u000028b7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031204114329.GA1405@pc174.deh.man.ac.uk>

On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 04:37:09AM -0800, Kevin Freels wrote:
> Why not coin an entirely new word like "Lomgakwoos" or maybe
> "smearniverses"? I a similar problem recently while referring to the event
> where you bite into a sandwich, pizza, or other multi-layered food and a
> pickel, pepperoni, or something slides out of the food, but is still between
> your teeth and it slops down onto your chin. In my household, this is now
> known as slerbeling. I slerbeled a pickel just today!
> Come to think of it, maybe "slerbelverse" would suffice.? :-)

Can I recommend /The Meaning of Liff/ by Douglas Adams and John Lloyd?
The premise is:

"In Life, there are many hundreds of common experiences, feelings,
situations and even objects which we all know and recognize, but for
which no words exist. 

On the other hand, the world is littered with thousands of spare words
which spend their time doing nothing but loafing about on signposts
pointing at places. 

Our job, as we see it, is to get these words down off the signposts and
into the mouths of babes and sucklings and so on, where they can start
earning their keep in everyday conversation and make a more positive
contribution to society."

I'm sure there's a synonym of slerbeling in there somewhere.
Particularly appropriate to mailing list culture is

"Sittingbourne (n.)

One of those conversations where both people are waiting for the other
one to shut up so they can get on with their bit"

:)

-- 
James <james at lab6.com> <http://james.lab6.com>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 13:19:56 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 05:19:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <001801c3ba48$9a2b5a90$84bf1b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <20031204131956.58653.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" 
> I've been reflecting lately on communication versus transportation. 
> The first is developing faster than ever, while the former seems 
> to be stalled. 
> 
> -----------
> 
> "And despite putting in billions and billions and billions of
> dollars, 
> the net return to owners from being in the entire airline industry, 
> if you owned it all, and if you put up all this money, is less than 
> zero. If there had been a capitalist down there [at Kitty Hawk the
> day 
> the Wright brothers made their first flight] the guy should have shot
> down Wilbur! I mean . [audience laughter]. You know. one small step 
> for mankind, and one huge step backwards for capitalism!"
> - Warren Buffett 
> http://www.geocities.com/peopleplanes/Carrier/WB.html 
> 
> What's wrong with this?
> For sure the expression 
> "one small step for mankind" 

Well, Warren, like any democrat, is counting net return averaged among
all owners, past and present, and not individual fortunes made.
Investors owning stock when an airline goes bankrupt have the same
amount in losses that those they bought from had in gains if these
original owners invested from the IPO forwards. Actually the losses
would be greater than the gains, since IPOs usually sell for a
significant dollar value and a bankrupt stock is worth pennies on the
dollar.

This does not mean that all that value disappeared. It is often picked
up at bankruptcy auction at bargain prices by new ventures.

Another error Buffet is committing is only counting airline companies
specifically. Any fool who knows anything about the business know that
the people that make the real profits are the aircraft makers and the
companies that actually own the airliners that lease them to the
airlines...

However, plenty of individuals have made fortunes in the airline
business. I happen to have known several such people, one who was
involved in the Boeing/United marriage for many years, cashed out to
help found a major Seattle bank. Another involved in the same venture,
a fellow name of Gleed, his descendants I've known for years.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 13:27:36 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 05:27:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Neanderthal art?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE529jtcEko8P000028b9@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031204132736.96628.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hooray! Once again we see they were smarter than we give them credit
> for!

Have you SEEN the rock doll they are talking about? It has about as
much artistic expression as a stick man. Whoopeedoo. Even if you
continue to think it is artistic (I think you are assuming a degree of
capacity for abstract expressionism mixed with dadaism that even most
of todays humans can't handle), it IS dated only 35,000 years ago, when
neanderthal was very old, was ending its tenure on earth and likely was
making a few desperate stabs at attaining higher reasoning, perhaps
with a little interbreeding help.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From megao at sasktel.net  Thu Dec  4 14:32:19 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 08:32:19 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203221744.05506008@mail.comcast.net>
	<3FCF11B2.1000308@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <3FCF4572.E51831F9@sasktel.net>

Might that be for people born in 1967 who make it to 2007 in good shape that
nutrition  and technology will slow the 40-50 span from 2007-2017 say by 50%; then
the 2017-2027 span will be slowed by say 70% and the 2027-2037 span by
80% yielding a body with the wear and tear of a 50 years @ 70.  By 2037
regenerative technology may reapair or replace the degeneration much more
effectively and say if the efficiency of repair and regeneration increases to 90%
for
30 years to 2067 then you have a 60 year old body with 100 chronological years.
At 2067 If technology can replace and regenerate 100% then chronological age
no longer matters.  So 1967 as a start of the AGELESS GENERATION may not be so far
off?

Morris

JDP wrote:

> David Lubkin wrote:
> >
> > The nevers surprise me, particularly for "Two Century Biological Lifespans."
>
> Apparently what they meant is we would go straight from lifespans
> shorter than two centuries to indefinite lifespans. (Drexler even gives
> 1967 for indefinite lifespan.)
>
> Thanks Hal for providing this!
>
> Jacques
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  4 15:21:53 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:21:53 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Neanderthal art?
Message-ID: <LAW9-F13hkeTxtfkdpc00001755@hotmail.com>

>From: "Kevin Freels" <kevinfreels at hotmail.com>
>Hooray! Once again we see they were smarter than we give them credit for!
>It's crazy how our perception that they didn't have artistic abilities
>relies on the fact that most of their art didn;t survive for tens of
>thousands of years. I wonder how many original Dali paintings will be 
>around
>in 50,000 years.

No originals, but there will be 75 billion of his posters that survive from 
excavated college dorms.

BAL

_________________________________________________________________
Take advantage of our best MSN Dial-up offer of the year ? six months 
@$9.95/month. Sign up now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Dec  4 15:18:04 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:18:04 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
Message-ID: <Law9-F44WnCRd3qix8x0000b5b0@hotmail.com>

Surface area should not affect water displacement. If both the crown and the 
lump were pure gold, it wouldn't matter the shape. I think it's more a 
matter of density and mass or something. Surface area comes into affect when 
dissolving solids into liquids but this wouldn't happen.

As for the air bubbles, I hope that Archimedes presented the king with some 
sort of margin of error (after he calmed down of course).

BAL

>From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
>Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:39:14 -0800
>
>
>King Heiron asked Archimedes if he could determine if
>his new crown were pure gold.  While bathing, he realized
>that the water he displaced would have the same mass as
>his body; therefore, he could measure the water displaced
>by the crown against that displaced by an equal amount
>of gold, determined that the king had indeed been
>defrauded by his jeweler, streaked, shouting eureka!
>and you know the story.
>
>But it occurred to me that a number of small, nearly invisible
>air bubbles may have adhered to the irregular surfaces of
>the crown, plus it likely had greater surface area than the
>pure lump of gold, thus making the crown displace more water
>than it would otherwise.  Archimedes might have been
>responsible for getting a possibly honest man executed.
>
>Akerue!
>
>spike
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t worry if your Inbox will max out while you are enjoying the holidays.  
Get MSN Extra Storage!  http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es



From natashavita at earthlink.net  Thu Dec  4 15:30:55 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:30:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Neanderthal art?
Message-ID: <54360-220031244153055597@M2W048.mail2web.com>


-----------------
From: Brian Lee brian

>From: "Kevin Freels" <kevinfreels at hotmail.com>
>Hooray! Once again we see they were smarter than we give them credit for!
>It's crazy how our perception that they didn't have artistic abilities
>relies on the fact that most of their art didn;t survive for tens of
>thousands of years. I wonder how many original Dali paintings will be 
>around
>in 50,000 years.

>No originals, but there will be 75 billion of his posters that survive
>from excavated college dorms.

The graffite paintings on the bathroom walls may last longer -  Digitized
prints have a life-span that degenerated before 50,000 years.  Same for
photographic copies.  Unless the Dalii prints are preserved in air-tight
frames and mountings, the Neanderthal may still outlive them.

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Dec  4 16:01:46 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 11:01:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
Message-ID: <3FCF5A6A.9070809@pobox.com>

http://www.nebraskaatheists.org/article1.htm

Some samples:

Article 6 Section 8 of North Carolina's State Constitution
"Disqualifications of office. The following persons shall be disqualified 
for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God."

Article 4 Section 2 of South Carolina's State Constitution
"No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor who denies the 
existence of the Supreme Being; ..."

I checked and yes, this is accurate.

The states whose constitutions discriminate against atheists are 
Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 
Tennessee, and Texas.  Maryland gets bonus points for apparently requiring 
belief in an afterlife, hell, and a male God.

I think it's time for another federal Constitutional amendment.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence




From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Thu Dec  4 16:14:48 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:14:48 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age : libertarian fervor
In-Reply-To: <20031204022007.35427.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000801c3b9ff$7c3a4b20$0200a8c0@etheric>
	<20031204022007.35427.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <n9nusvksr852ck8d7d1952hscs39hjnjfe@4ax.com>

On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:20:06 -0800 (PST), Lorrey wrote

>
>--- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
>> "Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?"

>e) being treated as a threat to national security by one of the major
>political parties and its last presidential administration...

Do tell?



>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



-------------



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 16:29:57 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 08:29:57 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
In-Reply-To: <Law9-F44WnCRd3qix8x0000b5b0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c3ba83$db240980$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

The reason I mentioned surface area is that the bubbles
would stick on the surfaces of the gold.  A crown has
more surface than a lump of pure gold, so it has more
places for the bubbles to stick.  spike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Lee
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 7:18 AM
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] akerue
> 
> 
> Surface area should not affect water displacement. If both 
> the crown and the 
> lump were pure gold, it wouldn't matter the shape. I think 
> it's more a 
> matter of density and mass or something. Surface area comes 
> into affect when 
> dissolving solids into liquids but this wouldn't happen.
> 
> As for the air bubbles, I hope that Archimedes presented the 
> king with some 
> sort of margin of error (after he calmed down of course).
> 
> BAL
> 
> >From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
> >To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
> >Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:39:14 -0800
> >
> >
> >King Heiron asked Archimedes if he could determine if
> >his new crown were pure gold.  While bathing, he realized
> >that the water he displaced would have the same mass as
> >his body; therefore, he could measure the water displaced
> >by the crown against that displaced by an equal amount
> >of gold, determined that the king had indeed been
> >defrauded by his jeweler, streaked, shouting eureka!
> >and you know the story.
> >
> >But it occurred to me that a number of small, nearly invisible
> >air bubbles may have adhered to the irregular surfaces of
> >the crown, plus it likely had greater surface area than the
> >pure lump of gold, thus making the crown displace more water
> >than it would otherwise.  Archimedes might have been
> >responsible for getting a possibly honest man executed.
> >
> >Akerue!
> >
> >spike
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >extropy-chat mailing list
> >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don't worry if your Inbox will max out while you are enjoying 
> the holidays.  
> Get MSN Extra Storage!  http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec  4 16:42:38 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 08:42:38 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
In-Reply-To: <Law9-F44WnCRd3qix8x0000b5b0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c3ba85$a0a12d40$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> As for the air bubbles, I hope that Archimedes presented the 
> king with some sort of margin of error (after he calmed down of
course).
> 
> BAL

I would hope so Brian.  The measurement of density of a crown
would be extremely tricky with the technology available
at the time.  It wouldn't be a slam dunk even today, if
water displacement methods are used to find volume.  You
would have surface tension affects, possibly allowing the
water level in the tub to be slightly higher than the
drain hole for instance, as can be seen with a reversed
meniscus in an overfilled water glass.  Since the diameter
of the tub would need to be sufficient to fit the crown,
the possible error from surface tension alone would be
enough to swamp the signal from a little bit of silver
mixed with the gold.

I would like someone to loan me a crown to play with, 
so that I might see if I could replicate Archimedes'
measurement.  Anyone have a spare gold crown lying about?

spike







From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 17:23:37 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:23:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age : libertarian fervor
In-Reply-To: <n9nusvksr852ck8d7d1952hscs39hjnjfe@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20031204172337.62087.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- randy <cryofan at mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 18:20:06 -0800 (PST), Lorrey wrote
> 
> >
> >--- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> >> "Would others speak to where their libertarian fervor came from?"
> 
> >e) being treated as a threat to national security by one of the
> major
> >political parties and its last presidential administration...
> 
> Do tell?

Being a gun owner, and one who owned automatic weapons, numerous
pronouncements by leaders of the DNC have stated that people like
myself are domestic terrorists, threats to national security.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec  4 17:43:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:43:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
In-Reply-To: <000b01c3ba83$db240980$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031204174341.1347.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> The reason I mentioned surface area is that the bubbles
> would stick on the surfaces of the gold.  A crown has
> more surface than a lump of pure gold, so it has more
> places for the bubbles to stick.  

But have you actually sunk a crown in water to see what sticks? How
about oil???

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From hal at finney.org  Thu Dec  4 18:04:40 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:04:40 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Brad DeLong on the economics of nanotech
Message-ID: <200312041804.hB4I4eL23677@finney.org>

Slashdot points this morning to an article by Berkeley economist Brad
DeLong on the economic implications of nanotech,
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/002838.html.

DeLong is good writer and seems to be a sharp economist.  He's got
a bloggish site with frequent updates and lots of links to economic
resources.  It's not a bad place to learn some economics from.

In this case, though, I was disappointed by his article.  It starts
off promisingly enough; he identies four questions which can guide an
analysis of the economics impact of any new technology:

 - What commodities--what goods and services--become extraordinarily
   cheap as a result of the technological revolution?

 - What human activities--what jobs and skills--become key bottlenecks,
   and thus become remarkably valuable and well-paid?

 - What risks blindside the society as the technology spreads?

 - What risks do people guard against that turn out not to be risks
   at all?

He then shows an example of how these questions could work by looking at
the early industrial revolution, specifically the impact of automation on
the textile industry:  1. Clothing became amazingly cheap.  2. Engineers
and technicians became increasingly valuable.  3. Increased demand
for cotton extended the institution of slavery another 50 years.  4.
Unfounded fears of inequality prompted the creation of communism as
an ideology.

One point missed by his list is the people who lose out, at least in
the short term; in this case the textile workers.  I think his second
item should be extended to list both winners and losers.

With regard to communism, DeLong makes a point which I will reference
below: "In retrospect, however, we can see that they sought to guard
against a danger that wasn't there: the share of total production paid
to workers has been remarkably constant over the past two centuries--the
predictions of the immiserization of the working class were completely
wrong."

Now we turn to nanotech.  DeLong "speculates" about three phases
of impact: first, improved materials; second, a "biological" wave;
and third, Drexlerian nanotech.  I'm not sure what these last two are,
but it doesn't matter, because he doesn't know, either, so he doesn't
discuss them.  All he looks at is the impact of improved materials.

And even there, his comments are limited to the prediction that increased
durability and "smartness" of materials will halve the size of the
manufacturing work force, and eliminate much of the service sector
dealing with repair and maintenance.

Winners, in his view, will be the programmers and technicians who can
manipulate and "program" the smart materials.  He then goes off on a
tangent about how American society is supposedly under-investing in
education and so we won't have a smart enough labor force to deal with
these new challenges.  He also is concerned that these changes will
increase income inequality as relatively unskilled jobs are replaced by
ones requiring more education.

This is a disappointingly shallow and unsupported analysis.  Just taking
that last point first, the industrial revolution replaced dumb jobs with
smart ones, but as he emphasized, it did not have the income inequality
effects that Marx predicted.  DeLong appears to be forgetting the very
historical lesson that he presented a few paragraphs earlier.

But going to his main predictions, why would better materials inherently
halve the size of the work force?  Wouldn't demand increase for these
materials, since they will have more uses than the ones we have today?
The textile revolution was a change in *how* things are made; many
fewer people could produce the same goods.  But this early pre-nanotech
revolution is a change in *what* things are made.  We don't have self
reproducing factories or home assemblers at this stage.  You're still
going to need a manufacturing work force.

It's possible that increased durability will eventually decrease demand
for goods, because they're not wearing out as quickly.  But I think people
are going to want new goods anyway, because due to continued progress
and innovation, the new goods will be of much higher quality than the
old ones.  The result will be that used and second-hand merchandise will
be widely and cheaply available and still be of good quality.

Overall, I thought DeLong got off to a good start and that his framework
was useful.  But it will take someone with more imagination and a better
understanding of the technology to apply these ideas to the real impact
of nanotech.

Hal


From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Thu Dec  4 18:20:38 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 12:20:38 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Consensus :Expressio unius est exclusioalterius
In-Reply-To: <00a101c3b6b9$323b7bf0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311280748500.15427-100000@server.aeiveos.com><00a201c3b5cc$f477beb0$3bb5ff3e@artemis><000f01c3b5e4$0c2f4020$0200a8c0@etheric><01bc01c3b5e8$a6f96c30$3bb5ff3e@artemis><006801c3b60f$42d8e060$0200a8c0@etheric><028601c3b612$a1527c70$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
	<010601c3b631$4044a880$0200a8c0@etheric>
	<00a101c3b6b9$323b7bf0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
Message-ID: <uupusv8tn9pesisud0kac7d508apnukh2s@4ax.com>

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:41:42 -0000, Dirk wrote
>
>The Consensus:-
>The political party for the new millennium
>http://www.theconsensus.org


I really like your new political party. It aligns fairly well with my
own political beliefs.  However, since there probably only about a
dozen people in the entire world who adhere to these same political
beliefs, I doubt it will take the world by storm, and the chances of
it making any dent here in the USA is of course nil.

But how do you feel about the European welfare states? You wrote:

"From the Right we believe in individual responsibility to balance
individual rights and that less government is best government ? that
governments should regulate, but not act as an employer or wealth
producer. "

This would seem to cast the European welfare states in a less
favorable light?

You also wrote:
"We are nationalists in that we believe that every major cultural
group should have its own homeland and live under laws of its own
choosing and in its own way. Also that the independent nation state is
the last line of defence for the common people against exploitation by
unrestrained Global Capitalism. We are 'inclusive nationalists' in
that we believe that all of our citizens have equal rights and are
equally welcome irrespective of race. So if you are looking for
nationalists who are not racists, sexists or into euphemisms such as
'traditional values', here we are. Our nationalism is a celebration of
our future, not the past."

I completely agree about having homelands and nation as small and as
homogeneous as possible.  This increases the available amount of
Social Capital, which gives more leverage to the citizens over those
entities and persons who have more financial leverage.




-------------



From thespike at earthlink.net  Thu Dec  4 22:15:28 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 16:15:28 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanogen's new patents in nanotech
	andnanomanufacturing
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203122201.06059b40@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <004001c3bab4$21ad7000$f2994a43@texas.net>

This has more detail:

Nanogen Issued Key Nanotechnology Patent

Newly Issued Patent Broadens Proprietary Position in Nanomanufacturing and
Nanotechnology

December 3, 2003; San Diego, CA (PRNewswire-FirstCall) -- Nanogen, Inc.
(Nasdaq:NGEN)
today announced that it has been issued U.S. Patent No. 6,652,808, "Methods
for the Electronic
Assembly and Fabrication of Devices," ("the '808 patent") by the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office.
This patent is the parent of a series of pending patent applications that
significantly broaden
Nanogen's proprietary position in the nanotechnology and nanomanufacturing
areas.  The Company
has now been issued nine patents during 2003, bringing the total number of
patents issued in the
U.S. to 56.

    "One of the challenges in producing new electronic and photonic devices
using nanoscale
components is the integration of these components into viable higher order
devices.  The new
Nanogen patent describes a unique electric field 'pick and place' process
that facilitates the
bringing together or integration of diverse DNA nanocomponents, thereby
helping solve difficult
scaling issues.  Combining the top-down electric field process with the
bottom-up DNA self-assembly
process enables more selective and higher precision incorporation of
nanoscale components
into higher order devices and structures," said Dr. Michael J. Heller,
co-founder of Nanogen,
one of the inventors, and currently a Professor in the Departments of
Bioengineering and
Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of California, San
Diego.

   "The technology described by Nanogen's new patent may provide a
technological foundation
for the effective use of nanocomponents in many diverse applications," said
Howard Birndorf,
Nanogen chairman and CEO.  "As we continue to increase and broaden our
intellectual property
portfolio, we intend to realize value from our nanotechnology patents
through licensing or partnering
opportunities.  Congress' recent commitment to nanotechnology research and
development
underscores the potential our technologies may have for impacting several
industries, including medicine."

    The new nanotechnology patent relates to a nanofabrication technology
that combines an electric
field assisted manufacturing platform and programmable self-assembling
nanostructures (for example,
DNA building blocks) for the fabrication of a wide range of unique
higher-order nano and microscale
devices, structures, and materials.  The nanofabrication platform and
process would be used for:
(1) producing new nanoscale electronic and photonic devices and structures,
including high-density
2D and 3D data storage materials, 2D and 3D photonic crystal structures,
hybrid electronic/photonic
devices such as large area light emitting flat panel arrays and displays,
and for the fabrication of highly
integrated medical diagnostic and biosensor devices;
(2) organization, assembly and interconnection of nanostructures and
submicron components onto
silicon wafers and other materials;
(3) integration of nanostructures within preformed microelectronic and
optoelectronic structures;
(4) production of precision modified nanoparticles (for example, photonic
crystals, nanospheres and
quantum dots) which can then more efficiently self-assemble into 2D and 3D
structures and materials
(photonic band gap structures, nanocomposite materials and so forth); and
(5) fabrication of selectively
addressable DNA nanoarray substrates and materials.

    The patent represents a unique nanofabrication technology which combines
the best aspects of
top-down microfabrication   processes with bottom-up biological type
self-assembly processes for
producing novel nanodevices and nanostructures.  The process is highly
parallel and has an inherent
hierarchical logic allowing one to control the organization, assembly and
communication of components
from the molecular and nanoscale into macroscale devices and structures.

    The '808 patent is jointly owned by Nanotronics, Inc., a wholly owned
subsidiary of Nanogen,
and the Regents of the University of California. Nanogen has exclusively
licensed the interests of the
University of California where there is joint inventorship.  Additionally,
Nanogen disclosed the issuance
over the last several months of three patents relating to electronic
microarray technology.  The three
additional issued patents are U.S. Patent No. 6,582,660 "Control System for
Active Programmable
Electronic Microbiology System," U.S. Patent No. 6,589,742 "Multiplex
Amplification and Separation
of Nucleic Acid Sequences on a Bioelectronic Microchip Using Asymmetric
Structures," and U.S.
Patent No. 6,638,482 "Reconfigurable Detection and Analysis Apparatus and
Method."

For additional
information please visit Nanogen's website at www.nanogen.com.


SOURCE  Nanogen, Inc.
CO:  Nanogen, Inc.
ST:  California
SU:  PDT
Web site:  http://www.nanogen.com
http://www.prnewswire.com
12/03/2003 08:01 EST




From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Thu Dec  4 23:47:22 2003
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 15:47:22 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl News~
Message-ID: <013101c3bac0$f9b40e80$3f80e40c@NANOGIRL>

The Nanogirl News
December 4, 2003

President Bush Signs Nanotechnology Research and Development Act. Today
(Dec.3) at the White House, the President signed into law the 21st Century
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, which authorizes funding for
nanotechnology research and development (R&D) over four years, starting in
FY 2005. This legislation puts into law programs and activities supported by
the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), one of the President's highest
multi-agency R&D priorities. (THE WHITEHOUSE 12/3/03)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031203-7.html
-Here is the Presidents statement on this action (The White House 12/03):
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031203-12.html
-Also see: Signed, Sealed, Delivered: Nano is President's Prefix of the day.
Here you can download the PDF file of the 21st Century Nanotechnology
Research and Development Act. (12/3/03 SmallTimes)
http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=7035

(News related to the above Act.) The government says "no" to federally
funded nanobots... Perhaps most interesting, though, is what the bill
apparently does not fund: research into so-called molecular nanotechnology,
a theoretical approach to nanotech that proposes the creation of "molecular
assemblers," which could build complex products from molecular level up. It
is this version of nanotech, promoted by nanotech guru Eric Drexler that
often appears in science fiction, where trillions of tiny, self-replicating
nanorobots can transform matter into just about anything. But most nanotech
researchers-including Nobel laureate Richard Smalley, co-discoverer of
carbon buckeyball molecules-are skeptical of this vision. The bill does
allow a "one-time study to determine the technical feasibility of molecular
self-assembly for the manufacture of materials and devices at the molecular
scale." But self-assembly is not the same thing as self-replication, with
the former being a proven chemical process being developed in nanotech labs.
The original House version of the bill did contain an explicit passage that
unmistakably referred to Drexlerian molecular manufacturing, including use
of the phrase "self-replication." It appears that in substituting the word
"assembly" for "replication," some savvy bill writer performed a bit of
legislative jujitsu to leave Drexler's approach out in the cold. After all,
why investigate the feasibility of self-assembly when it's already been
proved possible? (USNews 12/2/03)
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/nycu/tech/nextnews/nexthome.htm

Experts debate the future of nanotechnology. Two giants in the field of
nanotechnology face off in an exclusive point-counterpoint debate about the
future of this burgeoning field of science in the Dec. 1 issue of Chemical &
Engineering News (available online here:
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html), the weekly
newsmagazine of the American Chemical Society, the world's largest
scientific society. K. Eric Drexler, Ph.D., cofounder of the Foresight
Institute in Palo Alto, Calif., and the person who coined the term
"nanotechnology," and Richard E. Smalley, Ph.D., a professor at Rice
University and winner of the 1996 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, debate a
fundamental question of nanotechnology: Are "molecular assemblers" - devices
capable of positioning atoms and molecules for precisely defined reactions
in almost any environment - physically possible? (Eurekalert 12/2/03)
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-12/acs-dt120203.php

Also see an Analysis of the above exchange written by Chris Phoenix,
Director of Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (CRN).
http://crnano.org/Debate.htm

Nanoguitar Promises New Sensor And Electronics Applications. Six years ago
Cornell University researchers built the world's smallest guitar - about the
size of a red blood cell - to demonstrate the possibility of manufacturing
tiny mechanical devices using techniques originally designed for building
microelectronic circuits. Now, by "playing" a new, streamlined nanoguitar,
Cornell physicists are demonstrating how such devices could substitute for
electronic circuit components to make circuits smaller, cheaper and more
energy-efficient. (SpaceDaily 11/19/03)
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nanotech-03zzk.html

The Architecture of the Very Small (210 KB PDF). For nanostructured solids,
it's not just the chemistry, it's the way they're put together.
(Today's Chemist at Work Nov. 2003)
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/tcaw/12/i11/pdf/1103mcguire.pdf

Nano research eyes ink jet-printed 'sheets' of circuits. NanoProducts Corp.
lab researchers have begun work on nanoscale devices that may lead to the
formation of "plastic" circuit elements and circuit "sheets" fabricated with
ink jet printers within three years. The company's researchers have started
the evolution toward such products by integrating nanoscale materials with
existing micron-sized devices and composites, enhancing their performance
and lowering their cost. (EETimes 11/20/03)
http://www.eet.com/at/n/news/OEG20031120S0017

Nanotech instruments allow first direct observations of RNA 'proofreading'.
When Ralph Waldo Emerson said that nature pardons no mistakes, he wasn't
thinking about RNA polymerase (RNAP) - the versatile enzyme that copies
genes from DNA onto strands of RNA, which then serve as templates for all of
the proteins that make life possible. Emerson's comment notwithstanding,
RNAP makes plenty of mistakes but also proofreads and corrects them before
they have a chance to create abnormal proteins. (Eurekalert 11/25/03)
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-11/su-nia112503.php

"Nano" in firm's name fuels stock's hefty gain. A growing fascination with
nanotechnology seems to be doing wonders for the stock price of Nanometrics.
Too bad the company's only connection with the hot field of molecular-scale
machinery is the first four letters of its name and a stock ticker, NANO.
But that, apparently, is enough to confuse some investors.
(USAToday 12/4/03)
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/techcorporatenews/2003-12-04-nano-
nono_x.htm

DuPont-led Scientists Unveil Key Nanotechnology Discovery with Use of DNA.
Sorting Carbon Nanotubes Provides Significant Step in Advancing
Nano-Electronics Applications. A collaborative group of DuPont-led
scientists have discovered an innovative way to advance electronics
applications through the use of DNA that sorts carbon nanotubes. This
research in the emerging field of nanotechnology appears in the current
issue of the journal Science, which is published by the AAAS - the world's
largest general scientific organization. The research paper is titled "
Structure-Based Carbon Nanotube Sorting by Sequence-Dependent DNA Assembly."
(DuPont 12/2/03)
http://www1.dupont.com/NASApp/dupontglobal/corp/index.jsp?page=/content/US/e
n_US/news/releases/2003/nr12_02_03a.html

Shares of Nanogen Inc. skyrocketed 61 percent after the company received a
"Methods for the Electronic Assembly and Fabrication of Devices" patent from
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the lead patent in a series of pending
applications that will strengthen Nanogen's proprietary position in the
nanotechnology and nanomanufacturing fields, the company said.
(Pharmexec 12/4/03)
http://www.pharmexec.com/pharmexec/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=77969

TNT Weekly: deletion of MNT study from nano bill is "a farce". Issue #13 of
TNT Weekly (which will be archived here), the leading nanotech industry
e-newsletter, covers the recent deletion of a molecular manufacturing study
from the new U.S. nanotech legislation: " --The plot thickens and the
nanotech bill gets sillier--Last week we had some fun with the recent
nanotech bill in the US, especially the plan for a one-time study to
determine the feasibility of making things using molecular self-assembly,
which makes about as much sense as conducting a one-time study into the
feasibility of sharpening a stick with a sharp knife. With a combination of
cynicism and naivet?, we assumed that the bill had got away from those who
actually understood nanotech and ended up in the hands of politicians who
didn't understand the difference between self-assembly and molecular
assemblers, the result being a terminological boo-boo in the part that was
meant to direct figuring out whether Drexlerian-style molecular
nanotechnology (MNT) and molecular manufacturing are actually feasible. We
were not alone. Quite a few people, it seemed, thought that the MNT crowd
had been given the chance to make their case or forever hold their peace.
Even the skeptics seemed to think this was fair dinkum." (Nanodot 12/3/03)
http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/04/0216244

Scientists grow carbon nanofibres straight onto plastic. Researchers from
the University of Cambridge, UK, have deposited carbon nanofibres directly
onto plastic substrates using plasma-enhanced chemical vapour deposition.
The arrays of fibres could have applications as field emitters in displays.
(Nanotechweb 12/4/03) http://www.nanotechweb.org/articles/news/2/12/2/1

Kettering University Researchers Discover New Way to Produce Nanotubes.
Nanotubes have thermal conductivity better than diamonds,
electro-conductivity better than copper, and can withstand very high
temperatures. Researchers at Kettering University have discovered a
different method for producing nanotubes, which is one of the U.S.
government's best-funded technology areas...The Kettering team's procedure
for creating nanotubes is "actually a simpler way of doing it than had
previously been done," said Bahram Roughani, associate professor of Applied
Physics. Established methods include arc discharge, laser ablation or pulsed
laser vaporization (PLV), chemical vapor deposition and gas phase processes,
such as high-pressure carbon monoxide (HiPCO).
(Kettering University 12/4/03)
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_vie
w&newsId=20031204005092&newsLang=en

Major nanotechnology hurdle not so worrisome, thanks to Indiana University
chemistry discovery. According to the classic rules of physics, substances
melt at a lower temperature when their sizes decrease. But scientists at
Indiana University Bloomington have found that at least one substance,
gallium, breaks the rules, remaining stable as a solid at temperatures as
much as 400 degrees Fahrenheit above the element's normal melting point.
Their report will be published in an upcoming issue of Physical Review
Letters. The discovery gives hope to some nanotechnologists and
"nanocomputer" engineers, who have been worried that components will behave
unpredictably at smaller sizes, possibly even melting at room temperature.
(innovations report 12/3/03)
http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/life_sciences/report-23865.ht
ml

'Stuffed' nanotubes could enable high-density storage. Researchers here have
succeeded in loading carbon nanotubes with magnetic materials, an advance
that could enable the use of the tiny cylinders for making extremely
high-density data storage devices. (EETimes 11/25/03)
http://www.eet.com/at/n/news/OEG20031125S0035

Robot Nation? A couple of columns ago, I wrote a piece called Kent Brockman
on Unemployment, describing the impact of robots and automation on
employment. In the comments section, someone posted a link to some things
that the writer and founder of HowStuffWorks Marshall Brain has written.
Brain thinks that we'll be losing jobs wholesale to robots in the very near
future, long before things like nanotechnology have a chance to change the
world: (TCS: Tech Central Station 12/3/03)
http://www.techcentralstation.com/120303B.html

Nanosensor smells the faintest scent. Nanostructures could detect a few
molecules of perfume, says a Japanese researcher working on a cheaper way to
make these structures using ultra thin films. Professor Toyoki Kunitake from
the Japan Science and Technology Agency presented his research at an
Australian nanotechnology conference at the University of Melbourne
yesterday. The structures are very small, "one millionth of one millionth of
a metre",
Kunitake told ABC Science Online. (ABC Science Australia 12/3/03)
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1001890.htm

(Gaming) Codemasters Announce Perimeter. Codemasters today announced that it
has picked up worldwide publishing rights to a groundbreaking new Real-Time
Strategy (RTS), currently in development at 1C for the PC...Through
nanotechnology players can transform units on the battlefield, giving scope
for tactical opportunities to adapt combat units to a particular situation
and keep up with any changes that occur during the battle.
(TotalVideoGames 12/2/03)
http://www.totalvideogames.com/?section=Read%20News&id=4207&gameid=3524&form
at=000007

Nanotechnology center causing controversy. Nanotechnology has emerged as a
controversial issue at UAlbany. A heated meeting by the UAlbany senate on
the hot-button issue took place Monday night. All the controversy centers
around Professor Richard Collier, because he presented a resolution
questioning the development of the School of Nanosciences and
Nanoengineering at the university. (Capital News 9 12/2/03)
http://www.capitalnews9.com/content/headlines/?ArID=49847&SecID=33

(Movie-Review) Nanotechnology is one of the current hot topics in various
fields of science and medicine. Essentially, the idea is that small machines
can be made and programmed to perform a host of different tasks, sight
unseen, with endless possibilities. Recent television shows, including
Andromeda and Jake 2.0 explore some applications of such technology, albeit
by greatly advancing what we can do today. A newly released OVA anime
series, Zaion: I Wish You Were Here 1: Epidemic, explores the idea in
another way, this time as a means to combat an alien virus. (DVD Talk
11/30/03) http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=8501

Technique allows scientists to fine-tune strength and conductivity of
nanotube-laced materials. University of Pennsylvania researchers have
developed a technique to customize nanotube-laced materials. While
notoriously difficult to manipulate, nanotubes can provide added strength or
conductivity to materials, depending on how the nanotubes are oriented. The
Penn engineers have developed a production technique that permits a finer
and more precise dispersion of nanotubes within a material. (Eurekalert
12/2/03) http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/article.php?id=565

(Japan) How safe is nanotechnology? Although nanotechnology is said to have
the potential to drastically alter 21st-century society, there must be a
thorough assessment of the risks nanomaterials could pose to human health
and the ecosystem. In October, expectations surged in the academic world
that the Nobel Prize in Chemistry might be awarded to a Japanese researcher
for the fourth consecutive year. Meijo University Prof. Sumio Iijima was
considered the strongest among the Japanese candidates for the prize. This
is because Iijima is known for his 1991 discovery of the carbon nanotube, an
ultrafine carbon material measuring several thousandths of a human hair in
diameter. Iijima's discovery sparked nanotechnology studies worldwide.
(The Daily Yomiuri)
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20031128wo71.htm

Intern makes huge impact on nanotechnology. Rob Sobelman thought researching
the technique of creating carbon nanotubes would be boring. He ended up
making a major scientific discovery...For his part, Rob discovered that
heating to 1,000 degrees Celsius during the process of making carbon
nanotubes not only produced significantly more of them, but it also made
them longer and straighter - a major benefit in using the structures, such
as in computers and transistors. (The Advocate 11/27/03)
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/local/state/hc-27121224.apds.m0382.bc-c
t-fea--nov27,0,7857307.story?coll=hc-headlines-local-wire

Seasons greetings,

Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Tech-Aid Advisor http://www.tech-aid.info/t/all-about.html
nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."





From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Fri Dec  5 01:01:51 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:31:51 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217BBFE12C@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>

The difference in water displacement would have to have been pretty
significant to prove the point. I doubt that bubbles would have affected it
significantly.

Emlyn

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spike [mailto:spike66 at comcast.net]
> Sent: Friday, 5 December 2003 2:00 AM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] akerue
> 
> 
> The reason I mentioned surface area is that the bubbles
> would stick on the surfaces of the gold.  A crown has
> more surface than a lump of pure gold, so it has more
> places for the bubbles to stick.  spike
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf 
> Of Brian Lee
> > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 7:18 AM
> > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] akerue
> > 
> > 
> > Surface area should not affect water displacement. If both 
> > the crown and the 
> > lump were pure gold, it wouldn't matter the shape. I think 
> > it's more a 
> > matter of density and mass or something. Surface area comes 
> > into affect when 
> > dissolving solids into liquids but this wouldn't happen.
> > 
> > As for the air bubbles, I hope that Archimedes presented the 
> > king with some 
> > sort of margin of error (after he calmed down of course).
> > 
> > BAL
> > 
> > >From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
> > >To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > >Subject: [extropy-chat] akerue
> > >Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 23:39:14 -0800
> > >
> > >
> > >King Heiron asked Archimedes if he could determine if
> > >his new crown were pure gold.  While bathing, he realized
> > >that the water he displaced would have the same mass as
> > >his body; therefore, he could measure the water displaced
> > >by the crown against that displaced by an equal amount
> > >of gold, determined that the king had indeed been
> > >defrauded by his jeweler, streaked, shouting eureka!
> > >and you know the story.
> > >
> > >But it occurred to me that a number of small, nearly invisible
> > >air bubbles may have adhered to the irregular surfaces of
> > >the crown, plus it likely had greater surface area than the
> > >pure lump of gold, thus making the crown displace more water
> > >than it would otherwise.  Archimedes might have been
> > >responsible for getting a possibly honest man executed.
> > >
> > >Akerue!
> > >
> > >spike
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >extropy-chat mailing list
> > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > 
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Don't worry if your Inbox will max out while you are enjoying 
> > the holidays.  
> > Get MSN Extra Storage!  http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec  5 01:16:35 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 17:16:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <3FCF5A6A.9070809@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
wrote:
> Article 6 Section 8 of North Carolina's State
> Constitution
> "Disqualifications of office. The following persons
> shall be disqualified 
> for office: First, any person who shall deny the
> being of Almighty God."
> 
> Article 4 Section 2 of South Carolina's State
> Constitution
> "No person shall be eligible to the office of
> Governor who denies the 
> existence of the Supreme Being; ..."
> 
> I checked and yes, this is accurate.
> 
> The states whose constitutions discriminate against
> atheists are 
> Maryland, Massachusetts, North Carolina,
> Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 
> Tennessee, and Texas.  Maryland gets bonus points
> for apparently requiring 
> belief in an afterlife, hell, and a male God.
> 
> I think it's time for another federal Constitutional
> amendment.

Nope.  This was prohibited even before the First
Amendment came along - see Article VI of the
Constitution:

> no religious Test shall ever be required as a
> Qualification to any Office or public Trust under
> the United States.  

This applies at all levels of government - federal,
state, local, any any other.  See
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=459&invol=116
for an example of state laws promoting religion
getting struck down for that reason.  Or see
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=367&invol=488
for a more direct example of this kind of religious
requirement for public office being disqualified.

Someone needs to argue this in the courts.  See the
current case over the Pledge of Allegiance...which is
so legally open-and-shut, it's being won by a single
person representing himself despite massive
opposition.  There are times when the law is extremely
clear, and this is one of them.


From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec  5 03:14:40 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 21:14:40 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
References: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>

And rightly so! Atheists will never understand the true nature of the world,
as revealed for example at

http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html

Damien Broderick
[I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Fri Dec  5 03:41:51 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:41:51 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
References: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
	<013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312042234310.-447703@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>



Yes, IMHO that's a prank. Why? Check out the store -
http://www.cafeshops.com/objectivemin/
most particularly the "Ruby Matrimony Thong"
http://www.cafeshops.com/objectivemin.3749749

That's just *gotta* be a joke! :)))

Regards,
MB



On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:


> http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html
>
> Damien Broderick
> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Fri Dec  5 03:50:42 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 19:50:42 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
References: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
	<013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <007e01c3bae2$f4eb1c50$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>

> And rightly so! Atheists will never understand the true nature of the world,
> as revealed for example at
> 
> http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html
> 
> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]

It's a very good prank, indeed.  Go to the link just below ("Ministries Online Store").  "Ruby *Matrimony Thong*?"  "Hopsiah the Kanga-Jew Jr. Raglan?" "Mr. Gruff Atheist Witnessing Shirt?" 

http://www.cafeshops.com/objectivemin/

Then go here (now search for "Skeet" (the "Abstinence Czar!!!?))":  

http://objective.jesussave.us/members.html#PALEY

The tipoff is there's no method of contacting them (that I could decipher). 

Olga
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031204/07cf5d07/attachment.html>

From fauxever at sprynet.com  Fri Dec  5 04:05:51 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 20:05:51 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
References: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
	<013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00de01c3bae5$12c6c740$6400a8c0@brainiac>

One so-funny-it's-sad (or is it the other way around?) case was Herb
Silverman's, who was barred from becoming a *notary public* (perhaps the
lowest government position imaginable.  Sheesh...):

http://archive.aclu.org/news/w100396b.html

http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/september95/notary.html

Olga








From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec  5 04:35:51 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:35:51 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
References: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
	<013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
	<007e01c3bae2$f4eb1c50$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <017a01c3bae9$44b402a0$f2994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Olga Bourlin" <fauxever at sprynet.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:50 PM

>It's a very good prank, indeed.  Go to the link just below ("Ministries
Online Store").
http://www.cafeshops.com/objectivemin/

I especially like the

Irreducibly Complex Mousepad
$11.50

Damien Broderick



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec  5 05:17:46 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 00:17:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <007e01c3bae2$f4eb1c50$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <00bb01c3baef$21b92e00$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Damien Broderick wrote,
> http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html
> 
> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]

This site is owned by "NOK NOK" of "IdeaFlood, Inc.", PO Box 11289, Zepher
Cove, NV 89448.  Their contact is noc at ideaflood.com.  Their phone number is
7755887862.  Their FAX number is 7755887823.   

They also send thousands of pornographic spam advertisements around the
world.  

A list of complaints about pornographic spam from <noc at ideaflood.com> can be
found by Googling newsgroups for "noc at ideaflood.com"
<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=noc at ideaflood.com&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en
&btnG=Google+Search>.  

The ideaflood.com site is blocked by most spam blockers.  Information about
the spamming from this site can be found by Googling "ideaflood.com"
<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=ideaflood.com&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr
=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8>.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec  5 06:10:52 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:10:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <003801c3baf6$89d16af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> And rightly so! Atheists will never understand the true 
> nature of the world, as revealed for example at
> 
http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html

Damien Broderick
[I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]


Damien, it isn't a joke.  They are serious, even 
if it is absurd.  Trust me on this one pal, I know 
wherewithal.  spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec  5 06:33:00 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:33:00 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <00bb01c3baef$21b92e00$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <003901c3baf9$a15e22f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

This is an interesting one.  The actual material in 
the website identified by Harvey is quoted and used
by creationists.  Now it appears it is a front for
a pornographic distributor.  This is just too good.  

I guess that would be an excellent place to hide
if one is a pornographer.  Clearly they have done
quite a bit of work to disguise themselves, to the
point of generating material that is actually used
by churchmen.  {8-]  

This is evidently satire, so well written it has 
actually been used by creationists.

spike

http://objective.jesussave.us/members.html#PALEY

Dr. Richard Paley

Dr. Richard Paley comes to our movement through his involvement in
fighting other forms of anti-Christian hatecrimes. He has lead
successful boycotts against Sears and Piggly-Wiggly and has spearheaded
the movement to stop Evolutionism from being forced on the children of
Marian County. His experience in dealing with secularism's desperate
grasp on power has proved invaluable as we move into the next phase of
our campaign. Dr. Paley teaches Divinity and Theobiology at Fellowship
University.




> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Harvey Newstrom
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:18 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in 
> seven states
> 
> 
> Damien Broderick wrote,
> > http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html
> > 
> > [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]
> 
> This site is owned by "NOK NOK" of "IdeaFlood, Inc.", PO Box 
> 11289, Zepher
> Cove, NV 89448.  Their contact is noc at ideaflood.com.  Their 
> phone number is
> 7755887862.  Their FAX number is 7755887823.   
> 
> They also send thousands of pornographic spam advertisements 
> around the
> world.



From neptune at superlink.net  Fri Dec  5 12:15:42 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 07:15:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
Message-ID: <00d801c3bb29$81eaae40$4fcd5cd1@neptune>

I thought this might be relevant to the recent discussion of democracy
on this list.

Dan

'Demokratie. Der Gott, Der Keiner Ist'
by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Translation of the preface to the just-published German edition
[Leipzig: Manuscriptum] of Democracy. The God That Failed.

****

It gives me great satisfaction and confidence to see my most recent book
published in Germany.

That is not quite as obvious as it may appear, for Germany is not a free
country. Not even freedom of speech exists in Germany. Here, whoever
publicly contradicts certain governmentally approved pronouncements will
be jailed, and whoever expresses "politically incorrect" ideas will be
neutralized and silenced.

For the rest of this story, see
http://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe9.html



From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Dec  5 15:22:52 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 16:22:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
References: <20031205011635.25476.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
	<013e01c3bade$182cc880$f2994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031205152252.GY5783@leitl.org>

On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:14:40PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote:
> And rightly so! Atheists will never understand the true nature of the world,
> as revealed for example at
> 
> http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html

Is the site still up? I'm getting only a redirect to http://www.web1000.com/
It's either been pulled, or does geographically-aware redirect.

 
> Damien Broderick
> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]


-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/3e77c251/attachment.bin>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  5 15:34:37 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 07:34:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
In-Reply-To: <00d801c3bb29$81eaae40$4fcd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <20031205153437.71663.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Technotranscendence <neptune at superlink.net> wrote:
> 
> 'Demokratie. Der Gott, Der Keiner Ist'
> by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
> 
> Translation of the preface to the just-published German edition
> [Leipzig: Manuscriptum] of Democracy. The God That Failed.

"and the American mistreatment of German prisoners of war,"

I cannot speak for all POW camps here in the US, but can speak of one,
located in Stark, NH, an area with terrain very similar to southern
Germany. Prisoners spent the war logging, and were able to get to know
local residents well, so much so that after the war there were several
marriages between former prisoners and local girls. Former prisoners
still travel to NH from Germany to visit and have reunions, and a few
have immigrated to live in this area. I know of no similar experiences
by Americans held prisoner by Germans.

I also know that prisoners travelling by train were greeted at
trainstops across the US with lunches and refreshments made by locals,
while Americans held prisoner were starved as cattle by their German
captors, and only treated decently when the Red Cross showed up.

If all of Hans-Herman's writing is as inaccurate as this, then it is no
wonder that those who know the truth have little tolerance for him. He
is nothing but a neo-nazi revisionist, IMHO.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec  5 16:54:49 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:54:49 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eye implant may reverse blindness
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEALCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From BBC News: Scientists have described their first complete design of an
implant that will take the place of light-sensitive cells in the retina of a
damaged eye. Current implants use chips that convert light into electrical
impulses that are fed to the brain via the optic nerve. The new device will
work differently. It will be placed on a damaged retina and convert light
into chemicals that will stimulate nerve cells. The prototype is being
constructed at Stanford University in California. Dr Stacey Bent of Stanford
University calls the device "the holy grail of prostheses". It takes a new
approach to replacing a damaged retina, the layer of cells at the back of
the eye that detect light and send signals to the brain. Instead of using
electrical stimulation from a chip that converts light into electric
impulses, we are using an implant that releases neurotransmitters just as
the retina does naturally.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/139ebe74/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec  5 16:56:09 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:56:09 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Parallel worlds
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEALCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Delaware Online: You could either feel awe-inspired or small, listening
to Max Tegmark's lecture at the University of Delaware on Wednesday
afternoon on the probability of the existence of parallel universes
mimicking or diverging from our own. Tegmark, a professor of physics and
astronomy at the University of Pennsylvania, discussed the multiverse (more
than one "uni-" verse) with a standing-room-only group of more than 50
budding physicists and assorted philosophy, biology and science majors at a
UD Department of Physics and Astronomy lecture. Of course, your reaction
depends upon your point of view.
Tegmark has published many articles about the subject in academic
periodicals and more mainstream magazines, including "Scientific American."
Born in Sweden, he earned a doctorate from the University of California at
Berkeley and post-doctorate degrees in Europe and at Princeton. According to
Tegmark, the most popular and simplest cosmological model today predicts
that there is another you not a short distance from us doing - exactly or
approximately, depending on those unpre- dictable quantum mechanics - what
you're doing now: eating breakfast, riding in a carpool, or wrinkling your
brow and rolling your eyes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/478c2bd3/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec  5 17:30:10 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 18:30:10 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Treating Cancer with Beams of Anti-Matter
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEAMCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Slashdot: According to this Economist article scientists at CERN are
using beams of antimatter to destroy cancer cells. The basic idea is that
you make some anti-protons, whizz them round in a accelerator to get them
moving at a decent rate then fire them at living tissue. They burrow down to
the desired depth, find a friendly proton and do a spot of mutual
anihilation, releasing sufficient energy in the process to kill a cell or
two. The trick is that matter/anti-matter anihilation is a bit like nuclear
fission, it does not work if the particles are moving too fast. The
anti-proton has to be moving slowly enough to get pulled into the orbit of
some atomic nucleus and actually collide. This allows the treatment to be
fine tuned so it only affects the tissues at a very specific depth - unlike
traditional therapies which zap everything in the line of fire.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/ad5fb13b/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  5 17:35:40 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 09:35:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
In-Reply-To: <20031205153437.71663.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031205173540.12627.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> If all of Hans-Herman's writing is as inaccurate as this, then it is
> no wonder that those who know the truth have little tolerance for
him.
> He is nothing but a neo-nazi revisionist, IMHO.

I need to revise this. ;)

Reading a bit more into Hoppes writing, I see that he is espousing
views in a manner that I see all too often amongst my libertarian
colleagues these days: a willingness to adopt historical disinformation
and propaganda produced by radical left and right groups as fact simply
to discard what is seen as the accepted version of history, without any
application of criticism and cross examination of these unorthodox and
in many cases clearly disprovable claims.

Just because history as written by the center may be inaccurate or
self-serving to the powers that be does not mean that claims by
holocaust deniers or neo-nazi sympathyzers, or former ACP members or
Maoists are any more accurate.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From scerir at libero.it  Fri Dec  5 17:45:54 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 18:45:54 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Parallel worlds
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEALCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <003501c3bb57$a20102f0$8cb21b97@administxl09yj>

A. J. Leggett, 2003 Nobel laureate, will give his lecture soon
http://www.nobel.se/physics/laureates/2003/leggett-lecture.html

The text is not on-line, but I suppose it will be more or less like
www.nobel.se/physics/symposia/ncs-2001-1/leggett.pdf
after all he gave this lecture right there, in 2001!

He also wrote, i.e., in 'Foundations of Physics'
29 (3) 445-456, March 1999, "Some Thought-Experiments
Involving Macrosystems as Illustrations of Various
Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics"
Abstract: 'I consider various experiments related to the so-called
"macroscopic quantum coherence" experiment, which are probably at 
present in the class of "thought" experiment but are likely to become 
realistic in the next few decades. I explore the way in which outcomes 
consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics would be 
interpreted by an adherent of, respectively, the Copenhagen, 
statistical, and Bohmian interpretations of the formalism.'

Now the interesting point (Leggett is not a manyworlder, or an
Everettista, but he likes those interpretations, and the original
statistical-ensemble interpretation by Einstein and Ballentine) 
is that he was able to show that also in this macro-world
there are physical, real, superpositional effects. So in that
very readable lecture (link above he was trying to attack the 
so called 'macro-realism' (if I remenber well).

In a certain sense there are physical parallel worlds, but they
all seem to be 'here'. After all this is the meaning of the word
uni-vers! 




From jonkc at att.net  Fri Dec  5 18:37:56 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 13:37:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Crippled Poliovirus To Attack Brain Cancer
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEAMCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <023801c3bb5e$ed07b0d0$30fe4d0c@hal2001>

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031205051621.htm
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/071e79f2/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec  5 19:56:52 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:56:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <20031205152252.GY5783@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <001301c3bb69$ed787300$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

The site is still coming up for me.  This is the link someone
sent me, a serious creationist.  At the time, reading
just this article, I did not recognize the site as a
parody.  I still cannot call it a joke, since it clearly
shows an intent to slay, as opposed to entertain.

http://objective.jesussave.us/slot.html

What this demonstrates is that creationism is its own parody,
like the world wrassling federation.  It is impossible
to lampoon something that resembles its own parody so
closely as to make the two indistinguishable.  {8^D

Clearly the author of this site put some real effort 
into it.

spike



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Eugen Leitl
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 7:23 AM
> To: Damien Broderick; ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in 
> seven states
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:14:40PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote:
> > And rightly so! Atheists will never understand the true 
> nature of the world,
> > as revealed for example at
> > 
> > http://objective.jesussave.us/kangaroo.html
> 
> Is the site still up? I'm getting only a redirect to 
http://www.web1000.com/
It's either been pulled, or does geographically-aware redirect.

 
> Damien Broderick
> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be sure]



From hugh.crowther at esoterica.pt  Fri Dec  5 19:58:14 2003
From: hugh.crowther at esoterica.pt (Hugh Crowther)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 19:58:14 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Crippled Poliovirus To Attack Brain Cancer
In-Reply-To: <023801c3bb5e$ed07b0d0$30fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <BBF693D6.185D%hugh.crowther@esoterica.pt>

Set a thief to catch a thief.

To my mind, General Systems Theory, which rules us all, has a central theme
..... What goes around, comes around, figure that out before it surprises
you.

It?s very elegant, use a rhinovirus which has evolved to get across the
brain/blood barrier and caused possibly the most feared global epidemic, to
get where our drugs haven?t evolved to themselves.

Nice thought for the weekend.......
> 
> From: "John K Clark" <jonkc at att.net>
> Reply-To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 13:37:56 -0500
> To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Crippled Poliovirus To Attack Brain Cancer
> 

> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031205051621.htm
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/d9bd7698/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  5 20:44:40 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:44:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <001301c3bb69$ed787300$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031205204440.77357.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> The site is still coming up for me.  

Me too. In fact, the index page gives this warning:
"October 26, 2003 -- We are hearing reports that foreign visitors to
our site are being redirected to electronic bookstores and people
offering to pay to take surveys. We are not affiliated with these sites
and advise you not to deal with them; they may be front organizations
for cults. Although our technical staff is still looking into this
issue, we strongly suspect that anti-Christian and anti-American
governmental agents outside the U.S. are trying to keep our message
from being heard in their lands. If you have suggested our site to a
foreigner and he says he can't get through to it, warn him that he and
his family are living under the scrutiny of an authoritarian regime and
are in immediate spiritual -- and possibly physical -- danger!"

The only signs I can find that this sight may be a parody are the
banner ads appearing at the bottom of the pages. On the slot.htm page
Spike cited, the banner adverstised "Clowns for Christ". Viewing the
index page, at the foot was an ad for Mimeistry, "Reaching the unsaved
through the power of mime." If only all evangelical christians tried to
reach the unsaved through silence, this world would be a much more
enjoyable place.... ;) I highly recommend that the Mimeistry get as
much support as we can give it....

The most entertaining banner ad was one that seemed to advertise a porn
site. Figuring that I might have happened onto the porn-spam that
Harvey claimed the host was involved in, I clicked through to find what
appared to be the entrance page to a porn site. Clicking further
resulted in a page telling me what a sinner I was for looking for porn
on the internet, etc. etc. etc. citing biblical verse and recommending
I see a counselor about my addiction to internet porn... What fun!



=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec  5 21:05:45 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:05:45 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
References: <001301c3bb69$ed787300$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <011501c3bb73$8ec1bb00$82994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 1:56 PM

> At the time, reading
> just this article, I did not recognize the site as a
> parody.  I still cannot call it a joke, since it clearly
> shows an intent to slay, as opposed to entertain.

Paley, prof of Theobiology, is pretty obvious. But amazingly, I find this:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalIssue.aspx?pid=171&jiid=116

American Behavioral Scientist

Volume 45 Issue 12 - Publication Date: 08/2002

Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Biology, and Other Sciences for Deeper
Understanding

Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Biology, and other Sciences for Deeper
Understanding

The Authors

Introduction
Carole A. Rayburn, PhD, Lee J. Richmond

 Theobiology: Interfacing Theology and Science
Carole A. Rayburn, Lee J. Richmond

Nonreductive Physicalism and Soul: Finding Resonance Between Theology and
Neuroscience
Warren S. Brown, PhD

The Pyramids of Sciences and of Humanities: Implications for the Search of
Religious
Richard L. Gorsuch

Is Faith an Emotion? Faith as a Meaning Making Affective Process: An Example
>From Breast Cancer Patients
Johnny Ramirez-Johnson, Carlos Fayard, PhD, Carlos Garberoglio, Clara M.
Jorge Ramirez

Comments on Symposium: Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Psychology, and
Other Sciences for Deeper Understanding
Ralph W. Hood Jr

Beyond Equality
John S. Nixon

Theobiology and Gendered Spirituality
Sharon Kanis

Shamanism as Neurotheology and Evolutionary Psychology
Michael Winkelman

Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the Spiritual Transcendence Scale in
India: Spirituality as a Universal Aspect of Human Experience
Ralph L. Peidmont, Mark M. Leach, PhD

When Science Meets Religion
Akira Otani

Matter, Divinity, and Number
Gregory N. Derry

==============

How far does this go? It reminds me of a mock university faculty in Biblical
Accountancy, invented by my friend John Bangsund, which probed such ancient
fiscal riddles as: `How Doth It Profit a Man to Gain the Whole World and
Lose his own Soul?'

Damien Broderick





From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  5 22:24:14 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 14:24:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Poliovirus Attacks Cancer 
In-Reply-To: <00d801c3bb29$81eaae40$4fcd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <20031205222414.7633.qmail@web41213.mail.yahoo.com>

Extropes,

While the juggernaut of scientific advance is quite
exciting on its own, the following struck me as
particularly heartening.  Worth a post.

Researchers Use Crippled Poliovirus to Attack Brain
Cancer 

http://dukemednews.org/global/print.php?context=%2Fnews%2Farticle.php&id=7273

Best, Jeff Davis

   "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                           Ray Charles


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  5 22:41:35 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 14:41:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Poliovirus Attacks Cancer 
In-Reply-To: <20031205222414.7633.qmail@web41213.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031205224135.75842.qmail@web41210.mail.yahoo.com>

Whoops! Posted without first checking this morning's
latest posts, where I see John Clark beat me to it.

Never mind.

Best, Jeff Davis

  "And I think to myself, what a wonderful world!"
                        Louie Armstrong

--- Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Extropes,
> 
> While the juggernaut of scientific advance is quite
> exciting on its own, the following struck me as
> particularly heartening.  Worth a post.
> 
> Researchers Use Crippled Poliovirus to Attack Brain
> Cancer 
> 
>
http://dukemednews.org/global/print.php?context=%2Fnews%2Farticle.php&id=7273
> 
> Best, Jeff Davis
> 
>    "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
>                            Ray Charles
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
> http://companion.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec  5 23:04:45 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:04:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <011501c3bb73$8ec1bb00$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>

Hate to break it to you Damien but it's no joke. All the people listed on the site are real faculty members and scientists (although some ARE psychologists *wink*). Some of the people listed are actually fairly distinguished having won awards and such. What I want to know is why the rabid atheism on this list? Some of you go so far as to (as contradictory as it sounds) proselytize your atheism. Why? 
 
In my experience there are generally two types of religious folk. The first are the brainwashed sheep that send off their cash to any huckster with enough charisma to wave a 1000 year old book around in front of them and tell them they are doomed if they don't convert.
 
The second kind are very bright skeptical people that have examined the evidence thoroughly and made an informed decision that the universe is governed by a living rational force or entity. Usually these people are deeply spiritual although they tend to hold no stock in the traditional organized religions as they recognize these to be scams and tools of power on major scale. 
 
Some of the most celebrated geniuses in history have been of the second type: Newton,  Einstein, Bohr, Pascal, etc. This is because when you have a very high IQ you are good at seeing patterns of information. When you see so much pattern in the universe, so little of which can be explained by mere science, it engenders faith that there is SOMETHING out there calling the shots. 
 
The latest generations of cosmologists are trying to save our beloved theories of gravity from damning observations. They explain the inconsistencies in the motions of galaxies by invoking the deus ex machina of dark matter and dark energy which together are supposed to comprise some 95% of the mass of the universe. So if you are willing to BELIEVE that every tangible bit of matter and energy in the the universe that you can see with our best telescopes and detection equipment comprise a mere 5% of what's actually out there, then why can't you admit there might be room in the 95% of the universe you can't see for PROVIDENCE? Or do you prefer the deus ex machina to the DEUS VERITAS?     

Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Spike" 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 1:56 PM

> At the time, reading
> just this article, I did not recognize the site as a
> parody. I still cannot call it a joke, since it clearly
> shows an intent to slay, as opposed to entertain.

Paley, prof of Theobiology, is pretty obvious. But amazingly, I find this:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalIssue.aspx?pid=171&jiid=116

American Behavioral Scientist

Volume 45 Issue 12 - Publication Date: 08/2002

Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Biology, and Other Sciences for Deeper
Understanding

Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Biology, and other Sciences for Deeper
Understanding

The Authors

Introduction
Carole A. Rayburn, PhD, Lee J. Richmond

Theobiology: Interfacing Theology and Science
Carole A. Rayburn, Lee J. Richmond

Nonreductive Physicalism and Soul: Finding Resonance Between Theology and
Neuroscience
Warren S. Brown, PhD

The Pyramids of Sciences and of Humanities: Implications for the Search of
Religious
Richard L. Gorsuch

Is Faith an Emotion? Faith as a Meaning Making Affective Process: An Example
>From Breast Cancer Patients
Johnny Ramirez-Johnson, Carlos Fayard, PhD, Carlos Garberoglio, Clara M.
Jorge Ramirez

Comments on Symposium: Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Psychology, and
Other Sciences for Deeper Understanding
Ralph W. Hood Jr

Beyond Equality
John S. Nixon

Theobiology and Gendered Spirituality
Sharon Kanis

Shamanism as Neurotheology and Evolutionary Psychology
Michael Winkelman

Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the Spiritual Transcendence Scale in
India: Spirituality as a Universal Aspect of Human Experience
Ralph L. Peidmont, Mark M. Leach, PhD

When Science Meets Religion
Akira Otani

Matter, Divinity, and Number
Gregory N. Derry

==============

How far does this go? It reminds me of a mock university faculty in Biblical
Accountancy, invented by my friend John Bangsund, which probed such ancient
fiscal riddles as: `How Doth It Profit a Man to Gain the Whole World and
Lose his own Soul?'

Damien Broderick



_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/e94e714a/attachment.html>

From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec  5 23:34:18 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:34:18 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01c301c3bb88$506a5c80$82994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "The Avantguardian" <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:04 PM

> Hate to break it to you Damien but it's no joke. All the people listed on
the site are real faculty members and scientists (although some ARE
psychologists *wink*).

`Fellowship University'? Google finds it not, not surprisingly.

> Some of the most celebrated geniuses in history have been of the second
type: Newton,  Einstein, Bohr, Pascal, etc.

Bohr deplored religion, saying it was bad for people to believe lies.

Damien Broderick



From jef at jefallbright.net  Fri Dec  5 23:34:59 2003
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:34:59 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00e201c3bb88$6da19c00$1602650a@int.veeco.com>

A very impressive set of pages, but sure looks like a (meta)joke to me.  The
clarity and consistency of the text speaks louder than the words themselves.

Here's a fun excerpt, found at
http://objective.jesussave.us/pastorscorner.html.


"Some have criticized my stance on triclavianism as being counterproductive,
arguing that making a point of doctrinal contention over not making a point
of doctrinal contention over adiaphora is itself non-salvific. However, my
critics are overlooking the dangers of triclavianistic doctrines: allowing
adiaphora to creep into our credenda -- while possibly pushing the
theologoumenic envelope and providing exciting new opportunities for
supererogative works -- will most often serve to muddy the soteriological
foundation of Faith, leading in general to ultramontane excesses and, in
extreme cases, ebaptization (which is unacceptable pastoral malpractice,
however rare it may be.) Doctrinal integrity, and hence salvific
effectiveness, is best served by working to end triclavianism and similar
erroneous, or simply adiaphoric, doctrines."

- Jef



---- Original Message ----
From: The Avantguardian

> Hate to break it to you Damien but it's no joke. All the people
> listed on the site are real faculty members and scientists (although
> some ARE psychologists *wink*). Some of the people listed are
> actually fairly distinguished having won awards and such. What I want
> to know is why the rabid atheism on this list? Some of you go so far
> as to (as contradictory as it sounds) proselytize your atheism. Why?
>
> In my experience there are generally two types of religious folk. The
> first are the brainwashed sheep that send off their cash to any
> huckster with enough charisma to wave a 1000 year old book around in
> front of them and tell them they are doomed if they don't convert.
>
> The second kind are very bright skeptical people that have examined
> the evidence thoroughly and made an informed decision that the
> universe is governed by a living rational force or entity. Usually
> these people are deeply spiritual although they tend to hold no stock
> in the traditional organized religions as they recognize these to be
> scams and tools of power on major scale.
>
> Some of the most celebrated geniuses in history have been of the
> second type: Newton,  Einstein, Bohr, Pascal, etc. This is because
> when you have a very high IQ you are good at seeing patterns of
> information. When you see so much pattern in the universe, so little
> of which can be explained by mere science, it engenders faith that
> there is SOMETHING out there calling the shots.
>
> The latest generations of cosmologists are trying to save our beloved
> theories of gravity from damning observations. They explain the
> inconsistencies in the motions of galaxies by invoking the deus ex
> machina of dark matter and dark energy which together are supposed to
> comprise some 95% of the mass of the universe. So if you are willing
> to BELIEVE that every tangible bit of matter and energy in the the
> universe that you can see with our best telescopes and detection
> equipment comprise a mere 5% of what's actually out there, then why
> can't you admit there might be room in the 95% of the universe you
> can't see for PROVIDENCE? Or do you prefer the deus ex machina to the
> DEUS VERITAS?
>
> Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Spike"
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 1:56 PM
>
>> At the time, reading
>> just this article, I did not recognize the site as a
>> parody. I still cannot call it a joke, since it clearly
>> shows an intent to slay, as opposed to entertain.
>
> Paley, prof of Theobiology, is pretty obvious. But amazingly, I find
> this:
>
> http://www.sagepub.com/journalIssue.aspx?pid=171&jiid=116
>
> American Behavioral Scientist
>
> Volume 45 Issue 12 - Publication Date: 08/2002
>
> Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Biology, and Other Sciences for
> Deeper Understanding
>
> Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Biology, and other Sciences for
> Deeper Understanding
>
> The Authors
>
> Introduction
> Carole A. Rayburn, PhD, Lee J. Richmond
>
> Theobiology: Interfacing Theol! ogy and Science
> Carole A. Rayburn, Lee J. Richmond
>
> Nonreductive Physicalism and Soul: Finding Resonance Between Theology
> and Neuroscience
> Warren S. Brown, PhD
>
> The Pyramids of Sciences and of Humanities: Implications for the
> Search of Religious
> Richard L. Gorsuch
>
> Is Faith an Emotion? Faith as a Meaning Making Affective Process: An
> Example
>> From Breast Cancer Patients
> Johnny Ramirez-Johnson, Carlos Fayard, PhD, Carlos Garberoglio, Clara
> M. Jorge Ramirez
>
> Comments on Symposium: Theobiology: Interfacing Theology, Psychology,
> and Other Sciences for Deeper Understanding
> Ralph W. Hood Jr
>
> Beyond Equality
> John S. Nixon
>
> Theobiology and Gendered Spirituality
> Sharon Kanis
>
> Shamanism as Neurotheology and Evolutionary Psychology
> Michael Winkelman
>
> Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the Spiritual Transcendence Scale
> in India: Spirituality as a Universal Aspect of Human Experience
> Ralph L. Peidmont! , Mark M. Leach, PhD
>
> When Science Meets Religion
> Akira Otani
>
> Matter, Divinity, and Number
> Gregory N. Derry
>
> ==============
>
> How far does this go? It reminds me of a mock university faculty in
> Biblical Accountancy, invented by my friend John Bangsund, which
> probed such ancient fiscal riddles as: `How Doth It Profit a Man to
> Gain the Whole World and Lose his own Soul?'
>
> Damien Broderick
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
> The Avantguardian
>
>
> "He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out
> over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident
> just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his
> mind."
>
>
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec  5 23:54:10 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:54:10 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
	<00e201c3bb88$6da19c00$1602650a@int.veeco.com>
Message-ID: <01ce01c3bb8b$16a3fd00$82994a43@texas.net>

> Here's a fun excerpt, found at
> http://objective.jesussave.us/pastorscorner.html.
>
>
> "Some have criticized my stance on triclavianism as being
counterproductive,
> arguing that making a point of doctrinal contention over not making a
point
> of doctrinal contention over adiaphora is itself non-salvific. However, my
> critics are overlooking the dangers of triclavianistic doctrines: allowing
> adiaphora to creep into our credenda -- while possibly pushing the
> theologoumenic envelope

Do I scent a lapsed Seventh Day Adventist? This must be what Spike detected
in the parody site.

Damien Broderick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 00:34:27 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 16:34:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <01c301c3bb88$506a5c80$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031206003427.88715.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "The Avantguardian" <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:04 PM
> 
> > Hate to break it to you Damien but it's no joke. All the people
> listed on
> the site are real faculty members and scientists (although some ARE
> psychologists *wink*).
> 
> `Fellowship University'? Google finds it not, not surprisingly.
> 
> > Some of the most celebrated geniuses in history have been of the
> second
> type: Newton,  Einstein, Bohr, Pascal, etc.
> 
> Bohr deplored religion, saying it was bad for people to believe lies.

And Einstein said "God does not play dice with the universe." You can
say that makes him wrong twice... but it does not mean he was not
religious. I think Avant meant Bohm, who was also a believer and
advanced such concepts as the holographic mind. Even Sagan intimated a
belief of some sort in his novel Contact, of course I've never thought
much of Sagan in any event.

Now, Newton also believed in astrology, and many men who advanced
paradigm shattering theories were still very much prisoners of the
superstitions of their time in many ways, including Focault and
Descartes, Galileo and da Vinci. Just because they believed something
does not make it so or lend extra credence to such belief if they did
not demonstrate any supporting theory or objective evidence to explain
their belief.

However, Hawking has given some lectures that indicate that any
universe in which singularities exist are entirely capable of
supporting the existence of any deity under or beyond the sun.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From neptune at superlink.net  Sat Dec  6 00:54:00 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:54:00 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
References: <20031205153437.71663.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <018301c3bb93$709f98c0$05ca5cd1@neptune>

On Friday, December 05, 2003 10:34 AM Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com
wrote:
>> 'Demokratie. Der Gott, Der Keiner Ist'
>> by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
>>
>> Translation of the preface to the just-published German edition
>> [Leipzig: Manuscriptum] of Democracy. The God That Failed.
>
> "and the American mistreatment of
> German prisoners of war,"
>
> I cannot speak for all POW camps here
> in the US, but can speak of one, located
> in Stark, NH, an area with terrain very
>similar to southern Germany. Prisoners
> spent the war logging, and were able to
> get to know local residents well, so much
> so that after the war there were several
> marriages between former prisoners
> and local girls. Former prisoners still
> travel to NH from Germany to visit and
> have reunions, and a few have immigrated
> to live in this area. I know of no similar
> experiences by Americans held prisoner
> by Germans.

While I'm unfamiliar with this example, I do know of a few others who
had pretty good POW experiences, including the economist Hans Sennholz.
IIRC, Sennholz was a German fighter pilot and he was captured and
eventually came to see the US as perhaps the greatest country on the
planet because of its freedom.

I'm not so sure what Hoppe is getting at, though his preceding and
following statements in that paragraph ring true to me.

> I also know that prisoners travelling by train
> were greeted at trainstops across the US
> with lunches and refreshments made by
> locals, while Americans held prisoner were
> starved as cattle by their German captors,
> and only treated decently when the Red
> Cross showed up.

I don't think he mentioned anything about the German treatment of Allied
POWs.  I would suspect that Western Allied prisoner were treated much
better than those taken from the Soviets.

> If all of Hans-Herman's writing is as inaccurate
> as this, then it is no wonder that those who
> know the truth have little tolerance for him.

This is the usual tack you've taken with writings you disagree with.
(Not an insult but an observation.  You did the same with the article I
sent on privatizing fire departments.  You dismissed it because of one
thing you disagreed with in the abstract.  If I did likewise, my reading
list would be narrowed to nothing.:)  It might be better to read his
whole book -- which I have -- and see if any of it makes sense to you.
I've read it.  I don't agree with all of what he says and he does strike
me as a cultural conservative though a strict political anarchist and
also as a person who looks for shocking things to say.

> He is nothing but a neo-nazi revisionist, IMHO.

I disagree.  At least from what I've read of his work -- his book on
democracy and many published articles -- he's not pro-Nazi or neo-Nazi.
If anything, he's anti-Nazi.  He is, after all, anarcho-capitalist.
Though he only mentions Naziism one sentence of the English language
version of his book, he does not praise it.  (He blames WW1 and
democratization of Germany for putting the Nazis in power.)

Regards,

Dan
    See "For a Free Frontier: The Case for Space Colonization" at:
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/SpaceCol.html

"People who want to share their religious views with you almost never
want you to share yours with them." -- Dave Barry



From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 00:50:32 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 16:50:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <20031205152252.GY5783@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031206005032.65022.qmail@web41201.mail.yahoo.com>

> On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:14:40PM -0600, Damien
> Broderick wrote:

> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be
> sure]

As distinguished from you *believe" it's a prank?

Greetings and best wishes to you and Barbara this
holiday season.  I hope youse guys are together again.

Jeff

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 01:09:25 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:09:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Whoops! and holiday greetings;
	was Re: Atheists barred from office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <20031205152252.GY5783@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031206010925.70022.qmail@web41209.mail.yahoo.com>

Whoops!  I wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:14:40PM -0600, Damien
> Broderick wrote:

> [I *think* it's a prank, but you can never be
> sure]

As distinguished from you *believe" it's a prank?

Greetings and best wishes to you and Barbara this
holiday season.  I hope youse guys are together again.

Jeff

             -------------------------

The above was not meant for the list.  Forgot to paste
Damien's address into the "To:" line.  

Anyway, let me take this opportunity to wish all of
you on the list the beast this holiday season.  And
may we all enjoy ten thousand* more. 

*YMMV

         ------------------------------

Here's a little something for your amusement, which I
thought hilarious, and found at Ye Olde Rad Blog

http://radified.com/blog/archives/000051.html

"To work at some 'sensitive' industrial facilities,
you often have to take a psych test. I remember one
question on such a test. It asked: "If you could sneak
into a movie theater and knew for certain you wouldn't
get caught, would you do it?" I answered 'No' ..
thinking this was the obvious right answer. Not! 

They didn't like my answer and called me into the
office, where they told me they thought I was lying on
the test, specifically citing this question, saying
that a 'normal' person would answer 'Yes'. I said,
"Oh, I meant to say, 'Yes'". They said, "That's
better," and gave me the job."

Best, Jeff Davis

  Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?
                          
                          Groucho Marx


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec  6 01:20:34 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 12:20:34 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
Message-ID: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

For some reason the exchange between Smalley and Drexler
reminded me of a story I read when studying research methods
in psychology years ago. I found the text book _Research Methods
In Psychology_ (1985. Shaughnessy and Zechmeisser) and include
the story below:

"Can The Null Hypothesis Ever Be Accepted As True?

When we take a strict approach to null hypothesis testing - that the
only acceptable decisions are to reject H0 or to fail to reject H0 -
we are essentially acknowledging the fact that it is impossible to
prove that something does not exist. For example -

if we were to propose that there was a monster in Lake Michigan,
you would be unable to prove to us that this was not so. Putting
ecological conditions aside for the moment, you might drain Lake
Michigan and show that no monster is there. We could simply assert
that the monster dug into the bed of the lake. You might then begin to
dredge the lake and still come up with no monster; we could argue
that our monster is digging faster than you are dredging. Becoming
more desperate, you might fill the lake with explosives, and after
detonating them, find no remains of the monster. We could calmly
propose that our monster is impervious to explosives. So long as
we were free to add characteristics to our monster, there is no test
that you could perform that would convincingly show that the monster
does not exist."

I disagree with those who think that Drexler is ahead on points in the
debate with Smalley unless points are awarded to Drexler because the
debate is now at least happening with more earnestness and engagement
than previously. I think it is encouraging that Smalley is inviting chemists
to challenge the molecular nanotechnology views and nightmares of
Drexler (as he Smalley claims to see them). Let the truth out, and more
to the point as it is politics that matters more than philosophy let more
of the voting public see more of the truth outed.

I suspect that I am not alone in not quite grasping all that Drexler has
said yet and possibly for similar reasons. I simply haven't had (or made)
the time to tease out the facts yet and I don't get impressed with what
MAY BE numerology however eruditely it is expressed - there are plenty
of other things to divert me. I own a hardcopy of Nanosystems and have
read several chapters of it. I'll confess my prejudice that I would be in a
minority
even on this list in having gone that far. I wonder how many others would
see
(accurately or otherwise - and POLITICALLY that DOES NOT MATTER
as the default is no or very little action in either case) Drexlerian
notions of
self replicating nanomachines as like the assertion that there is a monster
in
Lake Michigan in the story above. I wonder if others like me see the switch
from talking about enzymes in a biological paradigm (for which there are
existence proofs but limited ones) to taking about factories a mechanical
paradigm (for which we have no fully self-replicating existence proofs that
I
can see - human - biological intervention is necessary still for factories
to
replicate factories to my knowledge). I can't help wonder, even as I keep
an open mind, and am aware of my emotional bias towards molecular
manufacturing whether something isn't being dropped in the switch between
the two paradigms.

Regards,
Brett







From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 01:33:44 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 17:33:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Intelligence corellations was RE: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from
	office in seven states
In-Reply-To: <003901c3baf9$a15e22f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031206013344.26906.qmail@web41204.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> This is an interesting one.  The actual material in 
> the website identified by Harvey is quoted and used
> by creationists.  Now it appears it is a front for
> a pornographic distributor.  This is just too good. 

I have been wondering for some time now whether there
is any research to correlate 'intelligence' with
'various cultural parameters'.  For example religious
belief, with sub correlations to specific religions
and degrees of fundamentalism.  Or along political
lines: Repub, Dem, Liber, Green, Indep, Commie,
non-voter.  Or say, liberal vs conservative.  Or gay
vs straight.  Not to mention along gender lines.

I've googled in search of this data, but so far no
luck.  Any of y'all got any tips for me?

Clearly, such 'data' is controversial and subject to 
a high bogosity coefficient (cf The Bell Curve). 
Never the less, inquiring minds want to know.

Personally, I want this information for evil purposes.

Bwah, hah hah!
  
Best, Jeff Davis
 
"We call someone insane who does not believe as we do 
          to an outrageous extent."
                     Charles McCabe


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec  6 01:42:38 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 12:42:38 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <022301c3bb9a$3b5e4f60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Avantguardian wrote:

> when you have a very high IQ you are good at seeing patterns
> of information. When you see so much pattern in the universe,
> so little of which can be explained by mere science, it engenders
> faith that there is SOMETHING out there calling the shots. 

I don't think its high IQ that engenders that but low psychology. 

Intellectually little is gained by positing a something out there calling the
shots and then treating that something as a great unknowable black box
outside of and separate to the many other things that intelligent people
also don't know. 

I like Sagan's question on this point best. When considering arguments
of uncaused causes and positioning that the universe had or needed a
creator but that the creator didn't need a creator - "why not save a step"?

I think the low psychology rather than high IQ is the real cause. I think 
(and this is speculation I admit) that humans are simply wired with a very
strong propensity to anthropomorphise. Much of what we do and what
matters to homo saps happens in a social and political context and our
brains have developed to reflect that strong preoccupation. Seeing design
and intention and athropomorphising all over the place is easier and offers
the possibility of appeal when circumstances may otherwise seem hopeless.

I do not think the high IQ types were immune because of that from 
existential angst. Nor do see any reason why their existential angst should
be resolvable any better in the universe than that of the lowest meanest 
brute.

if you are willing to BELIEVE that every tangible bit of matter and 
energy in the the universe that you can see with our best telescopes
and detection equipment comprise a mere 5% of what's actually out
there, then why can't you admit there might be room in the 95% of 
the universe you can't see for PROVIDENCE? 
 
I can admit it but I am not interested in dwelling on it as the time is wasted
and there are better more useful things for good minds to be communicating
about. I see the turning toward religion and providence as quite natural, as 
natural as panic in the face of near certain oblivion and about as helpful.

Regards,
Brett






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031206/264dc79f/attachment.html>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Dec  6 01:53:12 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 20:53:12 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] think this will catch on?
In-Reply-To: <3FCCC059.7080701@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3FCCC059.7080701@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312052028320.-327413@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


Ha. Here is something else I've not seen before. I
particularly enjoyed the description - it reminded me of the
Vespas in Italy during the 1950s. :))) They certainly
traveled in - not packs, but swarms!

http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/009696.php

I sure wish some of these new vehicles would make it into
the US - in a price range I could deal with! ;)

Regards,
MB



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 02:11:15 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 18:11:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <01c301c3bb88$506a5c80$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031206021115.27700.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>



Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "The Avantguardian" 
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 5:04 PM

`Fellowship University'? Google finds it not, not surprisingly.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%2B%22fellowship+university%22&btnG=Google+Search

actually Google found 25,600 references to the phrase "fellowship university"

 

 

> Some of the most celebrated geniuses in history have been of the second
type: Newton, Einstein, Bohr, Pascal, etc.

Bohr deplored religion, saying it was bad for people to believe lies.

Yeah he deplored "organized religion" just as I do. Don't misunderstand me, I am not advocating Christianity, Jehovah's Witness, Judaism, Islam or any other so called "religion". I am talking about a nameless spirtuality. A sense of oneness with the Universe. Besides if he didn't believe in SOMETHING then why did he have the "Yin and Yang" put on his family coat of arms when he was knighted by the queen of England? Yin and Yang are a several thousand year old Taoist religious symbol.



The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/1292b4c1/attachment.html>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Dec  6 02:18:00 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 21:18:00 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <01c301c3bb88$506a5c80$82994a43@texas.net>
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
	<01c301c3bb88$506a5c80$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312052104560.-327413@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


Google doesn't know triclavianism either, except WRT these
pages we're discussing. Or others who are discussing them
too.

Neither does my Webster's dictionary know triclavianism. Nor
my Oxford, which is old.

I'll ask the priest I used to work for, maybe she would
know. :/ I kinda doubt it, though.

Regards,
MB

On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:


>
> `Fellowship University'? Google finds it not, not surprisingly.


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Dec  6 02:57:25 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 18:57:25 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
References: <20031205153437.71663.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <007401c3bba4$adf374b0$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>

> I cannot speak for all POW camps here in the US, but can speak of one,
> located in Stark, NH, an area with terrain very similar to southern
> Germany. Prisoners spent the war logging, and were able to get to know
> local residents well, so much so that after the war there were several
> marriages between former prisoners and local girls. Former prisoners
> still travel to NH from Germany to visit and have reunions, and a few
> have immigrated to live in this area. I know of no similar experiences
> by Americans held prisoner by Germans.

Well, how sweet.  But how sad and ironic that in the United States at that
time we had a segregated army, and black men (particularly) risked their
lives sometimes even looking at "local girls" (... if those girls happened
to be white).

> I also know that prisoners travelling by train were greeted at
> trainstops across the US with lunches and refreshments made by locals ...

How very sweet.  But how sad that black citizens in many parts of the United
States couldn't go to restaurants (hotels, etc.).  And speaking of
refreshments - in veteran civil rights activist James Forman's book "The
Making of Black Revolutionaries," he details how he rather unwittingly found
out that the U.S. Army was more than simply segregated.  He was assigned to
the "white" Army for a time (because of a special duty he was asked to
perform), and in the "white" Army, much to his surprise, he was served ...
real eggs (whereas in the "black" Army he was used to being served powdered
eggs).

Just want to keep certain things in perspective, here ...

An aside on James Forman (who just turned 75, and is living in Washington,
D.C.) was that for a time his mother-in-law was Jessica Mitford (author, and
one of the famous "Mitford" sisters, one of whom - Diana - was a pal of none
other than Adolf Hitler's)
:http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/13/1060588457054.html).  Until
Jessica Mitford died, Forman would visit her whenever he got to Oakland,
California.  During a visit to Seattle in the mid 1990s my husband and I
were having breakfast with Forman, when he mentioned that he had just
visited his ex-mother-in-law.  I asked him "Who was she?  What does she do?"
(just the usual curious-type social questions)  Between mouthfuls of eggs
Forman said, "Jessica Mitford."  And continued eating.  (I had read "The
American Way of Death" as a teenager, and stopped eating my own eggs just
long enough to look around the restaurant and remember this little moment -
I took a "mental snapshot," you know?)

Forman was married to Jessica Mitford's daughter, Constancia Romilly, whose
father was Esmond Romilly, a nephew of Winston Churchill.

Churchill and Adolf Hitler and democracy and civil rights all in one little
uniquely American family.  Interesting, huh? (end of aside)

Olga








From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 03:00:25 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:00:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312052104560.-327413@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <20031206030025.97734.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

How about asking the host or the writer what these terms mean?

A google search turns up:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/a/021969.htm

Which says that triclavianism is the belief that christ was nailed to
the cross with just three nails, which for some reason is considered to
be some sort of heresy....

Urban legends also claims the site is a spoof with an extremely deadpan
sense of humor. What is also interesting is that the "Landover Baptist"
site that the Objective: Ministries site attacks is run by the same
spoofers. The Landover site is just a bit more of an obvious spoof.

Upon further research, apparently "First-century archeological evidence
points to three nails being the norm for crucifixion at the time (New
Bible Dictionary, Tyndale, 1982, page 253-254) although early church
art used four nails, switching to three nails around the 13th century."
http://markbyron.typepad.com/main/2003/06/a_quick_survey_.html

So it seems to be a very Swiftian sort of satire (note the Lilliputians
and their war over which side of the egg to crack open) to make an
issue out of how many nails a guy was nailed to a tree with.

Now, for those who are really atheist, you can further evangelize
atheism by promoting the triclavian debate. The more absurd you make
the christian theological world, the more people will give up on
religion and become atheists.

--- MB <mbb386 at main.nc.us> wrote:
> 
> Google doesn't know triclavianism either, except WRT these
> pages we're discussing. Or others who are discussing them
> too.
> 
> Neither does my Webster's dictionary know triclavianism. Nor
> my Oxford, which is old.
> 
> I'll ask the priest I used to work for, maybe she would
> know. :/ I kinda doubt it, though.
> 
> Regards,
> MB
> 
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> 
> >
> > `Fellowship University'? Google finds it not, not surprisingly.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 03:08:33 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:08:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
In-Reply-To: <007401c3bba4$adf374b0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20031206030833.70379.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote, continuing to prove she
is the queen of moral equivalency:
> 
> How very sweet.  But how sad that black citizens in many parts of the
> United
> States couldn't go to restaurants (hotels, etc.).  And speaking of
> refreshments - in veteran civil rights activist James Forman's book
> "The Making of Black Revolutionaries," he details how he rather
> unwittingly found out that the U.S. Army was more than simply
> segregated.  He was assigned to the "white" Army for a time
> (because of a special duty he was asked to perform), and in
> the "white" Army, much to his surprise, he was served ...
> real eggs (whereas in the "black" Army he was used to being served
> powdered eggs).
> 
> Just want to keep certain things in perspective, here ...

Oh WHAAAAAAAA  While black soldiers had to whine about getting powdered
eggs, Jews in Germany were getting exterminated, so put that
"perspective" in your pipe and smoke it. While blacks were getting
stuck in logistics jobs instead of being sent to the front to die (oh,
the horror), jewish prisoners were being worked to death building V-2
rockets in cave factories. While black soldiers were risking court
martial for refusing to load or unload dangerous munition cargoes from
ships, jews refusing to work were summarily shot. By the time several
dozen black airmen became subjects in the Tuskegee syphyllis
experiments, millions of jews had been exterminated in a national
experiment in racial engineering. Got enough apples for THAT perspective?

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Dec  6 03:28:00 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:28:00 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
References: <20031206030833.70379.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <013701c3bba8$f3be4a20$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> --- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote, continuing to prove she
> is the queen of moral equivalency:

Nope.  I am not in any sense a monarchist.

> > How very sweet.  But how sad that black citizens in many parts of the
> > United> > States couldn't go to restaurants (hotels, etc.).  And
speaking of
> > refreshments - in veteran civil rights activist James Forman's book
> > "The Making of Black Revolutionaries," he details how he rather
> > unwittingly found out that the U.S. Army was more than simply
> > segregated.  He was assigned to the "white" Army for a time
> > (because of a special duty he was asked to perform), and in
> > the "white" Army, much to his surprise, he was served ...
> > real eggs (whereas in the "black" Army he was used to being served
> > powdered eggs).
> >
> > Just want to keep certain things in perspective, here ...
>
> Oh WHAAAAAAAA  While black soldiers had to whine about getting powdered
> eggs, Jews in Germany were getting exterminated, so put that
> "perspective" in your pipe and smoke it. While blacks were getting
> stuck in logistics jobs instead of being sent to the front to die (oh,
> the horror), jewish prisoners were being worked to death building V-2
> rockets in cave factories. While black soldiers were risking court
> martial for refusing to load or unload dangerous munition cargoes from
> ships, jews refusing to work were summarily shot. By the time several
> dozen black airmen became subjects in the Tuskegee syphyllis
> experiments, millions of jews had been exterminated in a national
> experiment in racial engineering. Got enough apples for THAT perspective?

I was comparing the way *German soldiers* were supposedly being treated vs.
the way some *"black" American citizens* (and "black" military personnel)
were being treated here.  But you are talking about how Jews were treated -
in Europe.  Speaking of apples (since you conveniently brought them up) -
why have have sidled over into the "oranges" perspective?  The way Jews were
treated in Europe in no way justified the way American citizens were treated
right here.  That is not to say Jews weren't treated horribly.  They were
(somewhat less horribly in the United States, and about as nighmarish
horribly as can be imagined during the reign of the Nazis in Europe).
That's another subject, and another (added) perspective.

Mike, why do you seem so hostile?  Can't we talk?

Olga




From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Dec  6 03:50:20 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:50:20 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists barred from office in seven states
References: <00bb01c3baef$21b92e00$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <023901c3bbac$125dc4d0$6400a8c0@brainiac>


From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>

> This site is owned by "NOK NOK" of "IdeaFlood, Inc.", PO Box 11289, Zepher
> Cove, NV 89448.  Their contact is noc at ideaflood.com.  Their phone number
is
> 7755887862.  Their FAX number is 7755887823.
>
> They also send thousands of pornographic spam advertisements around the
> world.
>
> A list of complaints about pornographic spam from <noc at ideaflood.com> can
be
> found by Googling newsgroups for "noc at ideaflood.com"
>
<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=noc at ideaflood.com&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en
> &btnG=Google+Search>.
>
> The ideaflood.com site is blocked by most spam blockers.  Information
about
> the spamming from this site can be found by Googling "ideaflood.com"
>
<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=ideaflood.com&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&lr
> =&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8>.

Great detective work, Harvey!  (In other words, this is a booby trap!)

Here is another cousin, "for gifts that say 'I have much better taste than
you, dear.'"

http://www.cafeshops.com/bettybowers

Olga




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 03:57:55 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 19:57:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <022301c3bb9a$3b5e4f60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <20031206035755.32722.qmail@web60504.mail.yahoo.com>



Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote: 
Intellectually little is gained by positing a something out there calling the
shots and then treating that something as a great unknowable black box
outside of and separate to the many other things that intelligent people
also don't know. 
 
True I don't think anything intellectual is gained by the exercise. Although 
I don't think anything is lost either. Moreover, I wouldn't choose to treat it as a black box but rather a field open to exploration. There is an entire discipline called Theosophy which is dedicated to trying to understand the mind of that something.
 
I like Sagan's question on this point best. When considering arguments
of uncaused causes and positioning that the universe had or needed a
creator but that the creator didn't need a creator - "why not save a step"?
 
In my view the universe didn't need a creator because the universe IS the creator. Of course this view gets me in a lot of trouble with christian theologists (although not so much with the jewish ones) because it violates their dogma that heaven and God are separate from and and outside of the universe. Call me a heretic. *shrug* 
 
I think the low psychology rather than high IQ is the real cause. I think 
(and this is speculation I admit) that humans are simply wired with a very
strong propensity to anthropomorphise. Much of what we do and what
matters to homo saps happens in a social and political context and our
brains have developed to reflect that strong preoccupation. Seeing design
and intention and athropomorphising all over the place is easier and offers
the possibility of appeal when circumstances may otherwise seem hopeless.
 
This is actually a very good point. The question of whether the Universe created us in its image, or we interperate the Universe in ours is the Big Question after all. I choose the former out of simple humility. After all, if both life and consiousness are emergent properties of complex states of matter, how could I assume that I am more complex than the infinite Universe in which I am but the merest speck? And if the Universe is more complex than me, it would be sheer hubris on my part to assume that I am either more alive or intelligent than It is.
 
I do not think the high IQ types were immune because of that from 
existential angst. Nor do see any reason why their existential angst should
be resolvable any better in the universe than that of the lowest meanest 
brute.
 
I would posit that the high IQ types would be MORE prone to existensial angst since the lowest meanest brutes are too busy eating, boozing, and breeding to care.
 
 I see the turning toward religion and providence as quite natural, as 
natural as panic in the face of near certain oblivion and about as helpful.
 
I find it actually prevents panic allowing me to face life and death situations with calmness and serenity. That in turn usually allows me to successfully survive those situations (so far at least).
 
Cheers, :)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031205/99508b6a/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 04:00:36 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 20:00:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
In-Reply-To: <013701c3bba8$f3be4a20$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20031206040036.66481.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >
> > Oh WHAAAAAAAA  While black soldiers had to whine about getting
> powdered
> > eggs, Jews in Germany were getting exterminated, so put that
> > "perspective" in your pipe and smoke it. While blacks were getting
> > stuck in logistics jobs instead of being sent to the front to die
> (oh,
> > the horror), jewish prisoners were being worked to death building
> V-2
> > rockets in cave factories. While black soldiers were risking court
> > martial for refusing to load or unload dangerous munition cargoes
> from
> > ships, jews refusing to work were summarily shot. By the time
> several
> > dozen black airmen became subjects in the Tuskegee syphyllis
> > experiments, millions of jews had been exterminated in a national
> > experiment in racial engineering. Got enough apples for THAT
> perspective?
> 
> I was comparing the way *German soldiers* were supposedly being
> treated vs.
> the way some *"black" American citizens* (and "black" military
> personnel)
> were being treated here.  But you are talking about how Jews were
> treated -
> in Europe.  Speaking of apples (since you conveniently brought them
> up) -
> why have have sidled over into the "oranges" perspective?  

I was comparing how one oppressed minority was treated in Germany with
how another was treated in the US. Apples and apples, dear.

> The way Jews were treated in Europe in no way justified the way
> American citizens were treated
> right here.  That is not to say Jews weren't treated horribly.  They
> were
> (somewhat less horribly in the United States, and about as nighmarish
> horribly as can be imagined during the reign of the Nazis in Europe).
> That's another subject, and another (added) perspective.

Dead is a bit more than 'being treated horribly'. Being treated
horribly is having your credit card refused or sitting in the back of
the bus.

> 
> Mike, why do you seem so hostile?  Can't we talk?

Sorry, its late, I've been very tired from nursing mom, and you know
that moral equivilancy arguments always tick me off, and of course part
of my family is jewish. I am reminded of an editorial cartoon I saw
last year depicting two al Qaeda/Taliban hiding in an afghani cave
highin the Hindu Kush, freezing their asses off and reading the al
Qaeda Times with a review of conditions for prisoners in the tropical
paradise of Guantanamo Bay, the reviewer says, "Too Breezy, no pillow
mints." To which the talibanis respond, "Barbarians!!!"

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Dec  6 04:07:36 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:07:36 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligence correlations
In-Reply-To: <20031206013344.26906.qmail@web41204.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <003901c3baf9$a15e22f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031205215941.025c6008@mail.comcast.net>

At 05:33 PM 12/5/2003 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:

>I have been wondering for some time now whether there
>is any research to correlate 'intelligence' with
>'various cultural parameters'.  For example religious
>belief, with sub correlations to specific religions
>and degrees of fundamentalism.  Or along political
>lines: Repub, Dem, Liber, Green, Indep, Commie,
>non-voter.  Or say, liberal vs conservative.  Or gay
>vs straight.  Not to mention along gender lines.
>
>I've googled in search of this data, but so far no
>luck.  Any of y'all got any tips for me?

As you might expect, the higher the intelligence level, the harder it is to 
get a decent sample.

Myers-Briggs personality --

Overall population is (75% E,  25% I), (75% S, 25% N), (55% T, 45% F), (50% 
J, 50% P).

Mensa (1:50 IQ) came out at (27% E, 73% I), (10% S, 90% N), (75% T, 25% F), 
(75% J, 25% P) in a 1993 study.

The Triple Nine Society (1:1000) only had a couple dozen data points in an 
on-line poll.  Almost everyone was NT.  More I than E and slightly more J 
than P.

Triple Nine seems to be largely agnostics who are either libertarian or 
conservative but there are notable exceptions.  I suspect the connection is 
between personality and politics (libertarians usually being NT's) and 
between personality and intelligence, rather than directly between 
intelligence and politics.

By the way, it appears that people in the extropian community are pretty 
similar to Triple Nine in politics, intelligence, and personality.

Intelligence distribution of men vs. women *has* been extensively studied, 
and you should be able to find a lot of links.  You might start with Kevin 
Langdon, "Sex Differences in the Distribution of Mental Ability" ( 
http://www.polymath-systems.com/intel/essayrev/sexdiff.html ).

I'm not aware of any studies of gay vs. straight.  I would be skeptical, 
though, of how representative any gay sample would be of the overall gay 
population.

>Clearly, such 'data' is controversial and subject to
>a high bogosity coefficient (cf The Bell Curve).
>Never the less, inquiring minds want to know.

Have you actually read _The Bell Curve_?  I'm finally getting around to 
it.  The level of documentation and rigor for its assertions is far greater 
than its critics would have you believe.  It seems roughly on par with 
Thomas Sowell's best although not as much fun to read.  I do know that it 
is considered a credible work by people who are both skilled in 
psychometrics and members of high-IQ communities with 3 to 5 S.D. entrance 
requirements (that is, one-in-a-thousand to one-in-a-million).

The bogosity seems to be mostly in criticism by people who haven't actually 
read the book.  Much like what _More Guns, Less Crime_ received, for 
similar reasons.


-- David Lubkin.




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sat Dec  6 04:31:39 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 22:31:39 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com><01c301c3bb88$506a5c80$82994a43@texas.net>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312052104560.-327413@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <02a801c3bbb1$d989d440$82994a43@texas.net>

> `Fellowship University'? Google finds it not, not surprisingly.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%2B%22fellowship+univ
ersity%22&btnG=Google+Search
>
> actually Google found 25,600 references to the phrase "fellowship
university"

Yes, endless references to Chi Alpha Christian Fellowship, University of
Florida, or InterVarsity Christian Fellowship - University of Delaware, or
Vaclav Havel Fellowship, University of Michigan. So? Not what I was talking
about. If you think it is, please post its location, address and url. (I
might be wrong, would like to know if I am.)

Damien Broderick




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sat Dec  6 05:11:52 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 23:11:52 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Whoops! and holiday greetings
References: <20031206010925.70022.qmail@web41209.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <02c701c3bbb7$78b457c0$82994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Davis" <jrd1415 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 7:09 PM

> Whoops!  I wrote:

> Greetings and best wishes to you and Barbara this
> holiday season.  I hope youse guys are together again.

Luckily the INS guys at the LAX gate kindly allowed me in once more, yes,
and this time I hope to be allowed to stay in my San Antonio home with my
Texan missus for a bit longer than previously.

And best wishes to youse-all extropes, too.

Damien Broderick



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 05:37:19 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 21:37:19 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <01ce01c3bb8b$16a3fd00$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <000001c3bbbb$045f0380$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Do I scent a lapsed Seventh Day Adventist? This must be what 
> Spike detected in the parody site.
> 
> Damien Broderick

I see no hints of SDA, but rather many indications
of a Baptist who has become unborn again.

I have sold all my old theology text books so I will wing
this from memory.  I scanned several of the pages of the
site in question, and I must say it is an impressive 
piece of parody, not something that was put together in
two or three evenings.  The author demonstrates familiarity
with christian apologetics in several places.  She knows
the lingo and the lines of reasoning.

One of the clearest clues is found in the following comment:


...The Bible is the infallible and inerrant word of God; everything that
He wanted us to know about Faith can be found in its pages. If He
remains silent on the issue of the number of nails used in the sacrifice
of His only begotten Son, then it is not for us to presume to make it a
point of contention...

The concept is very much a Baptist notion, that the
bible contains everything we *really need to know*
in order to be decent people.  This concept eventually
led to the absurd and reprehensible conclusion that 
slavery is evidently not a sin under all circumstances, 
since the bible mentions it in several places and 
doesn't actually say it is a sin.  In the
short new testament letter to Philemon (a christian 
leader and slave owner), Paul never clearly
spells out "Philemon, thou stupid twit!  
Slavery is a SIN!  Let Onesimus go!"

The Baptists were forced by their own assumption
about biblical ethical completeness to defend slavery,
which they shamelessly did until ninteeeeen niiiinty
fiiiiive, yes my friends, 1995.  Up to that time they 
actually published literature attempting to explain why 
slavery really wasn't a crime against humanity.  They 
weasled it around by saying that one of the Christ twins, 
either Jesus or Hoerkheimer, said "...render unto Caesar
that which is Caesar's..." which means we are morally 
obligated to obey the laws of the land.  Slavery wasn't 
actually illegal and therefore not a sin until Lincoln's 
emancipation proclamation of 1863.

The Baptists eventually acknowledged the utter absurdity
of the position and caved in, which actually introduced
a logical inconsistency into their own philosophical
foundations.  Of course they are not the first group to 
succumb to philosophical pressure.  Recall that poor 
Galileo was in hell by direct order from the pope
until quite recently.

Before we gloat to loudly, we must acknowledge that
even extropian philosophy contains logical tension.
For instance, it seems to me we have never fully come
to grips with the inherent contradictions of libertarianism,
such as the fact that there are three very different
breeds that all fall under the same banner: those that 
arrived at libertarianism from the left, those that arrived
from the right, and Amara, who arrived at libertarianism
from above.  {8-]

spike
 




From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Dec  6 05:41:37 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 21:41:37 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
References: <20031206040036.66481.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <004b01c3bbbb$9def9af0$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>
> --- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:

> > > Oh WHAAAAAAAA  While black soldiers had to whine about getting
> > powdered> > > eggs, Jews in Germany were getting exterminated, so put
that
> > > "perspective" in your pipe and smoke it. While blacks were getting
> > > stuck in logistics jobs instead of being sent to the front to die
> > (oh,> > > the horror), jewish prisoners were being worked to death
building
> > V-2> > > rockets in cave factories. While black soldiers were risking
court
> > > martial for refusing to load or unload dangerous munition cargoes
> > from> > > ships, jews refusing to work were summarily shot. By the time
> > several> > > dozen black airmen became subjects in the Tuskegee
syphyllis
> > > experiments, millions of jews had been exterminated in a national
> > > experiment in racial engineering. Got enough apples for THAT
> > perspective?
> >
> > I was comparing the way *German soldiers* were supposedly being
> > treated vs. > > the way some *"black" American citizens* (and "black"
military
> > personnel) > were being treated here.  But you are talking about how
Jews were
> > treated -> > in Europe.  Speaking of apples (since you conveniently
brought them
> > up) -> > why have have sidled over into the "oranges" perspective?
>
> I was comparing how one oppressed minority was treated in Germany with
> how another was treated in the US. Apples and apples, dear.

Wrong.  *You* started comparing the oppressed in Germany with the oppressed
in America, but (again) that was *not* my point.  The United States was
fighting *against* Germany.  Germany (here's the crucial difference) didn't
pretend to be the "land of the free."  U.S./democracy:  apples.
Germany/fascism:  oranges.

Of course, there was that incident with the ship St Louis, where the U.S.
wouldn't allow Jews fleeing the Nazis to disembark on our shores, but, again
... another interesting aside to the whole sorry saga:
http://www.ushmm.org/stlouis/story/voyage/

> > The way Jews were treated in Europe in no way justified the way
> > American citizens were treated > > right here.  That is not to say Jews
weren't treated horribly.  They > > were > > (somewhat less horribly in the
United States, and about as nighmarish > > horribly as can be imagined
during the reign of the Nazis in Europe).> > That's another subject, and
another (added) perspective.
>
> Dead is a bit more than 'being treated horribly'. Being treated
> horribly is having your credit card refused or sitting in the back of
> the bus.

You mean dead is worse than ...?  No kidding?  Well, thank you for this
eye-opening revelation.  (Who knows?  One of these days we may even hear you
come to the conclusion:  "Better red than dead."  On second thought
........... naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.)

But seriously, you are being naive, simplistic and intellectually dishonest
if you are implying (using your example) that "sitting [at] the back of the
bus" was about as bad as things got for "blacks" in America.  You know
better than that.  You don't score points for your case by soft peddling
cruelly real issues like the history of racism in America.

> > Mike, why do you seem so hostile?  Can't we talk?

> Sorry, it's late, I've been very tired from nursing mom, and you know
> that moral equivilancy arguments always tick me off, and of course part
> of my family is jewish.

Whether your family is part Jewish (or not) should have no bearing on your
empathy for people who are treated unfairly.   Or - am I the one who's
confused? - because I just can't help but think:  *Why* should that matter?

Good night, Sweet Prince ...

Olga





From hal at finney.org  Sat Dec  6 05:43:52 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 21:43:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
Message-ID: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>

Brett Paatsch writes:

> For some reason the exchange between Smalley and Drexler
> reminded me of a story I read when studying research methods
> in psychology years ago. I found the text book _Research Methods
> In Psychology_ (1985. Shaughnessy and Zechmeisser) and include
> the story below:

> "Can The Null Hypothesis Ever Be Accepted As True?

> When we take a strict approach to null hypothesis testing - that the
> only acceptable decisions are to reject H0 or to fail to reject H0 -
> we are essentially acknowledging the fact that it is impossible to
> prove that something does not exist.

I had a similar reaction.  Here is a posting I was working on about the
debate at http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html:

One of the problems I often see in debates about nanotechnology is an
attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the other side.  (This is
actually a widespread problem in debates on all topics, but I think
it is particularly inappropriate with nanotech.)  In the online debate
between Drexler and Smalley, it seems sometimes that the issue is, "Are
the fat-finger and/or sticky-finger problems inherent to all possible
nanotech assembler designs?"  This puts the burden on the critic to show
that there are no possible designs which could evade a particular problem,
a virtually impossible task.

But that's not fair.  The big issue here is obvious: will Drexlerian
nanotech work?  Will we have the kind of revolutionary developments
described in Engines of Creation and Drexler's other books?  Will we
have self-replicating machines which can replace most of the world's
industrial capacity in a manner of, what, a few years? months? days?

These are extraordinary claims, and many experts in physics and chemistry
say that they are not credible.  The burden of proof here is obvious.
It is on the nanotech supporter, not the critic.  He is the one making
amazing predictions.  He is the one who must support his claims by
providing evidence in the form of technological plans and designs
sufficient to make a strong case that this will all be possible.

He can't just wave his hands and say, if one thing doesn't work, we'll
try something else.  He can't point to living things as an existence
proof (because Drexlerian nanotech's revolutionary properties go far
beyond anything possible with biology).  He needs to come up with
enough specifics to make his case.  The burden of proof is on him.
Supporters of Drexlerian nanotech must take on this burden squarely and
refrain from demands that critics prove that the technology is impossible.

Along these lines, let me ask a question.  In his open letter, Drexler
complains about Smalley's statement that assemblers will suffer from
the "fat finger" and "sticky finger" problems.  He writes, "I find this
puzzling because, like enzymes and ribosomes, proposed assemblers neither
have nor need these 'Smalley fingers'."

So I will ask, what "proposed assemblers"?  What is Drexler referring
to, a proposal for an assembler that doesn't have these problems?
My understanding is that we lack any designs for self-replicating
assemblers that would be sufficiently detailed to know that they will
work and not need "fingers".  If Drexler has an assembler proposal that
answers this question, I'd appreciate a pointer to it.

Hal


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 05:50:07 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 21:50:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Whoops! and holiday greetings
In-Reply-To: <02c701c3bbb7$78b457c0$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <000001c3bbbc$ce0cffb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> And best wishes to youse-all extropes, too.
> 
> Damien Broderick

We really must fix the flaw in English that the word 
meaning you is the same for singular and plural.
Various dialects have attempted patches, such as 
y'all, youse, you guys, you-uns, youse-all, youay, 
all yall, youse guys, and even the disrespectful-
sounding "you people."  We need a standard patch. 

Suggestions?

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 06:02:02 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 22:02:02 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ramano's bad luck with rotorcraft
In-Reply-To: <02c701c3bbb7$78b457c0$82994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <000201c3bbbe$784c6a00$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


I propose a massive email campaign to michael Chrichton
to explain to him what *should* to happen to likeable
grinches.  They are supposed to have their heart grow
three sizes then get the strength of ten griches plus 
two, not have a flaming helicopter land upon them like 
Wile E. Coyote.  Good bad-guys aren't supposed to
meet with a hapless demise.  What is the matter with
that guy?

spike



From gpmap at runbox.com  Sat Dec  6 08:28:29 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 09:28:29 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Humans and computers compete in virtual creature game
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEAMCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From the New Scientist: An online game that lets contestants build and race
virtual beasts is being used to pit humans against a variety of artificial
intelligence algorithms. The objective of Sodarace, which started at the end
of November, is to construct a two dimensional creature that can travel over
a certain type of terrain in the shortest possible time. Each creature is
constructed of "mass", muscles", "limbs" and "joints" which control the way
it moves. These creations can then be raced over a piece of terrain.
Creatures can have many limbs or none at all and can walk, wriggle or even
jump along.
It is relatively simple to construct a creature by hand. But the game has
been written so that a creature's key parameters can easily be fed into
another computer program and artificial intelligence (AI) programmers are
being invited to take part. So far, Sodarace has attracted thousands of
contestants from around the world. These include hobbyists and professional
AI researchers. In the first round, a human player was able to outwit
competing computer algorithms to develop the fastest creature.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031206/4c9269af/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Sat Dec  6 08:52:53 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 09:52:53 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] White House is hoping to renew space intrigue
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEAMCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From the International Herald Tribune: The Bush administration is developing
a new strategy for the U.S. space program that would send American
astronauts back to the moon for the first time in more than 30 years,
according to administration and congressional officials who said the plan
also included a manned mission to Mars. A lunar mission - possibly
establishing a permanent base there - is the focus of high-level White House
discussions on how to reinvigorate the space program following the space
shuttle Columbia accident this year, said the officials, who spoke on
condition of anonymity. NASA, along with other agencies, has been providing
the administration with information about these long-term objectives," said
Robert Jacobs, a spokesman for the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
NASA officials met in Washington this week as part of a national space
policy review prompted by the Columbia disaster, which killed all seven
astronauts aboard. While officials stressed that the White House had yet to
sign off on a specific plan, they said President George W. Bush was expected
soon to unveil a strategy that would include manned missions to the moon and
to Mars. The idea is to motivate NASA engineers and researchers by aiming to
explore deeper reaches of space than the current shuttle fleet is capable of
visiting. Vice President Dick Cheney recently met with members of Congress
to discuss the proposals, the officials said.
NASA officials and space specialists increasingly believe that recent
American human space flight activities - particularly the delayed and costly
construction of the International Space Station - do not push the envelope
enough to motivate researchers and engineers or spark the kind of public
fascination with space that was generated by the first missions to the moon.
A challenge to go back to the moon and reinvigorate the space flight program
would be welcomed by the public.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031206/41366813/attachment.html>

From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec  6 12:20:08 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 23:20:08 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Whoops! and holiday greetings
References: <000001c3bbbc$ce0cffb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <039e01c3bbf3$49eb24a0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Spike wrote:
> 
> > And best wishes to youse-all extropes, too.
> > 
> > Damien Broderick
> 
> We really must fix the flaw in English that the word 
> meaning you is the same for singular and plural.
> Various dialects have attempted patches, such as 
> y'all, youse, you guys, you-uns, youse-all, youay, 
> all yall, youse guys, and even the disrespectful-
> sounding "you people."  We need a standard patch. 
> 
> Suggestions?

Use ewes?

Brett Paatsch (surname "patch" in standard 'Australian')



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 15:12:57 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 07:12:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DRUG: Coke/X cause mutations
Message-ID: <20031206151257.46875.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031205/sc_nm/health_cocaine_dna_dc_4

Italian researchers have concluded a three year study with results
showing that use of drugs like cocaine and excstasy cause mutations in
subjects DNA.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 15:57:57 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 07:57:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Whoops! and holiday greetings
In-Reply-To: <039e01c3bbf3$49eb24a0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <20031206155757.47656.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Spike wrote:
> > 
> > > And best wishes to youse-all extropes, too.
> > > 
> > > Damien Broderick
> > 
> > We really must fix the flaw in English that the word 
> > meaning you is the same for singular and plural.
> > Various dialects have attempted patches, such as 
> > y'all, youse, you guys, you-uns, youse-all, youay, 
> > all yall, youse guys, and even the disrespectful-
> > sounding "you people."  We need a standard patch. 
> > 
> > Suggestions?
> 
> Use ewes?

Yoots (also useful in referring to youths in inner city settings).

I'll note that the French have 'tu' for the singular and 'vous' for the
plural (as best I recall). Y'all does seem to be spreading with the
popularity of country music, so it may wind up becoming the default
choice, especially as it is most phonetically efficient. I hear it more
often with the folks in northern new england these days, and yankees
love phonetic efficiency, as evinced by our lack of 'r's.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From neptune at superlink.net  Sat Dec  6 16:15:22 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 11:15:22 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
References: <20031206040036.66481.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
	<004b01c3bbbb$9def9af0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <00be01c3bc14$276f9de0$07ce5cd1@neptune>

On Saturday, December 06, 2003 12:41 AM Olga Bourlin
fauxever at sprynet.com wrote:
> Wrong.  *You* started comparing the oppressed
> in Germany with the oppressed in America, but
> (again) that was *not* my point.  The United
> States was fighting *against* Germany.
> Germany (here's the crucial difference) didn't
> pretend to be the "land of the free."  U.S./
> democracy:  apples. Germany/fascism:  oranges.

While this is correct, one should also remember that the Nazi period was
only 12 years.  Before the Nazis, Jews were a considerable large
minority in Germany, Austria, and many other Central and Eastern
European countries.  (Of course, many Jews did migrate to the West and
to Israel, but, IIRC, a large percentage were killed by the Nazis and
their henchmen -- among other groups they tried to wipe out, such as
White Russians, and Poles.)

> Of course, there was that incident with the ship
> St Louis, where the U.S. wouldn't allow Jews
> fleeing the Nazis to disembark on our shores,
> but, again ... another interesting aside to the
> whole sorry saga:
> http://www.ushmm.org/stlouis/story/voyage/

A shameful episode.

> But seriously, you are being naive, simplistic
> and intellectually dishonest if you are implying
> (using your example) that "sitting [at] the back
> of the bus" was about as bad as things got
> for "blacks" in America.  You know better
> than that.  You don't score points for your
> case by soft peddling cruelly real issues like
> the history of racism in America.

As long as you're alive, you can live to fight or be free another day.
However, many Blacks were lynched.  However, this was nothing like the
mass killings of Jews and other groups by the Nazis and their allies.

> Whether your family is part Jewish (or not) should
> have no bearing on your empathy for people who
> are treated unfairly.   Or - am I the one who's
> confused? - because I just can't help but think:
> *Why* should that matter?

It should NOT matter in the moral or cognitive sense, but it does matter
emotionally.  Humans naturally band together into groups and show more
empathy for those they can identify with.  I'm not saying this is right
or wrong, but it is what happens.

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorks.html

"You will never find anybody who can give you a clear and compelling
reason why we observe daylight savings time." -- Dave Barry



From scerir at libero.it  Sat Dec  6 17:50:45 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 18:50:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Whoops! and holiday greetings
References: <20031206155757.47656.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir>

"Mike Lorrey" 
> I'll note that the French have 'tu' for the singular and 'vous' for the
> plural (as best I recall)

We also use "tu" for the singular,
and "voi" for the plural. But,
during fascism they used "voi" plural, 
instead of "tu", for the singular too,
because it was more robust, solemn. 
Still now you can find somebody saying
"voi", for the singular. For the
same reason "voi", for the singular,
was/is strongly forbidden, among
leftists. But we also use, instead
of "tu" (singular), "lei" or "ella"
(singular) when the situation is formal
(in theory "lei" and "ella" is a third
person, singular) and you want to put
some distance between you and the other.

Less difficult to understand is 
questo = this (close to me)
quello = that (far from me)
codesto = ??? (far from me, close to you)

Sanin
s.

    



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 17:55:29 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 09:55:29 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <001001c3bc22$23044c20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/19/cf.opinionrachel.mills/index.h
tml


Why didnt we think of this before?

spike



From jonkc at att.net  Sat Dec  6 18:17:06 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 13:17:06 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>

"Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>

>  it is impossible to  prove that something does not exist.

That's not quite true; you can prove that the largest prime number does not
exist for example. A perpetual motion machine can not exist either if the
law of conservation of energy is true and to deny that would put one
squarely in the junk science camp. Likewise if it could be shown that for
Drexler's assemblers to work you'd need to move faster than light, violate
the conservation of momentum law,  place things with more precision than
Heisenberg allows, or violate the second law of thermodynamics then it would
be safe to dismiss the entire idea as nonsense; but nobody has come close to
doing that.  I also disagree that life is not a pretty good existence proof
of the idea, it's true Drexler's machines can do more but that's what you'd
expect, all else being equal intelligent design will always beat random
mutation and natural selection. Of course we will not know with absolute
certainty that Drexler was correct until an assembler is actually built, and
that should be about 20 minutes before the singularity.

  John K Clark     jonkc at att.net






From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec  6 18:24:24 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 10:24:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <001001c3bc22$23044c20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031206182424.53474.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/19/cf.opinionrachel.mills/index.h
> tml
> 
> 
> Why didnt we think of this before?

Actually, I think Rachel started the project on the Free State forums.
She's a great gal, and expect more coming.

In June, we will be having the "Porc-Fest", a festival in the Free
State, for Porcupines (FSP members) and prospective members from
elsewhere in the country to visit, get to know NH, attend libertarian
seminars, take bus and car tours of the state, focusing on real estate
and communities of particular note to libertarians planning to move
here, and get to know a lot more fellow members. We will have
entertainment as well, which may include some well known libertarian
entertainers. Recreational opportunities include hiking, fishing,
kayaking, shooting, rock climbing, boating, biking, and much more.
Planning is currently underway, so expect more details in a few months.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Dec  6 19:13:51 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 11:13:51 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Trouble With Democracy
References: <20031206040036.66481.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com><004b01c3bbbb$9def9af0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
	<00be01c3bc14$276f9de0$07ce5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <003201c3bc2d$16929040$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Technotranscendence" <neptune at superlink.net>
> On Saturday, December 06, 2003 12:41 AM Olga Bourlin
> fauxever at sprynet.com wrote:

> > Of course, there was that incident with the ship
> > St Louis, where the U.S. wouldn't allow Jews
> > fleeing the Nazis to disembark on our shores,
> > but, again ... another interesting aside to the
> > whole sorry saga:
> > http://www.ushmm.org/stlouis/story/voyage/
>
> A shameful episode.

But not all that surprising, was it?  Gregory Peck starred in a movie (mid
1940s if memory serves) called "Gentlemen's Agreement" (a Jewish variation
on the "Black Like Me" plot of the late 1950s/early 1960s) where the plot
involved pretending to be Jewish, for the sake of journalistic research.
Ooooh ... and the nasty goings on he discovered,  tsk, tsk, tsk.  That
movie - almost a decade *after* this St Louis incident - was about as
provocative as pabulum, but it was supposed to be groundbreaking for its
time (just as the namby-pamby "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?" was considered
oh-so-controversial in the late 1960s).

> > But seriously, you are being naive, simplistic
> > and intellectually dishonest if you are implying
> > (using your example) that "sitting [at] the back
> > of the bus" was about as bad as things got
> > for "blacks" in America.  You know better
> > than that.  You don't score points for your
> > case by soft peddling cruelly real issues like
> > the history of racism in America.
>
> As long as you're alive, you can live to fight or be free another day.
> However, many Blacks were lynched.

Yes.

 However, this was nothing like the
> mass killings of Jews and other groups by the Nazis and their allies.

We cannot justify slapping kids around in America by saying, "However, this
is nothing like the mass limb amputations by machetes performed on thousands
of children in Sierra Leone ..."

We cannot condone spousal abuse here by saying, "However, this is nothing
like the public floggings of Iranians prescribed by Shari'a (an Islamic law)
..."

We cannot excuse religious intolerance in our country by saying, "However,
this is nothing like the suffering people have undergone under the Taliban
..."

I never intimated that Jews who were caught by the Nazis suffered any more
or less than American "blacks."  Whether they did or not is irrelevant and
immaterial, as I was pointing out the racism in America during and after
WWII for this discussion.  My comment was fostered when the discussion
turned to a comparison about how well some German prisoners during WWII in
America were treated by some of our good-hearted citizens.

Of course, an apples-to-apples comparison could be made insofar as Jews in
America at that time.  Jews, like "blacks" in America, also experienced some
housing discrimination, job discrimination, being barred from "exclusive"
WASP golf club memberships and the like, but at least they could drink out
of "white" drinking fountains, marry other "whites," be "movie stars," and
generally be a part of  whatever was American society at that time (you
know, those years so many white Americans remember nostalgically as "the
good old days").

> > Whether your family is part Jewish (or not) should
> > have no bearing on your empathy for people who
> > are treated unfairly.   Or - am I the one who's
> > confused? - because I just can't help but think:
> > *Why* should that matter?
>
> It should NOT matter in the moral or cognitive sense, but it does matter
> emotionally.  Humans naturally band together into groups and show more
> empathy for those they can identify with.  I'm not saying this is right
> or wrong, but it is what happens.

Another aside:  it seems like if given half a chance, those once
discriminated against can turn out to be the oppressors (look at Israel).

Due to my upbringing (too many countries in so little time), I must have
lost out on the lessons of my tribe.  I can distinguish between people I
personally like and don't like (yet feel a compassion for  humans in general
because, after all, we are doomed to die ...).  I can try to distinguish
between just and unjust laws.  But I've not had any particularly special
feeling about my ancestral "group."  I do have a fondness for Russian
cuisine, but my palate - just as my current ethnic "grouping" - has broken
out of the boundaries of Slavdom (slavedom? - interesting ...).   Vive le
difference, I say.

Olga




From scerir at libero.it  Sat Dec  6 19:44:20 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 20:44:20 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] old toys for N-mas
References: <001001c3bc22$23044c20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000401c3bc31$779b6d40$f0c7fea9@scerir>

Newtonmas is close.
FAO Schwarz, the 'ultimate' toy store
http://www.faoschwarz.com/default.cfm
isn't in good (financial) shape.
Let us turn to everlasting items.

Hero's Fountain

-reality
http://physics.kenyon.edu/EarlyApparatus/Fluids/Heros_Fountain/Heros_Fountai
n.html

-theory
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0310039


The Drinking Bird

-reality
http://www.backstreet.demon.co.uk/oddstuff/drinkingbirds/drinkingbirds.htm

-theory
http://nautilus.fis.uc.pt/personal/mfiolhais/artigosdid/did15.pdf
http://nautilus.fis.uc.pt/personal/mfiolhais/artigosdid/did14.pdf


The Cartesian Diver

-reality
http://physics.kenyon.edu/EarlyApparatus/Fluids/Cartesian_Diver/Cartesian_Di
ver.html

-theory
http://nautilus.fis.uc.pt/personal/mfiolhais/artigosdid/did13.pdf
http://nautilus.fis.uc.pt/personal/mfiolhais/artigosdid/did8.pdf

-philosophy
http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/courses/CI241-science-Sp95/resources/philoToy/philoTo
y.html




From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec  6 19:58:01 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 20:58:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>
References: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>
Message-ID: <20031206195800.GC5783@leitl.org>

On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 09:43:52PM -0800, Hal Finney wrote:

> I had a similar reaction.  Here is a posting I was working on about the
> debate at http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html:

I have an unfinished post sitting in my postponed queue, which 
(quite rudely) interleaves in the Drexler/Smalley exchange.
 
> One of the problems I often see in debates about nanotechnology is an
> attempt to shift the burden of proof onto the other side.  (This is
> actually a widespread problem in debates on all topics, but I think
> it is particularly inappropriate with nanotech.)  In the online debate
> between Drexler and Smalley, it seems sometimes that the issue is, "Are
> the fat-finger and/or sticky-finger problems inherent to all possible
> nanotech assembler designs?"  This puts the burden on the critic to show
> that there are no possible designs which could evade a particular problem,
> a virtually impossible task.

The problem with Smalley that his critique is limited to a few off the
cuff statements he's unwilling or unable to expand. We've had heard
these same points before (in fact, I used very similiar points once,
from a pure synthetic chemist's point of view), whereas the machine-phase
approach has meanwhile resulted in considerable number of publications. 
 
> But that's not fair.  The big issue here is obvious: will Drexlerian
> nanotech work?  Will we have the kind of revolutionary developments
> described in Engines of Creation and Drexler's other books?  Will we
> have self-replicating machines which can replace most of the world's
> industrial capacity in a manner of, what, a few years? months? days?
> 
> These are extraordinary claims, and many experts in physics and chemistry
> say that they are not credible.  The burden of proof here is obvious.
> It is on the nanotech supporter, not the critic.  He is the one making
> amazing predictions.  He is the one who must support his claims by
> providing evidence in the form of technological plans and designs
> sufficient to make a strong case that this will all be possible.

The Bush administration has just approved a major spending package
for R&D in nanotechnology, machine-phase being notably exempt from
the plan. Now this is not very nice.

What would be sufficient as a burden of proof? We already have
evidence of machine-phase in manipulative proximal probe. There are
no simulators large and precise enough to contain a full design.

In a sense, the only hard proof will be a working assembler itself,
or something with a self-rep closure so close to unity it doesn't
require a leap of faith to go over unity, and to scale down the
design.

Where will money for this come from? Smalley is blocking R&D
in that development quite efficiently by using essentially arguments
from authority. This is not a laid-back ivory tower discussion.
This is political science, with R&D budget and long-term policy
being at stake.
 
> He can't just wave his hands and say, if one thing doesn't work, we'll
> try something else.  He can't point to living things as an existence

Actually, yes, because there are several approaches in design space.
Just because one aspect has been invalidated (I personally expect
crosslinked polymer as structure bulk, not diamond nor graphenes;
and possibly sorting of precursors from a stochastical synthetic batch,
along with microfluidics functionalization, self-assembly *and* machine
phase as the most viable approach) it doesn't mean the whole thing
is a no-go.

> proof (because Drexlerian nanotech's revolutionary properties go far
> beyond anything possible with biology).  He needs to come up with

Not really, enzymes (and enzyme assemblies) plus active transport
within the cell do fall within mechanosynthesis domain. The reactive
site in an enzyme does resemble processes occuring at the tip, albeit
minus some aspects (substrate recognition and envelopment,
bond weakening before breakage). 

> enough specifics to make his case.  The burden of proof is on him.
> Supporters of Drexlerian nanotech must take on this burden squarely and
> refrain from demands that critics prove that the technology is impossible.

It's still perfectly valid to call bogus arguments that, I hope.
 
> Along these lines, let me ask a question.  In his open letter, Drexler
> complains about Smalley's statement that assemblers will suffer from
> the "fat finger" and "sticky finger" problems.  He writes, "I find this

Fat fingers is a perfectly valid point, though stated in dumbed-down
language. There's steric hindrance from the side of plane substrate,
and tool tips coming from other space quadrants (to be stiff, they need to
be bulky). How many tool tips need to be simultaneously present, though?
It's not obvious we need more than one, or two. I don't like cycles,
even if it's driven at resonance, but you don't really need cycles. A SWNT
can continuously extrude an allene strand, and polymerize this linear
monomer with a minimal-amplitude tooltip oscillation. This is a continuous, 
one-tip deposition. Where are the fat fingers here? This is the same
thing as bucky-tipped AFM head, and you know the resolution of that.
You can buy these tools, and they resolve deep crevices at atomic resolution.

Now sticky fingers are a red herring, because no one is proposing
to handle naked reactive monoatomics. It's perfectly possible to drag
and position e.g. Xe on Ni at cryogenic UHV conditions precisely because
Xe sticks to the STM tip. Cycled deposition doesn't deposit atoms
directly, only formally so. You don't need a methyl radical to methylate
Hg with Acetyl CoA. It's a cycle activate-deposit-regenerate, and it's
all perfectly vanilla chemistry in-between, except it's all dry and
extremely controlled.

> puzzling because, like enzymes and ribosomes, proposed assemblers neither
> have nor need these 'Smalley fingers'."
> 
> So I will ask, what "proposed assemblers"?  What is Drexler referring
> to, a proposal for an assembler that doesn't have these problems?

I presume he refers to mechanosynthetic reaction set, and these reactions
indeed do not require Smalley fingers. Apart from Merkle's stuff, you'll 
see interesting hits for mechanosynthesis on Google.

Now these are theoretic cycles, but they do use classic chemistry
assumptions and calculations to back them up. I agree fundamentally
that the set of these reactions the critical part of the proposed
classical (you don't need a true assembler for a number of applications) 
assembler.

> My understanding is that we lack any designs for self-replicating
> assemblers that would be sufficiently detailed to know that they will
> work and not need "fingers".  If Drexler has an assembler proposal that

Self-assembly doesn't need any fingers, and Drexler/Merkle stuff is limited
to a few tooltips, so I wouldn't get too worked up about what Smalley
says.

> answers this question, I'd appreciate a pointer to it.

Ultimatively, the best proof is to try designing your own. For the
most part, it's currently all about modelling and software engineering.

The bootstrap issue is not orthogonal to the design, but fund allocation
is critically dependant on a killer demo, and if it's only in the virtual
dry dock.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031206/4dca73b8/attachment.bin>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 21:12:10 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 13:12:10 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <000401c3bc31$779b6d40$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <000901c3bc3d$9ce64730$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

This is why I read at least two different news sources:


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/06/afghan.blast/index.h
tml


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105037,00.html





From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Dec  6 23:28:05 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 15:28:05 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ACTION: ERIC DREXLER's Message to ExI
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031206152400.0212d260@pop.earthlink.net>

I am forwarding the below message from Eric Drexler:
_______________________________________________________

"Nobel chemist Richard Smalley has responded to my longstanding
challenge to defend the controversial direction of U.S. policy in
nanotechnology, which excludes work on molecular manufacturing. This
event -- and the press coverage now building -- offer an opportunity to
change the flawed course of the field.

The revolutionary promise of molecular nanotechnology (MNT) has
become a part of society's expectations for the future. This technology
will provide nanomedicine breakthroughs that could cure cancer and
extend lifespace, bring abundance without environmental harm and
provide clean sources of energy. These ideas are part of the vision that
launched the field of nanotechnology.

So the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) is, of course,
plotting an aggressive course toward MNT -- isn't it?
Massive research funds are flowing to groups pursing competing approaches,
and researchers are touting their results as steps toward the goal...right?

The reality is starkly different. NNI research programs support a host of
valuable projects yet exclude work explicitly directed toward MNT. In
an effort to distance the field from fears that might threaten funding, the
leading NNI spokesman, Richard Smalley, has declared that molecular
assemblers are impossible. This stance has opened a vast gap between
perception and reality, creating a world in which students interested in
pursuing MNT research lack sponsorship, while lab groups and start-up
companies working toward MNT goals must hide their intentions. By
falsely declaring molecular assembly technology to be impossible,
detractors have associated it with warp drives in official circles and
relegated it to fringe status.

Fortunately, this erroneous situation is beginning to change, in part
because the extended Foresight community refuses to let this important
issue be dismissed. We now have a unique opportunity to seize the
momentum. Richard Smalley has responded to my challenge, and the
ensuing exchange -- the Dec. 1 cover story of the American Chemical
Society's magazine, Chemical & Engineering News -- may mark a
tipping point, but only if it is seen -- and properly understood -- by a
wider audience, and if it is properly translated into action.

WHAT YOU CAN DO!

1)  I urge you to read the Foresight press release
<http://www.foresight.org/press.html> and the full exchange
<http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html>, and
then consider what part you can play in adding to the momentum. The
detractors of MNT have shown the power of disinformation; it's time
they saw what well-informed people can do. Some suggestions:

2)  Speak up: make others aware of what's going on. Forward the
press release and the exchange. Write a letter to the editor of
your favorite publication, attaching these materials and
requesting coverage of this important issue. Write policy makers
about your concerns. Raise issues and answer naysayers though
message boards and blogs. Show the opposition our numbers and
  knowledge.

3)  Elevate the debate: shift the discussion on molecular assemblers and
molecular manufacturing from rhetoric and metaphors to science and
  research. Demand proof from those dismissing the accomplishments
  to date. Give someone influential a copy of Nanosystems (Chapters
  1 and 2 are on the web  <http://www.foresight.org/Nanosystems/toc.html>).
Refer them to the work of Ralph Merkle, Robert Freitas and others.

4)  Get more active: request seminars and classes on related topics
Transform your next social event or book group to focus on
these issues. Become more engaged with Foresight -- help match
the challenge grant <http://www.foresight.org/challenge>,
tell us about yourself and your skills
<https://marble.he.net/%7Eforesite/long_survey.html>
consider how you can help with plans for Foresight's next phase
<http://www.foresight.org/stage2>.

5)  Above all, take action.

Regardless of what avenues you may choose, make your voice and intentions 
heard.
Our future is counting on you.

  -- Eric

K. Eric Drexler
Chairman, Foresight Institute

_______________________________________


Natasha Vita-More
President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031206/93da4a23/attachment.html>

From cphoenix at best.com  Sat Dec  6 21:55:52 2003
From: cphoenix at best.com (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 16:55:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
Message-ID: <3FD25068.949E23D0@best.com>

This was CC'd to me, so I'll respond.  Remember that I won't see any
answers unless they are also CC'd to me.

The debate is all screwed up.  Each side thinks they have made a strong
case and are obviously right and the other side is obviously wrong. 
Onlookers generally have strong emotional reasons to pick one side or
the other.  The situtation is a lot more symmetrical than it appears to
either side.  It's like a messy divorce: a lot of "he said she said,"
and no one can take a step back to realize that what's really important
is that the lawyers are getting all the money.

If you want to know who's right, you have to strip away the debate and
look at the scientific claims.  Most of the trouble here comes from the
context and structure of the debate, not the scientific claims
themselves.

It's easy to reach an impasse in this discussion.  You see the claims of
cryonics, assemblers, doom-and-gloom scenarios, and you say, "These
claims are extraordinary.  Therefore I won't believe them without very
strong evidence."  But what evidence is possible?  Note that these
claims are not about scientific theory; they're about the projected
consequences of one side's understanding of the theory.  

Drexler says that we have to prepare for MNT and we should be
researching it further.  This assumes there's a reasonable chance of MNT
working.  Which, when you take a step back, is at least plausible;
there's a lot of careful theory that says it should, and no careful
theory that says it can't.  Drexler isn't (or at least shouldn't be)
insisting that all scientists agree with him.  It's just that MNT should
be given a fair study, so that if it does work we won't be caught by
surprise.  

To argue with this, a critic doesn't have to *prove* MNT can't
work--just show that it's so unlikely there's no point in wasting time
on it.  This is a practial, not a theoretical issue.  And it doesn't
seem unfair to me.  It's like an epidemiologist saying, "SARS has killed
eighty people, but reasonable extrapolation shows it could kill ten
million unless we stop it soon."  Is this putting an unfair burden of
proof on the Chinese government to open up unless they can show that
SARS isn't a threat?  No, it's a heavy burden, but it's not unfair.

Hal complains about a lack of specifics on Drexler's side, and asks,
"What 'proposed assemblers'?"  Ironically, the specifics are there, but
they're *too* specific.  There's been a substantial amount of work in
the past decade on mechanochemical systems, both the mechanics and the
chemistry.  But it's buried in a thick book with lots of equations, and
a number of academic papers from several sources.  One would have to
spend substantial effort to find the details, and more effort to
evaluate them.  I've spent a decade doing this, and it turns out that
building a mechanochemical system without "fingers" is not a big deal at
all.  That part of the claim is simply not extraordinary.  

Let me repeat that.  The claim that mechanochemistry can be a useful
manufacturing technique is not extraordinary.  That doesn't mean it's
right.  But it's fairly simple to decide whether it's right or not.  

We already know mechanochemistry works in a few cases.  The question is
whether it can be used to build useful diamondoid shapes.  So far,
there's a significant amount of careful evidence that it can, from basic
theory, chemical simulation, and experiment.  And there's no careful
evidence that it can't.  (Whatever you may think about Smalley's
argument, you must admit that he was not careful; his statements about
enzymes were shockingly wrong.)  Mechanochemistry is no stranger than
surface catalysis or flame chemistry.  It only seems weird and
extraordinary because of its association with weird insect-like
assemblers.  

On this particular claim, there should be no extremism or requirement
for extraordinary proof on either side.  It looks plausible and useful,
but hasn't been demonstrated in detail.  Fine--let's look at it more
closely.

The question may have some urgency, because if it works it may be the
foundation of a very powerful manufacturing capability with lots of
implications.  But why does that imply that Drexler has to provide
extraordinary evidence that it works?  Seems to me just the opposite.  

Actually, I know why.  If I tell you, "Lend me $10 and tomorrow I'll
give you $15," you may do it.  But if I say, "Lend me $10 and tomorrow
I'll give you $100," you know something must be wrong somewhere.  I
think this is one reason why Drexler's claims, taken in aggregate, are
not acceptable.  It probably would've been better if Drexler had cloned
himself, and Eric Drexler only talked about the science (which is pretty
mundane and should have been respectable) while Drew Ericson talked
about the policy implications if Drexler was right.  It also would've
been better if the description of assemblers did not map so closely to
the archetype of bugs (in the sense of both insect and germ).  

But that's hindsight.  The point is, the debate got off to a very
unfortunate start.  But if you want to understand the science, the only
way to do that at this point is to strip away the debate history and
just look at the scientific claims.  Smalley says that precise
positional chemistry can only work underwater.  Is he right?  No. 
Meanwhile, Drexler says NEMS can do carbon deposition on diamond to
build NEMS.  Is he right?  So far, the evidence is on his side.  Let's
go get more evidence.

Chris

--
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec  6 22:27:35 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 09:27:35 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

John K Clark wrote:

> ..if it could be shown that for Drexler's assemblers to work 
> you'd need to move faster than light, violate the conservation
> of momentum law, place things with more precision than
> Heisenberg allows, or violate the second law of thermodynamics
> then it would be safe to dismiss the entire idea as nonsense; but
> nobody has come close to doing that. 

I am not dismissing the idea as nonsense. But I am wary that 
often what we want to be true isn't and I very much include myself 
in that category of we. I am glad that Smalley has engaged with
Drexler, that in itself is a win for Drexler. Whether or not it is a win
for the truth I can't say as I do not yet presume to know the truth
on this matter. But it is a mistake to think that the burden of proof 
lies on Smalley. Its a political mistake.

I think it was David Hume that said that extraordinary claims 
require extraordinary evidence. There is an opportunity cost for 
people to investigate complex ideas requiring understanding in multiple
disciplines like those that are detailed in Nanosystems. And it could
be fairly asserted perhaps if they are true that there is an opportunity
cost in not making the effort to come to terms with those ideas.  But
right now most people, even most intelligent people are not in the 
camp that can see it is true. Anything that can be done to make it 
easier to convince more people and to reduce the amount of effort 
open minded interested folk have to divert from there other tasks
would I think be efforts well spent. 

> I also disagree that life is not a pretty good existence proof
> of the idea, it's true Drexler's machines can do more but that's what
> you'd expect, all else being equal intelligent design will always beat 
> random mutation and natural selection. Of course we will not know
> with absolute certainty that Drexler was correct until an assembler
> is actually built, and that should be about 20 minutes before the 
> singularity.

I think it is possible to set the standard of verification lower than
20 minutes before the singularity, but I think it is prudent to realise
that the task of persuading folk to spend time examining this issue
and thinking about what standards of proof would be adequate or
greatly improve confidence that further investigation into the matter
is not wasted time, is itself a task that falls on either the enlightened
or the true-believers. The open minded undecideds we can tell the
enlightened from the true-believers beforehand. 

I am not looking to join the latest religious crusade I am willing (time
permitting - and it often isn't - that's a problem everyone faces when
they are trying to persuade) to engage in pleasant and interesting 
conversation with folk who know what they are talking about and 
who don't say - just read everything Drexler ever wrote and by the
way here is thirty papers of my musings on partially related matters
as well.  That stuff may be said in good faith but it just doesn't 
persuade. 

Perhaps genuine discussion with those who are interested but not
yet convinced and who will therefore play Socrates to Drexler's 
(and those that already agree with him's) Protogoras, is a good way
 to achieve two worthy things. 1. It allows the arguments aimed at 
persuading open-minded folk to be honed. 2. It brings some clear
thinkers (who are often good persuaders once persuaded themselves)
on-board quicker.  

Regards,
Brett




From max at maxmore.com  Sat Dec  6 21:15:38 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 15:15:38 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <001001c3bc22$23044c20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>

At 11:55 AM 12/6/2003, you wrote:
>http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/19/cf.opinionrachel.mills/index.h
>tml
>
>Why didnt we think of this before?

Egad!  What a terrible interview.

It confirms the impression of Tucker Carlson as a moron, which I formed 
when I was on crossfire debating cryonics during the Ted Williams furor.

More disappointingly, Rachel Mill's responses could have been much better 
-- even taking into account the rapid fire format.

It doesn't help that the first two words out of her mouth are: "Child 
pornography?"

When asked about marijuana, she replies "Marijuana, I think honest science 
proves that it's harmless just like alcohol". I must have missed the news 
when it was shown that alcohol is *harmless*. Defending the legality of a 
substance on the grounds that it's harmless is a doomed strategy.

When asked, "which free-market economy turns you on most? she replies "You 
know, right now I like Russia, actually, because they just passed a 13 
percent flat tax, and their economy is soaring".  It's staggering that she 
would point to Russia as an exemplar of free markets! State control of the 
media with Putin looking like an old-time Communist, lack of the rule of 
law, and so on...

I've never been a supporter of the LP even though its policies are closer 
to my views than any other party I know of. This display makes it even more 
likely that my non-support will continue.

Spike, what on Earth was it that you liked about this?

Max


_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
_______________________________________________________




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sat Dec  6 23:16:02 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 18:16:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <000901c3bc3d$9ce64730$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <002801c3bc4e$eae78be0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> This is why I read at least two different news sources:
>
<http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/06/afghan.blast/index.html
>
>
> <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105037,00.html>

I must be missing something.  What is the difference between these two
stories?

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 23:42:20 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:42:20 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000601c3bc52$976f9bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> At 11:55 AM 12/6/2003, you wrote:
> >http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/19/cf.opinionrachel.mi
> lls/index.html
> 
> Spike, what on Earth was it that you liked about this?
> 
> Max

The calendars.  I thought the interview was dippy too.  The
"promoting libertarianism effectively" was an ironic statement,
which often doesn't work online.  I should have put NOT! afterwards.

Thanks for the reality check Max.  {8-]  spike





From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec  6 23:45:06 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 15:45:06 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <002801c3bc4e$eae78be0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000701c3bc52$faa8c310$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Spike wrote,
> > This is why I read at least two different news sources:
> >
> <http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/06/afghan.bl
ast/index.html
>
> <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105037,00.html>

I must be missing something.  What is the difference between these two
stories?  Harvey

Very different spins.  I scarcely recognize the two stories
as describing the save event.  When all the facts are in,
it will be interesting to see if the Taliban really did
this, and if so why was CNN so hesitant and if not why
was Foxnews so speculative.  spike





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  7 00:13:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 16:13:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <000601c3bc52$976f9bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031207001341.86452.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > At 11:55 AM 12/6/2003, you wrote:
> > >http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/19/cf.opinionrachel.mi
> > lls/index.html
> > 
> > Spike, what on Earth was it that you liked about this?
> > 
> > Max
> 
> The calendars.  I thought the interview was dippy too.  The
> "promoting libertarianism effectively" was an ironic statement,
> which often doesn't work online.  I should have put NOT! afterwards.
> 
> Thanks for the reality check Max.  

On the contrary, anything we do to promote liberty in any way that
doesn't hurt anybody is good. WHy? Because for most average people in
America, when you say "libertarians", they say "whassat? sum kinna
crazy democrat?" 

It is a common comment among many boomer males that the only reason
they went to anti-war rallies as kids was to get laid. Get a clue. Sex
sells. If it becomes common knowledge that supermodels attend
Libertarian Conventions (and I've met quite a number of exotic dancers
at LP events who are libertarians) then penises will follow, at least
long enough to figure out that this is a serious political movement
with rational arguments.

Given the rather dippy arguments that Max was subjected to when he
appeared on Crossfire, it it any wonder the dip factor on that show is
any different today? Is it any surprise that both Carlson and Carville
were left looking like idiots when facing an attractive woman who is
not afraid of her own sexuality? Rachel coulda smacked em both between
the eyes with a two by four and they wouldn't have noticed.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From max at maxmore.com  Sat Dec  6 23:27:42 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 17:27:42 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <20031207001341.86452.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000601c3bc52$976f9bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206172545.03ca2108@mail.earthlink.net>

Mike,

I did not object to the calendars. Didn't say a word about them. It was 
everything else that looked weak to me.

However, I disagree that *anything* done to get ideas about liberty out 
there is good. First impressions have a powerful influence on the human 
mind. A poor first impression only increases the work to be done.

Max





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  7 01:25:07 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 17:25:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206172545.03ca2108@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20031207012507.21895.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> Mike,
> 
> I did not object to the calendars. Didn't say a word about them. It
> was everything else that looked weak to me.
> 
> However, I disagree that *anything* done to get ideas about liberty
> out there is good. First impressions have a powerful influence on the
> human mind. A poor first impression only increases the work to be
> done.

I agree entirely. I disagree that an underwear calendar of attractive
women is in any way a poor first impression. What do you want? A
calendar of computer dorks with pocket protectors and birth control
glasses??? Now THAT would go over like a lead balloon, and would
certainly reinforce public perception of libertarians as fringe dorks.

I'm not sure that the transcript accurately reflected the emotive
context of Rachels statements. I believe she was expressing incredulity
that Tucker Carlson would imply that her underwear calendar was in some
way associated with child porn. It is a common attack of statists to
try to link the LP with NAMBLA. 

While you and I agree that alcohol is far from 'harmless' from a
physiological standpoint, it is the common opinion of joe sixpack, who
dislikes MADD intensely, that a sixpack after work on friday is just
what the doctor ordered, especially considering that 'moderate'
drinking is supposed to be good for you. 

Recall recently that Howard Dean said that the Dems need to appeal to
southern democrats who "have confederate flags on their pickups" in
order to win the presidency. He was exactly right, but that demographic
is getting more educated that its liberties are best protected by
libertarians, a group that Dean is trying hard to appeal to. That group
is the 'petty bourgoisie' that the Ford Foundation tries to undermine,
that group is the angry white male that the dems treated as a threat to
national security for eight years. They are pretty well sick of
government in its entirety, and most of them don't seem much harm in
smoking a spliff occasionally on the weekend.

These sorts of guys are not Klan material generally speaking. The Klan
finds them fertile ground only because nobody else is listening to
them, because everybody else is treating them as 'the exploiter class'.
To most of them, the confederate flag is only a symbol of sticking it
to the man, just as much as a black gloved raised fist is to a black
male.

Rachel Mills, who is running for office in North Carolina, knows
EXACTLY the sort of demographic she needs to win election. These are
the guys who hang swimsuit and pinup calendars in their place of work:
their garage, the cab of their trucks or construction equipment, their
tool room or factory floor. This is the new demographic for the
libertarian party: the working class stiff who is being economically
exiled from their home towns by environmentalist land restrictions and
growth ordinances that raise the cost of housing far above where it
would be in an unfettered market.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec  7 01:28:02 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 20:28:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <000701c3bc52$faa8c310$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <007601c3bc61$5bd60c70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
\
> > Spike wrote,
> > > This is why I read at least two different news sources:
> > >
> > <http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/06/afghan.bl
> ast/index.html
> >
> > <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105037,00.html>
> 
> I must be missing something.  What is the difference between 
> these two stories?  Harvey
> 
> Very different spins.  I scarcely recognize the two stories
> as describing the save event.

OK....  But you didn't answer my question.  How are they different?  I know
you said "spin", but specifically what is different between the two stories?
They clearly look like they describe the same event to me.  I see no
contradictions or disagreements between the stories.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec  7 01:36:08 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 20:36:08 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206172545.03ca2108@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <007701c3bc62$806a4190$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Max More wrote,
> However, I disagree that *anything* done to get ideas about 
> liberty out there is good. First impressions have a powerful
> influence on the human mind. A poor first impression only
> increases the work to be done.

I have to agree with Max on this one.  There are two ways to market a
product.  If the product is good, you focus on the product.  If the product
is bad, you focus on anything else.  Any advertising that has to resort to
sexual distraction only does so because the product is itself uninteresting.
It is a clear admission that the target audience has to be bribed or tricked
into showing any interest.  People who are looking for sexual appeal are
unlikely to find the other message as interesting anyway.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 






From support at imminst.org  Sun Dec  7 03:06:35 2003
From: support at imminst.org (support at imminst.org)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 21:06:35 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update
Message-ID: <3fd2993bd6044@imminst.org>

IMMINST UPDATE

Book Project
********************
Upon completion, the book will represent an important 
achievement and focal point for the organization. 

The book will consist of essays submitted by ImmInst members 
and respected authors. 

Happily, ImmInst has thus far received submissions from such 
notable authors as Max More, Natasha Vita-More, James Halperin 
and Ray Kurzweil. 

Submit an essay, visit: http://www.imminst.org/book


Chat - Cryonics, Immortality & Swayze 
********************
James Swayze joins ImmInst to talk about his 
life, his current projects and the feasibility of 
cryonics as a pathway toward physical immortality.
Dec 7 - Sun 8pm Eastern
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=67&t=1927&st=0


Upcoming Chat - Mike Perry, Alcor & Cryonics
********************
Alcor Patient Care Assistant and author of "Forever for All: 
Moral Philosophy, Cryonics, and the Scientific Prospects for 
Immortality ", Mike Perry chats will ImmInst about his current 
work and the future of Cryonics.
Dec 14 - Sun 8pm Eastern
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=2385&st=0#entry18367


ImmInst Full Member on ABC's 20/20
********************
Shannon Vyff appeared on 20/20 - Dec 5. Her family 
was featured during a 7 minute segment about Caloric 
Restriction (CR), a proven life-extension method. 
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=1432&st=0&#entry19638


Support ImmInst
********************
We now have 53 Full Members!

If you haven't yet, consider joining as an ImmInst 
Full Member. 

You?ll gain access to the Full Member Forums where 
members are working on the ImmInst Book Project 
and other important projects.   
http://imminst.org/amember/member.php





To be removed from all of our mailing lists, click here:
http://www.imminst.org/archive/mailinglists/mailinglists.php?p=mlist&rem=extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sun Dec  7 03:06:23 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:06:23 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206220612.02416008@mail.comcast.net>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>On the contrary, anything we do to promote liberty in any way that
>doesn't hurt anybody is good. WHy? Because for most average people in
>America, when you say "libertarians", they say "whassat? sum kinna
>crazy democrat?"

People I meet usually have heard just enough about libertarians to be 
confused.  Hard-core policy advocates tend to understand where we are, 
particularly if our positions overlap with theirs, like taxpayer, gun 
rights, or motorcycle groups.  But average conservatives hear of our stand 
on drugs, prostitution, and gays, and figure we're some form of 
liberal.  And average liberals hear of our stand on the minimum wage, 
entitlement programs, and school choice, and figure we're some form of 
conservative.

My take is to tailor the message to my audience.  If they bring up an issue 
where we apparently disagree, I try to first get them to see the common 
ground on issues where we do agree.  When we get to a contentious issue, I 
try again to establish common ground by identifying how we want to achieve 
the same goals.  If they perceive me as a fellow traveller, I have a much 
better chance of them listening instead of simply arguing back.

But it sure is easy to get sucked into the Libertarian Macho Flash.  (Or, 
for that matter, the Extropian Macho Flash.  But we can rely on a copy of 
"The Gentle Seduction" to get people thinking.)

Max More wrote:

>However, I disagree that *anything* done to get ideas about liberty out 
>there is good. First impressions have a powerful influence on the human 
>mind. A poor first impression only increases the work to be done.

I'm not sure whether Rachel Mills's project is helping or hurting.  But 
I've definitely met quite a few loons who I wish weren't on my side of an 
issue.  (And then there are the loons that people *think* are on my 
side.  I'm getting tired of explaining that no, Lyndon LaRouche is not a 
Libertarian, he's a Democrat.)

All else being equal, it is true that we'll do better with articulate, 
well-dressed, well-groomed, and attractive.  My fellow paleos may recall 
Perry Metzger's forceful assertion that the farther your idea is from the 
mainstream, the more important it was for you to look and sound clean-cut 
and mainstream?  (While, of course, not coming off as a Mormon missionary 
or insurance salesman.)


-- David Lubkin.




From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 05:02:09 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 00:02:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: atheists barred from office in several states
Message-ID: <020f01c3bc7f$45b27e60$8bce5cd1@neptune>

This is a cross-post from another list where I forwarded the original
post Eliezer to.

Dan

From: Michael Hardy <hardy at math.mit.edu>
To: atl2 <atlantis_II at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 6:07 PM
Subject: [atlantis_II] atheists barred from office in several states

 Article 6, Clause 3 of the US Constitution says:

   ... no religious Test shall ever be required as a
   Qualification to any Office or public Trust under
   the United States.

This alludes to a law that existed in England from some time
in the 17th century until the early 19th century, saying that
those not adhering to the right religion were barred from public
employment, including not only what we usually called public
office, but also, if I'm not mistaken, academic appointments
at Oxford and Cambridge.  Thus, Isaac Newton kept his
unitarianism secret for fear of being fired from his position
as professor of mathematics.  I think "under the United States"
means _federal_ rather_ than _state_ office, but the way the
courts have construed the 14th Amendment may have effectively
extended the rule to state office, thus rendering those
provisions of state constitutions void.  But have these clauses
been tested in court?   -- Mike Hardy

--
Michael Hardy
hardy at math.mit.edu



From jonkc at att.net  Sun Dec  7 05:05:19 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 00:05:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
	<04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>

"Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>

> it is a mistake to think that the burden of proof  lies on Smalley.

I disagree, I think the burden of proof is on Smalley. Drexler is proposing
a construction machine, lots of such devices have been made; to say it is
imposable even in principle for this particular construction machine to ever
exist you need to identify which law of physics it would violate. Smalley
has not done this and neither has anyone else.

>  Its a political mistake.

Perhaps, but not a scientific mistake.

> I think it was David Hume that said that extraordinary claims
> require extraordinary evidence.

Yes, and the claim that a machine that organizes matter in a certain manner
will always be imposable is extraordinary.

  John K Clark   jonkc at att.net






From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  7 05:14:38 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 21:14:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] AIRCAR: Boeing X-50 offers cheap alternative
Message-ID: <20031207051438.35526.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.boeing.com/phantom/crw.html

I think that Boeing's Canard Rotor Wing test aircraft, the X-50
Dragonfly, promises personal air-car capabilities sooner than Moller or
Bell/Augusta. At the page above, note the photo in the lower left part
of the page. The X-50 just began flight tests today with a hover test
to 12 foot altitude. The X-50 is supposed to be capable of high
subsonic flight after transitioning from VTOL configuration. It
eliminates need for a tail rotor, as well as a transmission by venting
turbofan gasses through vents at the tips of the rotor when in VTOL
mode. The canard and tail surfaces generate lift as it picks up speed,
then thrust is directed through tailpipe and the rotor locks into place
as a standard airfoil. This processes reverses to land.

The weight savings and mechanical simplicity of this design concept are
what I think will make aircars a reality.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sun Dec  7 05:28:36 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 00:28:36 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312062359490.-329001@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>



How old is that interview? She sold calendars for 2003 to
raise money for the 2002 elections in NC. She's selling new
calendars for 2004 now.

Most of the folk I ran into here who heard of it thought it
was pretty cool, rather than taking a handout from the
government to run a campaign or badgering people for
contributions.

Regards,
MB in North Carolina.



> At 11:55 AM 12/6/2003, you wrote:
> >http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/19/cf.opinionrachel.mills/index.h
> >tml
> >


From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 05:44:43 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 00:44:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Socialism versus Transhumanism
References: <20031123172838.11990.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <025a01c3bc85$53296580$8bce5cd1@neptune>

Missed this one...

On Sunday, November 23, 2003 12:28 PM Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com
wrote:
>> The problem is that democracy is not antithetical
>> to statism, especially not government intervention
>> in the economy.  All extant democratic polities
>> are welfare states, some bordering on socialism.
>> You might say this tendency is contingent and in
>> a different setting democracy would not lead to
>> welfare statism or socialism.  However, people like
>> Hans-Hermann Hoppe argue on purely political
>> economic grounds that democracies will always
>> tend in that direction.
>
> The current status of many extant democracies is
> not an indictment of democracy as inherently
> socialist.

Well, I did cover that above.  This is why I wrote, "You might say this
tendency is contingent and in a different setting democracy would not
lead to welfare statism or socialism."  I tend to agree with Hoppe and
others here: once you have a government, then it will increase its
power.  Socialism is just the maximal point of that increase, wherein
the state absorbs all social activity.

Now you may disagree with this point -- which I see below you do -- but
that was the issue I was raising NOT ignoring.

> In fact, socialist tendencies are, according to
> historical commentators, a key indicator that a
> democracy is headed down a slippery slope to
> tyranny, when the majority discovers it can vote
> itself largess from the public treasury, taxed to
> the tab of the minority.

But isn't that the point?  In any democracy, how long will it take for
special interests or even majorities to find out how to work the
system -- in terms of finding ways to take wealth instead of making it?
I believe the learning curve in democracies is not that steep.

> Republican features are intended to prevent,
> halt, or otherwise mitigate this slide, as Max
> has said.

I know that and so other libertarian and anarchist critics of democracy.
Their point and mine is that such features at best only slow this slide
which is inherent in the system.

> They are really needed only so far as the
> degree to which a democratic government is
> empowered to regulate the lives of individuals,
> and how successful statists are over time at
> redefining such powers to encompass greater
> and greater amounts and areas of human
> endeavor.

Agreed, but any empowerment heads toward the same goal.  The real
solution here is to look for systems that are better than democracy or
republics.  I believe this can be found in polycentric legal orders
(i.e., anarchist systems), though even such systems are not invulnerable
to corruption.  They just take longer to decay.  Democracy and republics
tend to be on a fast track to increasing statism because they infect
more individuals and groups with powerlust and give them the means to
act on such.

By this later is meant a point that Hoppe brings up in _Democracy -- The
God That Failed_: class consciousness is blurred in democracies.  Since
the line between rulers and the ruled is everchanging, individuals and
groups become less suspicious of state power, since while it might be
used against them, they, too, might one day use it for their own ends
(viz., against others).  Thus, instead of jealously guarding their
freedoms, they instead look jealously on others' powers.  (A case in
point is antitrust law in the US.  For a long time, so called
Conservatives were critical of it until they saw it could be used
against their enemies and now only a few question it.  Another case is
the New Deal itself.  Still another is Medicare, where Republicans and
Democrats now seem to compete over who can hand out the most loot.  (I'm
speaking specifically of the new prescription drug benefit.))

Put another way, once power is accumulated, it's very hard to dissipate,
since people tend to see it as a opportunity rather than a threat.
Every time you hear, "There ought to be a law" this is just this
tendency manifesting itself -- the tendency to see government as a
workhouse rather than a dangerous beast.

> For example, here in the US, Congress seems
> to have few powers, according to the
> Constitution,

It depends on what you mean.  I tend to think the power to draft, coin
money, tax, and the like are too much.  Plus the Congress can amend the
Constitution as well, meaning it can expand its powers.

But seriously, since the US government faces no competitor -- it's a
monopolist -- it can do whatever it wants for the most part.  The
government even interprets its own limits via the courts.

> yet the greatest power that congress has is
> the power to regulate interstate commerce.

See above.

> The Constitution does not have a glossary to
> define what 'interstate commerce', or even
> 'regulate', means.

See above.  The mechanism is to use the courts.  That doesn't work
because they're government courts.  It mgiht offer more of a check, too,
if the courts were not appointed by the very branches of the government
they're supposed to check.  (Only a bit more, since eventually they
would come to an arrangement even under such a system.  Or there would
be conflict until either the courts took over, making them unchecked and
unlimited, or were subdued, making them no check on others' power.)

> As a result, where it was once accepted to
> mean the overseeing of purely commercial
> traffic between states via channels of
> commerce, as and where it occurs at
> borders, interstate commerce was
> reinterpreted during the FDR administration
> to cover any sort of human activity that has
> any sort of impact on commercial activity
> which might potentially involve, or in the
> future involve, goods and services in traffic
> between the states. The SCOTUS decision
> which was responsible for this reinterpretation
> was, of course, the result of Roosevelt
> threatening to pack the court, but it was still
> responsible for 98% of the domestic statist
> expansion in the US in the 20th century.

I'm not sure about the 98% figure, but even before FDR there was
creeping regulation in this area.  The problem can be traced back to the
Constitution itself and central government expansion began long before
FDR -- first with the Constitutional Convention, though perhaps the next
biggest episode after that was the U.S. Civil War.  Later expansions
were merely elaborations of that.

> This trend was something I described in my
> 2001 essay, "It's About The Trust, Stupid!",
> published in The Libertarian Enterprise. As
> Jose Cordeiro commented the other day,
> redefining the terms of discourse is the most
> heinous way by which statists expand their
> influence.

Something noted long before by others, but still a valid point that
needs to be brought up again and again.

> Politically, they steal labels like 'liberal' and
> 'progressive' to stealthily legitimize their
> subversion. They become involved in the
> legal system and help to rewrite the legal
> dictionaries with expanded definitions of
> terms to fit their needs for statist expansion
> of power.  They engage in promoting their
> new definitions via the press and literature.

I don't think it's all that conscious like some vast plot.  The thing is
meanings do shift over time, driven, as Rand would point out, by changes
in the underlying philosophy.  However, such changings in philosophy are
not immune to influence.  It's basically a dialectical process with
different influences driving the whole system and influencing each
other.  There are counterveiling forces -- or the system would either be
totally free or totally controlled.

Later!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 05:55:47 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 00:55:47 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001><04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 07, 2003 12:05 AM John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote:
>> it is a mistake to think that the burden of proof
>>  lies on Smalley.
>
> I disagree, I think the burden of proof is on
> Smalley. Drexler is proposing a construction
> machine, lots of such devices have been made;
> to say it is imposable even in principle for this
> particular construction machine to ever exist you
> need to identify which law of physics it would
> violate. Smalley has not done this and neither
> has anyone else.

I agree.  An analogy might prove helpful.  Imagine I were to say, "It's
impossible for humans to live on Mars."  "Impossible" is a pretty tall
order and the burden on proof would be on me to show why.  Even if no
human ever sets foot on Mars, that would NOT constitute a proof of
impossibility.  If even every human that lands on Mars -- assuming some
eventually do -- dies immediately on landing that would also NOT
constitute a proof of impossibility.

>> I think it was David Hume that said that
>> extraordinary claims require extraordinary
>> evidence.
>
> Yes, and the claim that a machine that
> organizes matter in a certain manner
> will always be imposable is extraordinary.

I agree.  (I suspect Hume would too, from my reading of him.  He railed
against absolute knowledge in empirical matters.  Smalley's claim of the
impossibility of nanoassemblers strikes me as just a such a claim of
absolute knowledge.)  It assumes that Smalley can either divine the
future or knows physics better than our current understanding.

BTW, there is a monster in the lake near me.  I have to feed it every
now and then.  On a totally unrelated matter, would you guys like to
hold the next convention here?  There's a nice convention center by the
lake...:)

Later!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec  7 06:03:16 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 22:03:16 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <007601c3bc61$5bd60c70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <001101c3bc87$cec6ae80$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> > > Spike wrote,
> > > > This is why I read at least two different news sources:
> > > >
> > > <http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/06/afghan.bl
> > ast/index.html
> > >
> > > <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105037,00.html>
> > 
> > I must be missing something.  What is the difference between 
> > these two stories?  Harvey
> > 
> > Very different spins.  I scarcely recognize the two stories
> > as describing the save event.
> 
> OK....  But you didn't answer my question.  How are they 
> different?  I know you said "spin", but specifically what is different
between 
> the two stories?  They clearly look like they describe the same event
to me.  I see no
> contradictions or disagreements between the stories.




CNN title:  Afghan bicycle bomb injures 15

Foxnews title:  Taliban Targets U.S. Soldiers in Afghanistan



CNN:  A bicycle carried a bomb that exploded in the main square of the
southern Afghanistan city of Kandahar, wounding at least 15 people

Foxnews:  A bomb ripped through a bustling Kandahar bazaar Saturday,
wounding 20 Afghans, in an attack the Taliban say targeted - but missed
- U.S. soldiers.



CNN:  Hashma and Deputy Chief Mohammad Salim said police and U.S. troops
were investigating, but no arrests had been made. 

Foxnews: Taliban fighters claimed responsibility, saying the blast was
aimed at American soldiers, but went off late.



CNN:  The blast damaged several shops in the square, breaking windows
and crumbling walls...

Foxnews: ...Six shops were leveled. Broken glass from the shattered
hotel front littered the ground, stained by the victims' blood. The
wounded included three children...three of the 20 injured were seriously
hurt and taken to the coalition military base at the city's airport for
treatment...


The tone of the articles is so very different that
it leads to different conclusions.  The CNN report
almost makes it sound like they do not know who set 
off the explosion.  Foxnews has already tried and
convicted the mad dogs of the Taliban.  It is no
wonder there is such deeply divided opinion on the
coalition action in Afghanistan, it depends on which
news sources one reads.  Both sources are necessary 
to even start to understand.

spike 



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sun Dec  7 06:14:24 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 22:14:24 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
References: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir><5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312062359490.-329001@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <004301c3bc89$5cde9ba0$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "MB" <mbb386 at main.nc.us>
>
> How old is that interview? She sold calendars for 2003 to
> raise money for the 2002 elections in NC. She's selling new
> calendars for 2004 now.
>
> Most of the folk I ran into here who heard of it thought it
> was pretty cool, rather than taking a handout from the
> government to run a campaign or badgering people for
> contributions.

I'm sorry, but I can't see how the issue of whether selling calendars rather
than asking the government for a "handout" is in any way cool.  To be
concerned about a "handout" from the government at this level - it just
seems like such a piffle.  The Iraq war is what's costing us so much (beyond
the cost of the sacrifice of human lives, which are incalculable).
Furthermore, (although it may not be "badgering" per se - just a unilateral
decision hoisted on us), who but the "people" are going to be stuck paying
the  $100 *billion* the war is anticipated to cost?:

http://www.iht.com/articles/90690.html

Believe me, I'm not endorsing Harry Browne (former Libertarian Party
presidential candidate), but found this advice in an article of his written
in 2002 (link to entire article follows):

"Don't invade Iraq. That's probably the only way to motivate Saddam Hussein
to attack us with whatever dangerous weapons he might have. So long as we
leave him alone, he won't commit the suicidal act of provoking the U.S. to
drop nuclear bombs on him":

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28690

I read Rachel Mills' interview.  A bit on the frothy side, wasn't it?

Olga



http://www.iht.com/articles/90690.html




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Dec  7 08:37:33 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 19:37:33 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
	<04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>
	<028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Technotranscendence wrote:

> John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote:
------[Brett]
> >> it is a mistake to think that the burden of proof
> >>  lies on Smalley.
> >
> > I disagree, I think the burden of proof is on
> > Smalley. Drexler is proposing a construction
> > machine, lots of such devices have been made;
> > to say it is imposable even in principle for this
> > particular construction machine to ever exist you
> > need to identify which law of physics it would
> > violate. Smalley has not done this and neither
> > has anyone else.
>
> I agree.  An analogy might prove helpful.
[snip]
> >> I think it was David Hume that said that
> >> extraordinary claims require extraordinary
> >> evidence.
> >
> > Yes, and the claim that a machine that
> > organizes matter in a certain manner
> > will always be imposable is extraordinary.
>
> I agree.
[snip]

Two questions then, one sort of scientific or at least empirical, the second
political.

1) What *particular* machine is being considered? (I think I'm just
paraphrasing Hal here actually, so perhaps better to answer Hal).

2) If neither Drexler (and associates) nor Smalley (and associates) were to
*accept* the burden of proof scientifically what happens by default
politically?

Regards,
Brett







From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec  7 08:47:32 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 00:47:32 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
In-Reply-To: <05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <000001c3bc9e$c0f8c790$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


Tonight was our friend's children's Christmas play.
It was the heartwarming story of how a grumpy old
janitor working over the holiday meets a mysterious
visitor and unexpectedly comes to find the true 
meaning of Christmas.  

I wanted to barf.  I wonder, what if...
scientists discover that the true meaning of Christmas
really is maximizing retail sales.  They may find
that crass commercialism reduces harmful cholesterol
and improves circulation.

What this world needs is more brain-warming stories.

spike



From scerir at libero.it  Sun Dec  7 10:03:36 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 11:03:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
References: <000001c3bc9e$c0f8c790$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000401c3bca9$6212ccc0$f0c7fea9@scerir>


You know that one of the present political
problems in UE (or EU) is whether they
should introduce in the Constitution
the word Christ or the expression Christian
values, or not. The general opinion was:
"No, we do not need these terms". But
an influent Italian (urged by the Vatican)
said: "What is the meaning of Sunday, then?".
So, the problem now becomes: should we 
introduce Sunday in the Constitution?
s.  




From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Dec  7 12:24:01 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 13:24:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <001101c3bc87$cec6ae80$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <007601c3bc61$5bd60c70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<001101c3bc87$cec6ae80$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031207122401.GL5783@leitl.org>

On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 10:03:16PM -0800, Spike wrote:

> The tone of the articles is so very different that
> it leads to different conclusions.  The CNN report
> almost makes it sound like they do not know who set 
> off the explosion.  Foxnews has already tried and

You do know why Fox News is usually spelled Faux News,
right?

http://dir.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/11/15/ellis/index.html

They've got a bias the size of, excuse me, Texas.

> convicted the mad dogs of the Taliban.  It is no
> wonder there is such deeply divided opinion on the
> coalition action in Afghanistan, it depends on which
> news sources one reads.  Both sources are necessary 
> to even start to understand.

Nope, both are still US and Western sources. You can't
expect mainstream media giving you the straight dope,
the best you can hope to do is to average different spins
(including Arab media, of course), and expect this will
be close to reality.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/0c42697a/attachment.bin>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Sun Dec  7 12:30:12 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 13:30:12 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryonicist Harry Braun for President
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBCEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Alcor member, Harry Braun, is on the ballot in several states for president
of the U.S.A. Harry Braun is an energy analyst and author of The Phoenix
Project: Shifting from Oil to Hydrogen (phoenixproject.net). The following
paragraphs are taken from his site "Harry Braun for President".
Harry has worked as an energy and environmental analyst for the past 30
years, and is the Chairman and CEO of Sustainable Partners LLC, a systems
integration firm that is involved in a number of renewable energy projects,
including the development of a $180 million wind farm project in New Mexico.
Harry received a Bachelors degree from Arizona State University in 1971. His
undergraduate work was in history and general science, while his graduate
work focused on anthropology and evolutionary biology. His post graduate
research has been in the areas of energy technologies and resources, as well
as the on-going developments in molecular biology, protein engineering and
nanotechnology. Harry ran for Congress in 1984 against John McCain. He is
Chairman of the Hydrogen Political Action Committee (h2pac.org) and author
of the proposed Fair Accounting Act legislation. Harry's religious views are
based on an understanding of molecular biology. Harry is member of Alcor
(alcor.org), a non-profit cryobiology laboratory that freezes and cares for
people when they die in the hope that they can be regenerated in the future,
with all of their past memories, into a biocybernetic "designer gene" era.
To avoid the oblivion scenario and hopefully secure a pollution-free utopian
future of biochips and designer genes, Harry Braun is committed to shifting
from fossil and nuclear fuels to a solar hydrogen economy with wartime-speed
(i.e., by 2010). Given the exponential nature of the global energy and
environmental problems, it is much later that most people think. We are all
like passengers on the Titanic, and there is little time left to change
course. Analyst and author Harry Braun has the new heading, but only the
American public can initiate this rapid "transition of substance" by
electing Harry Braun as President of the United States.
The exponential developments in molecular biology and computer science will
soon make a biological transition to renewable resources inevitable. It is
not a question of whether --but when. In the Chapter called Utopia: From
Here to Eternity, The Phoenix Project reviews a "utopia" scenario that
extrapolates the exponential advances in computers, molecular biology and
nanotechnology. Cloning is only the beginning of this era of molecular
medicine that will develop "biochips" and "designer genes." These rapidly
developing nanotechnology developments will not only delete the biological
mechanisms of aging and disease, but they will allow individuals to
reprogram their genetic structure -- at will -- with atomic (i.e. atom by
atom) precision. The result will be the evolution of a new species, Homo
Immortalis, that will develop an Immortalist culture and institutions that
will be based on individuals having unlimited life spans.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/8ff3f21d/attachment.html>

From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec  7 12:46:56 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 07:46:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <001101c3bc87$cec6ae80$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <00ae01c3bcc0$369a2400$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> The tone of the articles is so very different that
> it leads to different conclusions.  The CNN report
> almost makes it sound like they do not know who set 
> off the explosion.  Fox news has already tried and
> convicted the mad dogs of the Taliban.  It is no
> wonder there is such deeply divided opinion on the
> coalition action in Afghanistan, it depends on which
> news sources one reads.  Both sources are necessary 
> to even start to understand.

OK, that's the specifics that I was curious about.  You are exactly right.

As near as I can tell, CNN reported physical damage while Fox focused on
emotional horror.  CNN quoted the chief of police as a source while Fox
quotes the Taliban terrorists as a source.  CNN focuses on the actual Afghan
victims while Fox focuses on the presumed U.S. victims who were not actually
attacked.

They seem to be the exact same story, except I would classify the CNN report
as a factual news report about the event, while I would classify the Fox
report as an editorial position about the event.  They are different
newspapers with different purposes and methods of reporting.

There is no doubt why 80% of Fox viewers versus 55% of CNN viewers believed
that our troops found links between Iraq and al Qaeda, found weapons of mass
destruction, and that world public opinion supported the war.  (Ref.
<http://www.tvbarn.com/ticker/archives/015590.html>.)

	Fox viewers - 80% to have these misconceptions
	CBS viewers - 71%
	NBS viewers - 61%
	CNN viewers - 55%
	Print readers - 47%
	NPR/PBS listeners - 23%

(The report also notes that variations in misperceptions according to news
source cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the
demographics of each audience, because these variations can also be found
when comparing the rate of misperceptions within demographic subgroups of
each audience.)

Simply put, CNN is more of a news source, while Fox is more of an editorial
opinion source.  I have known this for a long time.  I was able to read both
sources and see that they described the exact same event with no direct
factual contradiction.  That was why I wanted to know exactly what
difference you saw.  It is rare to see CNN and Fox agree so well on the
facts, with only the spin being different.  Usually CNN and Fox diverge
wildly on actual numbers and facts in the stories they report!

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Dec  7 12:54:11 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 13:54:11 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
	<04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>
	<028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>
	<05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <20031207125411.GP5783@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 07:37:33PM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> 1) What *particular* machine is being considered? (I think I'm just
> paraphrasing Hal here actually, so perhaps better to answer Hal).

No specific machine. Not even a specific process, though there are early
suggestions, e.g.

http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/hydroCarbonMetabolism.html

(several of these are heavy steric hindrance candidates).

http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/mechanosynthesis.html

"mechanosynthesis" and "machine-phase chemistry" are good keywords.
 
> 2) If neither Drexler (and associates) nor Smalley (and associates) were to
> *accept* the burden of proof scientifically what happens by default
> politically?

The Nobel "what's this purple crap in soxhleted soot?" laureate wins by default</duh>
 
-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/957468a7/attachment.bin>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Sun Dec  7 13:48:15 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 14:48:15 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From 2theadvocate.com: After 20 years of research, an encryption process is
emerging that is considered unbreakable because it employs the mind-blowing
laws of quantum physics. In November, a small startup called MagiQ
Technologies Inc. began selling what appears to be the first commercially
available system that uses individual photons to transfer the numeric keys
that are widely used to encode and read secret documents.
MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this will
appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and
other organizations that transmit sensitive information. "We think this is
going to have a huge, positive impact on the world," said Bob Gelfond,
MagiQ's founder and chief executive. Encryption schemes commonly used now
are considered safe, though they theoretically could be broken someday. But
even before that day arrives, Gelfond believes quantum encryption is
superior in one important way. In some super-high-security settings, people
sharing passwords and other information must have the same key, a massive
string of digits used to encode data. Sometimes the keys will be transferred
by imperfect means -- via courier or special software. They are not changed
very often and can be susceptible to interception.
Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of physics:
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic particles exist in
multiple possible states at once, however hard as that may be to imagine,
until something interacts with them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/aea9ec1f/attachment.html>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sun Dec  7 14:28:37 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 09:28:37 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <004301c3bc89$5cde9ba0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
References: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir><5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312062359490.-329001@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
	<004301c3bc89$5cde9ba0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312070915370.-142043@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


My original question "How old is that interview" stands.
Looked to me like it was more than a year ago. 19 September
2002.

My comment reflected the reaction I saw here in NC *at that
time*, prior to the 2002 elections, when Rachel and other
Libertarian candidates made and sold calendars to help
finance her campaign. That they should now make a calendar
for 2004 indicates the idea was a popular one, well received
by a number of folk, maybe even outside the Libertarian
party.

There is some disapproval in the Libertarian circles about
the government financing of political campaigns.

The disucssion was not, IIUC, about the war in Iraq, either
its correctness nor its financing.

Regards,
MB

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Olga Bourlin wrote:

> From: "MB" <mbb386 at main.nc.us>
> >
> > How old is that interview? She sold calendars for 2003 to
> > raise money for the 2002 elections in NC. She's selling new
> > calendars for 2004 now.
> >
> > Most of the folk I ran into here who heard of it thought it
> > was pretty cool, rather than taking a handout from the
> > government to run a campaign or badgering people for
> > contributions.
>
> I'm sorry, but I can't see how the issue of whether selling calendars rather
> than asking the government for a "handout" is in any way cool.  To be
> concerned about a "handout" from the government at this level - it just
> seems like such a piffle.  The Iraq war is what's costing us so much (beyond
> the cost of the sacrifice of human lives, which are incalculable).
> Furthermore, (although it may not be "badgering" per se - just a unilateral
> decision hoisted on us), who but the "people" are going to be stuck paying
> the  $100 *billion* the war is anticipated to cost?:
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/90690.html
>
> Believe me, I'm not endorsing Harry Browne (former Libertarian Party
> presidential candidate), but found this advice in an article of his written
> in 2002 (link to entire article follows):
>
> "Don't invade Iraq. That's probably the only way to motivate Saddam Hussein
> to attack us with whatever dangerous weapons he might have. So long as we
> leave him alone, he won't commit the suicidal act of provoking the U.S. to
> drop nuclear bombs on him":
>
> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28690
>
> I read Rachel Mills' interview.  A bit on the frothy side, wasn't it?
>
> Olga
>
>
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/90690.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 14:45:16 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 09:45:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001><04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001><028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>
	<05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <00b901c3bcd0$bba24820$9ccd5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 07, 2003 3:37 AM Brett Paatsch
bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au wrote:
> Two questions then, one sort of scientific or
> at least empirical, the second political.
>
> 1) What *particular* machine is being
> considered? (I think I'm just paraphrasing Hal
> here actually, so perhaps better to answer Hal).

The particular design would make it much easier to demonstrate
impossibility.  Of course, even if a particular design fails, this does
not mean the general idea is impossible.  This would be akin to the
particular pre-Wright airplane designs that failed proving
heavier-than-air flight was impossible.  (Also, just like the airplane
analogy, nanotechnological construction is already done by non-made-made
things like enzymes.  Birds, insects, and bats already had
heavier-than-air flight before humanity.)

Smalley has also given specific reasons why he believes nanotechnology
won't work -- the fat and sticky fingers arguments, the that only
organics can do this construction in water (very close to the view that
only birds can fly which someone might have made prior to Kitty Hawk),
and the like.  These specific empirical claims are wrong and he should
know better.  In fact, all of this seems like the 10-leaky-buckets
Tactic -- the view that 10 invalid arguments somehow add up to a valid
one.  (I often see theists using this when defending their belief in
God.  They will, e.g., present a lot of arguments -- not necessarily
ten:) -- that are all invalid, but most people are not logicians, so
maybe the average person might see through a few of them, but still be
convinced by others.  Also, they're trying to use an analogy with
evidence: as evidence accumulates, usually an idea is made more
persuasive, but the same does not hold with invalid arguments.  It's
sort of akin to the view that if you have enough fictions, eventually
they'll add up to fact.)

I'm not claiming Smalley is doing this on purpose or has a bad
character -- or even that others who actually use the 10-leaky-buckets
Tactic are likewise bad people, consciously trying to use illogic to
support their claims.  I'm just saying this is how it appears,
especially given how sophomoric and easily defeated his arguments were.
(In fact, the only thing that actually supports his conclusion is that
we don't have nanotechnology now.  Of course, to claim something's
impossible because we can't do it at this moment is not a very strong or
compelling argument.  It would only convince people who either were
already biased in that direction or who did not understand the technical
details.  Sure, such people do exist, but I hardly think Smalley merely
wants to preach to the choir and the ignorant.)

> 2) If neither Drexler (and associates) nor
> Smalley (and associates) were to *accept* the
> burden of proof scientifically what happens by
> default politically?

I don't understand the use of "politically" in the above question.  Do
you mean that the science will drive the politics?  I don't think so.
In the short term, the politics will be based less on where the science
actually can do -- which can fall either way: Drexler could be right or
he could be wrong (Smalley can't be right because his argument is
invalid; at best, his conclusion might be right, but for different
reasons) -- than on who has more clout, even who can persuade more
people in positions of power which amounts to the same thing.

In a rational society, this wouldn't matter much, since science would be
a private endeavor and both Drexler and Smalley could carry on their
work: Drexler trying to build a nanoassember, any nanoassembler and
Smalley trying to prove it can't be built.  Actually, were the latter a
little more rational, he would make an excellent foil and help the whole
effort -- whatever is possible or whatever happens in the end.  (If
nanotechnology is truly beyond our capabilities, he might hasten our
acceptence of this view. If it is not, then he might help us to avoid
fruitless areas of research or to highlight specific problems that
enthusiasts might overlook.  Likewise Drexlerians would help him out as
well.  If nanotech is impossible, their continued looking for a solution
might refine our understanding of matter at that level by defining the
actual limits of our capabilities.)

Later!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 14:57:41 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 09:57:41 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
References: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir><5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net><Pine.WNT.4.55.0312062359490.-329001@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
	<004301c3bc89$5cde9ba0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <00c501c3bcd2$777f6ea0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 07, 2003 1:14 AM Olga Bourlin fauxever at sprynet.com
wrote:
> I'm sorry, but I can't see how the issue of
> whether selling calendars rather than
> asking the government for a "handout" is
> in any way cool.  To be concerned about
> a "handout" from the government at this
> level - it just seems like such a piffle.

Well, I'm not sure about it being "cool," but that's a relative term.
Anything can be cool or uncool depending on the context.

I also don't think it's a piffle.  Yes, there are bigger areas of
spending waste, but this a way to get the point across about such
handouts in a way that most people won't find threatening and might even
agree with.  One problem, too, with government financing of election
campaigns is that it becomes merely another welfare program -- meaning
certain special interests will want to keep it going regardless of its
results -- and that it will result in even more government control over
elections -- meaning that the government will play more of role in what
the issues are and who runs.  The old anarchist saw will apply in
spades:  No matter who you vote for the government wins.  (Well,
naturally, but the more intervention there is in the process, the more
those who hold the reigns of power now will decide who holds them after
the next election.  The more the current government will decide who will
be in the next government and what its policies will be.)

Later!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 15:20:31 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 10:20:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>

Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable?  I believe it's more of a matter of not yet finding a way to break it.

Dan
  From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 
  To: wta-talk ; hit ; extropy-chat 
  Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:48 AM
  Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution


  From 2theadvocate.com: After 20 years of research, an encryption process is emerging that is considered unbreakable because it employs the mind-blowing laws of quantum physics. In November, a small startup called MagiQ Technologies Inc. began selling what appears to be the first commercially available system that uses individual photons to transfer the numeric keys that are widely used to encode and read secret documents. 
  MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this will appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and other organizations that transmit sensitive information. "We think this is going to have a huge, positive impact on the world," said Bob Gelfond, MagiQ's founder and chief executive. Encryption schemes commonly used now are considered safe, though they theoretically could be broken someday. But even before that day arrives, Gelfond believes quantum encryption is superior in one important way. In some super-high-security settings, people sharing passwords and other information must have the same key, a massive string of digits used to encode data. Sometimes the keys will be transferred by imperfect means -- via courier or special software. They are not changed very often and can be susceptible to interception. 
  Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of physics: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic particles exist in multiple possible states at once, however hard as that may be to imagine, until something interacts with them.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/a91a155f/attachment.html>

From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 15:20:31 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 10:20:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>

Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable?  I believe it's more of a matter of not yet finding a way to break it.

Dan
  From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 
  To: wta-talk ; hit ; extropy-chat 
  Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:48 AM
  Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution


  From 2theadvocate.com: After 20 years of research, an encryption process is emerging that is considered unbreakable because it employs the mind-blowing laws of quantum physics. In November, a small startup called MagiQ Technologies Inc. began selling what appears to be the first commercially available system that uses individual photons to transfer the numeric keys that are widely used to encode and read secret documents. 
  MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this will appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and other organizations that transmit sensitive information. "We think this is going to have a huge, positive impact on the world," said Bob Gelfond, MagiQ's founder and chief executive. Encryption schemes commonly used now are considered safe, though they theoretically could be broken someday. But even before that day arrives, Gelfond believes quantum encryption is superior in one important way. In some super-high-security settings, people sharing passwords and other information must have the same key, a massive string of digits used to encode data. Sometimes the keys will be transferred by imperfect means -- via courier or special software. They are not changed very often and can be susceptible to interception. 
  Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of physics: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic particles exist in multiple possible states at once, however hard as that may be to imagine, until something interacts with them.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/a91a155f/attachment-0001.html>

From jacques at dtext.com  Sun Dec  7 15:19:24 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:19:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] promoting libertarianism effectively
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312070915370.-142043@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
References: <000a01c3bc21$7a6cd000$f0c7fea9@scerir><5.1.0.14.2.20031206150543.00bc04c8@mail.earthlink.net>	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312062359490.-329001@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>	<004301c3bc89$5cde9ba0$6400a8c0@brainiac>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312070915370.-142043@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <3FD344FC.80100@dtext.com>

http://www.livejournal.com/users/rachelmills/22673.html




From gpmap at runbox.com  Sun Dec  7 15:24:56 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 16:24:56 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBCCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From what I have read it is unbreakable in principle, because you can find
out if is it has been intercepted (then of course you declare the key void
and exchange a new one).
  -----Original Message-----
  From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of
Technotranscendence
  Sent: 07 December 2003 16:21
  To: ExI chat list; wta-talk; hit; extropy-chat
  Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution


  Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable?  I believe it's more of a
matter of not yet finding a way to break it.

  Dan
    From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0
    To: wta-talk ; hit ; extropy-chat
    Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:48 AM
    Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution


    From 2theadvocate.com: After 20 years of research, an encryption process
is emerging that is considered unbreakable because it employs the
mind-blowing laws of quantum physics. In November, a small startup called
MagiQ Technologies Inc. began selling what appears to be the first
commercially available system that uses individual photons to transfer the
numeric keys that are widely used to encode and read secret documents.
    MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this will
appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and
other organizations that transmit sensitive information. "We think this is
going to have a huge, positive impact on the world," said Bob Gelfond,
MagiQ's founder and chief executive. Encryption schemes commonly used now
are considered safe, though they theoretically could be broken someday. But
even before that day arrives, Gelfond believes quantum encryption is
superior in one important way. In some super-high-security settings, people
sharing passwords and other information must have the same key, a massive
string of digits used to encode data. Sometimes the keys will be transferred
by imperfect means -- via courier or special software. They are not changed
very often and can be susceptible to interception.
    Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of physics:
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic particles exist in
multiple possible states at once, however hard as that may be to imagine,
until something interacts with them.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    extropy-chat mailing list
    extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
    http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/5928e712/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  7 16:12:22 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 08:12:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <20031207161222.43412.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>

Well, the system is merely a means of key transmission that is not
crackable, in that it is able to easily detect interception and take
countermeasures. It says nothing about the security of the cryptosystem
that generates the keys themselves. As far as I am aware, the
cryptosystem is NOT a quantum computer based system.

--- Technotranscendence <neptune at superlink.net> wrote:
> Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable?  I believe it's more
> of a matter of not yet finding a way to break it.
> 
> Dan
>   From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 
>   To: wta-talk ; hit ; extropy-chat 
>   Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 8:48 AM
>   Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
> 
> 
>   From 2theadvocate.com: After 20 years of research, an encryption
> process is emerging that is considered unbreakable because it employs
> the mind-blowing laws of quantum physics. In November, a small
> startup called MagiQ Technologies Inc. began selling what appears to
> be the first commercially available system that uses individual
> photons to transfer the numeric keys that are widely used to encode
> and read secret documents. 
>   MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this
> will appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical
> companies and other organizations that transmit sensitive
> information. "We think this is going to have a huge, positive impact
> on the world," said Bob Gelfond, MagiQ's founder and chief executive.
> Encryption schemes commonly used now are considered safe, though they
> theoretically could be broken someday. But even before that day
> arrives, Gelfond believes quantum encryption is superior in one
> important way. In some super-high-security settings, people sharing
> passwords and other information must have the same key, a massive
> string of digits used to encode data. Sometimes the keys will be
> transferred by imperfect means -- via courier or special software.
> They are not changed very often and can be susceptible to
> interception. 
>   Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of
> physics: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic
> particles exist in multiple possible states at once, however hard as
> that may be to imagine, until something interacts with them.
> 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
>   _______________________________________________
>   extropy-chat mailing list
>   extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>   http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec  7 16:21:29 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 08:21:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <001101c3bc87$cec6ae80$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031207162129.44972.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> CNN title:  Afghan bicycle bomb injures 15
> 
> Foxnews title:  Taliban Targets U.S. Soldiers in Afghanistan
> 
> 
> 
> CNN:  A bicycle carried a bomb that exploded in the main square of
> the
> southern Afghanistan city of Kandahar, wounding at least 15 people
> 
> Foxnews:  A bomb ripped through a bustling Kandahar bazaar Saturday,
> wounding 20 Afghans, in an attack the Taliban say targeted - but
> missed
> - U.S. soldiers.
> 
> 
> 
> CNN:  Hashma and Deputy Chief Mohammad Salim said police and U.S.
> troops
> were investigating, but no arrests had been made. 
> 
> Foxnews: Taliban fighters claimed responsibility, saying the blast
> was
> aimed at American soldiers, but went off late.
> 
> 
> 
> CNN:  The blast damaged several shops in the square, breaking windows
> and crumbling walls...
> 
> Foxnews: ...Six shops were leveled. Broken glass from the shattered
> hotel front littered the ground, stained by the victims' blood. The
> wounded included three children...three of the 20 injured were
> seriously
> hurt and taken to the coalition military base at the city's airport
> for
> treatment...
> 
> 
> The tone of the articles is so very different that
> it leads to different conclusions.  The CNN report
> almost makes it sound like they do not know who set 
> off the explosion.  Foxnews has already tried and
> convicted the mad dogs of the Taliban.  It is no
> wonder there is such deeply divided opinion on the
> coalition action in Afghanistan, it depends on which
> news sources one reads.  Both sources are necessary 
> to even start to understand.

Well, I wouldnt' say Fox has tried and convicted the Taliban. Their
article clearly states that the Taliban has *claimed* responsibility,
and is only making excuses about why they wound up killing only fellow
afghans. The CNN simply didn't publish any claims of responsibility by
parties like the Taliban.

Now, I don't know why either side would do what they did. Is CNN simply
parroting its policy of not reporting that a criminal suspect is black
when he/she IS black, and not posting a photo, but having no trouble
reporting white criminals and posting their images, especially when
they are middle aged white males? In this case, are they not reporting
bad things the opponents of the US are doing as being done by them? Is
Fox trying to depict the Taliban as incompetent guerrillas, or are they
trying to say that Afghanistan is still dangerous?

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From rhanson at gmu.edu  Sun Dec  7 16:55:01 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:55:01 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who Anticipated Internet Exploding in 90s?
In-Reply-To: <00c401c3b9c2$d7679670$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031203104058.01e64960@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031207114404.0210c208@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/3/2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> >>>I just read someone who said:
> >>>"no one anticipated the explosive diffusion of the Internet
> >>>during the 1990s"
> >>>and I figured that this can't be right - surely someone must
> >>>have had the dumb luck to predict such a thing before 1990.
> >>>Can anyone point to a quote?
> >>I suggest reading through "A Brief History of the Internet" at
> >>http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml .  It has references
> >>to all the milestones in Internet creation, including white papers,
> >>conferences, etc.
> >That is a history of who did what when, not of who predicted what when.
>
>Wow.  Remind me not to have you do any research for me!  :-)
>
>You think that the Internet was based on past network usage and not build on
>wide-spread predictions of how the future network would be used and what it
>had to support?  All requirements documents are based on future predictions.
>There are technical predictions of load, spread, and acceptance. ... Of
>*course* they are chock full of predictions about how great and widespread
>the internet was going to be in the future!
>Some quick examples of documents listed in the reference you dismissed: ...

I did not mean to be dismissive; I meant to indicate that I was wondering
if anyone knew of a quote regarding the particular kind of prediction that
was asked for - a predictions of "explosive diffusion" "during the 1990s."
This is much more specific than general predictions that the internet will
eventually be wonderful.  And none of the specific quotes you offered are
on this specific point.  I agree that such predictions may reside in the
many internet "white papers, conferences, etc".  And this is naturally where
one would start to look if one was willing to spend several weeks
researching this topic.  But I'm not going to put that effort in just to be
able to casually tell a particular person that their claim is mistaken.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From jonkc at att.net  Sun Dec  7 16:55:12 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 11:55:12 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
	<012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <019a01c3bce2$f2acfd80$8efe4d0c@hal2001>

 Technotranscendence  Wrote:

  >  Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable? 
    
  I do. Unlike achieving Nanotechnology to break this code the fundamental laws of physics would have to be very different from what we think they are.

   

  John K Clark    jonkc at att.net  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/98e73e92/attachment.html>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Sun Dec  7 16:04:37 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:04:37 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBCCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
References: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031207105429.02057e00@mail.gmu.edu>

There is an article in the latest New Scientist on how to break it.

> From what I have read it is unbreakable in principle, because you can 
> find out if is it has been intercepted (then of course you declare the 
> key void and exchange a new one).
> >Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable?  I believe it's more of a 
> matter of not yet finding a way to break it.
> >>From 
> <http://www.2theadvocate.com/stories/120703/bus%5f7sci001.shtml>2theadvocate.com: 
> After 20 years of research, an encryption process is emerging that is 
> considered unbreakable because it employs the mind-blowing laws of 
> quantum physics. ...


Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From rhanson at gmu.edu  Sun Dec  7 16:48:42 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:48:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031207125411.GP5783@leitl.org>
References: <05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
	<04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>
	<028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>
	<05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031207110754.02082990@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/7/2003 Eugen* Leitl  wrote:
> > 2) If neither Drexler (and associates) nor Smalley (and associates) were to
> > *accept* the burden of proof scientifically what happens by default
> > politically?
>
>The Nobel "what's this purple crap in soxhleted soot?" laureate wins by 
>default</duh>

It's worse than that actually.  My strong impression from the recent NNI 
conference I just attended is that even if Drexler had the Nobel prize, 
Smalley's position would still win.

The key dynamic is government agencies perceive that "nanobots" have been 
associated in the public mind with possible big dangers, and they'd rather 
avoid any such association with dangers.  So they want to declare that 
"nanobots" are impossible, with no more specific common definition of what 
the impossible things are than whatever it is that the public is afraid 
of.  As long as respectable scientists can be recruited who say they are 
impossible, this is the position the government agencies will take.  And 
given the vast money available, it was pretty sure that some respectable 
scientists would be found to take this position.

Given all this, they key political "mistake" was to publicly create a 
vision of nanotech that included possible big dangers.  Given this initial 
choice, it was pretty much determined that this vision would never get 
government funding.  Of course it could still have been the right thing to 
do to warn the world about the dangers.  It should just have been realized 
(given 20/20 hindsight of course) that this would preclude any direct 
government funding.

An irony is that it was the exciting vision, including both dangers and 
great promise, that created enough public interest to make politicians 
think of creating a special research program, and to make those politicians 
want to explicitly require that there be some study of the social 
implications of this technology.  Given the way this plays out, the studies 
they actually do of social implications will explicitly exclude all 
scenarios that they think have anything to do with the declared impossible 
dangerous nanobots.




Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Sun Dec  7 17:01:47 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:01:47 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] followup avoidance upon unexpected dissident responses
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031206172545.03ca2108@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <000601c3bc52$976f9bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
	<20031207001341.86452.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031206172545.03ca2108@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <n7n6tv8fgq8osoki4gpnhqr8kinqcpfj5j@4ax.com>

I have been reading a lot lately about how the media shapes political
debate and excludes radical and third party political candidates.  In
particular, I have been following the Democratic party presidential
race and debates.  One of the interesting aspects of the media
coverage has been how, during the televised candidate debates,  the
sometimes "radical" or "dissident" comments of candidate Kucinich has
been handled.
Also, a former poster to this list, Anthony Garcia, was recently on
the Houston PBS "connections" TV show.  He is a Texas Libertarian
party activist and sometime candidate.  He "debated"/discussed various
broad political issues with representatives of the local Democrat,
Republican, and Green parties.  Interesting to me was how the
moderator and Dem and GOP representatives completely ignored Anthony's
occasional comments about broad issues regarding how the dems and gop
use their power to keep 3rd party candidates off the ballot and away
from the media. However, almost every comment from the dem and gop
representatives, even when about seemingly trivial subject matter,
prompted a followup from the moderator and the other major party
candidate.

Likewise, when Kucinich made radical/dissident comments about broad
issues during the debate, the moderator simply ignored every single
one, while comments from the more "mainstream" candidates were
followed up by the moderator.

Here is a quote from Michael Parenti's website that defines how this
exclusion of outlier parties, ideologies, and candidates is
accomplished via "followup avoidance of dissident comments" when a
radical or dissident comment is made on TV:


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Follow-up Avoidance

When confronted with an unexpectedly dissident response, media hosts
quickly change the subject, or break for a commercial, or inject an
identifying announcement: "We are talking with [whomever]." The
purpose is to avoid going any further into a politically forbidden
topic no matter how much the unexpected response might seem to need a
follow-up query. An anchorperson for the BBC World Service (December
26, 1997) enthused: "Christmas in Cuba: For the first time in almost
forty years Cubans were able to celebrate Christmas and go to church!"
She then linked up with the BBC correspondent in Havana, who observed,
"A crowd of two thousand have gathered in the cathedral for midnight
mass. The whole thing is rather low key, very much like last year."
Very much like last year? Here was something that craved
clarification. Instead, the anchorperson quickly switched to another
question: "Can we expect a growth of freedom with the pope's visit?"

On a PBS talk show (January 22, 1998), host Charlie Rose asked a
guest, whose name I did not get, whether Castro was bitter about "the
historic failure of communism". No, the guest replied, Castro is proud
of what he believes communism has done for Cuba: advances in health
care and education, full employment, and the elimination of the worst
aspects of poverty. Rose fixed him with a ferocious glare, then turned
to another guest to ask: "What impact will the pope's visit have in
Cuba?" Rose ignored the errant guest for the rest of the program.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>



-------------



From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Sun Dec  7 17:47:13 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 12:47:13 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>
Message-ID: <004601c3bcea$26086780$6501a8c0@dimension>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>

> He can't just wave his hands and say, if one thing doesn't work, we'll
> try something else.  He can't point to living things as an existence
> proof (because Drexlerian nanotech's revolutionary properties go far
> beyond anything possible with biology).

###  I think it's useful to consider the conditions that led to the
formation of biological mechanosynthesis, conditions which do not pertain in
the case of artificial mechanosynthesis, and try to imagine how changed
conditions could change the possible outcomes.

Consider, for example the need for self-assembly of every protein: The vast
majority of proteins are produced by a standard system (the ribosome) out of
a very limited number of building blocks, in such a way that the simple
one-dimensional ordering (protein sequence) determines the three-dimensional
outcome. This introduces severe limits on the kind of chemical interactions
between parts of a protein - they cannot be cross-linked for higher
strength, except by the use of other proteins or the limited expedient of
S-S bridges, so only select proteins are cross-braced (see collagen
formation), or else you'd need to have a bunch of specialized
post-translational modificators for each protein, and a bunch of
modificators for each modificator, and ...

The supporting structure of an enzyme has to not only support the active
moieities, but also code for its own folding, necessitating many loops which
are there only because of the folding requirement (see the difference in
size between the catalysts based on cage-compounds and proteins of similar
catalytic ability). Since there is no internal cross-bracing except for
non-covalent bonds (with few exceptions), the structure is very
thermosensitive.

Or consider the need for evolutionary malleability coupled limited
information storage and low computational capabilities: you need to change
enzyme structure very quickly to adapt to new conditions (so you have to
reuse existing devices and kludge them together to make new functions), but
the only way you can compute new structures is to make prototypes out of a
small number of building blocks (a cell couldn't store enzyme information
for making e.g. 20 000 building blocks instead of 21) and see if they
survive. This is a severe limitation on the amount of searching in the
design space you can do, even in millions of years.

The situation for the nanotechnologist is different. Let's imagine you have
enzymes (garden-variety biological ones) to make 20 000 distinct building
blocks - rods, braces, steppers, thousands of prosthetic groups for various
catalytic steps. Instead of making a protein catalyst out of 500 aminoacids,
you could use five or six structural blocks and attach two-three prosthetic
groups to have the same catalytic ability- but in a much smaller and more
durable package, as in a cage compound. You would need an assembler able to
grasp many more building blocks than a ribosome does, maybe even many
separate ribosome-like entities, yes, but without the computational limits
inherent in being a single cell that needs to reproduce *and* make most of
its components almost from scratch, this should be doable.

Also, if you are not limited to reusing existing enzymes, you can calculate
the optimal structure, and choose the optimal blocks out of your library of
20 000, you will make much more efficient devices. You can search the design
space far away from the list of available components and if you find
something worthwhile, you can make the components to get you there. With a
library of 20 000 specialized blocks you should be able to design organisms
with orders of magnitude higher concentrations of active elements, therefore
faster reaction speeds, smaller size, higher complexity - or simply, you'd
have MNT. It's true that the "assembler" might be a bank of 20 000
specialized building-block producers with a hierarchy of assembling devices,
each accepting the feedstocks of dozens of others to finally churn out the
products (such as a specialized producer, or fur for a teddy bear) - but
this makes it all the more believable, at least for me.

I do think that Drexlerian nanotech is possible, and pointing to living
things as the proof of principle is a valid argument. Almost all proofs of
principle, being hastily cobbled together from available parts, are slow and
clunky.... the final product of optimization will be much better.

Rafal



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec  7 17:53:00 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 12:53:00 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <20031207161222.43412.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <011c01c3bcea$f7ab1760$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > --- Technotranscendence <neptune at superlink.net> wrote:
> > Does anyone seriously think it is unbreakable?  I believe
> > it's more of a matter of not yet finding a way to break it.
>
> Well, the system is merely a means of key transmission that
> is not crackable, in that it is able to easily detect 
> interception and take countermeasures. It says nothing about 
> the security of the cryptosystem that generates the keys 
> themselves.

Technotrascendence is right about this merely being temporarily unbreakable.
Unbreakable techniques come and go all the time.  They are theoretically
unbreakable until someone figures out a way to break it.  Sometimes there
was a flaw in the theories.  Usually, it is cracked using an unexpected
trick that does not violate the theoretical proof in any way.  For example,
encrypted passwords were once thought to be unbreakable.  People calculated
that it would take billions of years to try all the passwords to find the
right one.  But hackers noticed that people didn't really choose random
passwords.  They chose English words from their small vocabularies of a few
thousand words.  The key space was magnitudes weaker than theoretically
predicted.  A dictionary attack trying English words broke most
English-speakers' passwords fairly quickly.  In this day of new physics and
rapid advancement, even the laws of physics may be subject to change and/or
new methods discovered that will invalidate previous theories.

Mike is exactly right that this only solves the key-exchange problem, if it
even does that.  It does not address algorithmic flaws or operations flaws.
Common operational attacks are still available for use against this
technology.  Even if the keys are created and exchanged securely, other
methods of attack are not blocked.

A timing attack, for example, can greatly limit the key range required for
guessing if we can somehow detect the beginning of the key generation and
then detect when it comes back with an uncrackable key.  Different
algorithms take different lengths of time to calculate different keys.  By
measuring the time exactly, we can figure out how long it took the algorithm
to develop the key.  This limits the keys to only those taking this length
of time.  Based on the random mathematics involved, some keys take more time
while others take less.  Being able to limit the key range limits the
strength of the key.  The best example of a timing attack was a timing bug
in SSH using remote password encryption.  Theoretically, the system
shouldn't tell you if you have a good username with a bad password, or if
the username is bad as well.  Hackers noticed that a good username took a
few seconds to respond because the system had to decrypt the password for
comparison.  While a bad username came back immediately because there was no
password to decrypt because the username was wrong.  By timing the
responses, hackers could tell whether a username existed or not.  They could
go down a list of common names and have the system tell them whether they
were valid or not.  Theoretically, the encryption was not cracked.  But
timing differences revealed the answer anyway.  Quantum communications won't
protect from this kind of attack.

A man-in-the-middle attack, for example, is when a person masquerades as the
intended party and tricks the security system into exchanging keys with the
fake person rather than the real person.  Then all messages sent to the fake
person are readable by them, and then they re-encrypt it and forward it to
the real recipient.  The sender and the real recipient talk back and forth
using "uncrackable" encryption (which technically has not actually been
cracked), never knowing that a third party is reading all their encrypted
communications.  Quantum communications won't protect from this kind of
attack.

Plain old spying, for example, still allows a person's office or PC to be
bugged so that the spy sees everything going on, even if the data is
encrypted over the network.  They spy sees the human-readable data at each
end before it is encrypted or after it is decrypted.  The data must be made
human readable for the humans at each end to read it, and that is where the
spying occurs.  Quantum communications won't protect from this kind of
attack.

Plain old social engineering, for example, is when a bad person fools a
target into lowering security without them realizing it.  A fake e-mail
message to the person saying that they need to give their uncrackable key to
the sysadmin for backups might get the uncrackable key from a gullible
person.  Or consider fake directions on how to verify that their quantum key
generation is really secure, where the complicated directions include
resetting the key to a known key instead of the randomly generated one.
Quantum communications won't protect from this kind of attack.

A Tempest attack, for example, measures very fine changes in power draw or
electromagnetic interference to determine what a device is doing.  Imagine a
graph showing the power consumption to your device.  Random fluctuations on
the power grid are large and broad on this graph.  Power draw from most
appliances are also large discrete changes.  However, a fast computer might
be drawing different micro amounts depending on what data it is
transferring, and these changes are fast and minute.  It is theoretically
possible to extrapolate such data from the power draw.  Another example of
Tempest leaks is the slight radio static click that each keystroke makes.
Each key has a little switch inside it that makes a connection as you type.
They keys are not microscopically similar, and each one gives a slightly
different static burst that is unique.  A person doesn't even have to
recognize each key, they can statistically deduce them like a coded
cryptogram, where "e" is the most common letter in English, "the" is the
most common three-letter word, etc.  A third example of Tempest leakage is
the power leakage from your screen as you type.  Between keystrokes, it is
constant while the screen isn't changing.  With each keystroke, the screen
only changes by one letter difference.  Repeating the letter will repeat the
same delta change.  Different letters with a different number of pixels take
a different amount of energy to display.  This also gives a Tempest spy the
ability to remotely read what is on your screen as it displays.  Quantum
communications won't protect from this kind of attack.

In other words, the quantum key generation and/or transmission only solves a
specific case of security and makes it secure.  All the other security
problems still exist.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec  7 17:54:11 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 12:54:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031207105429.02057e00@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <011d01c3bceb$2224f650$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> There is an article in the latest New Scientist on how to break it.

Thanks.  That was fast!  (The more things change, the more they stay the
same....)

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Sun Dec  7 18:36:40 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 13:36:40 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Golden Transcendence
References: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>
	<004601c3bcea$26086780$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <007e01c3bcf1$10b36b80$6501a8c0@dimension>

I just finished reading the third part of John C. Wright's Golden Age
trilogy, and I am awed. As I suspected, Wright allows humanity an escape
from the eons of dignified dying outlined in Phoenix Exultant - I was
convinced that a dynamical optimist like Wright wouldn't let humanity go out
with a quadrillion-year whimper. Add to it insights and epiphanies galore,
some unexpected but smart (rather than, as it sometimes happens, confusing
and stilted) plot twists, wry humor, ebullient libertarianism and an
explanation of some hitherto mysterious elements of his world history and
politics, and you have a glorious conclusion to the best s-f trilogy since
Varley's "Titan" (AISI).

The one issue I don't understand are the IP laws in the Golden Ecumene - are
they statutory or merely contractual? If statutory, why are they
(apparently) time-unlimited, which might result in inefficiencies (and
Wright doesn't say how inefficiencies are avoided), and if they are
contractual, how do they become universally enforced? I could imagine the
following argument in favor of IP held in perpetuity - since the IP owner
receives the full market value of his invention, there is a strong stimulus
to provide new inventions - both to earn and to avoid paying for older IP.
But then, if the inventor of the wheel was still alive, we would be paying
him royalties on every car, including toy trucks. On the other hand,
contractual IP would assure return commensurate with effort spent on
research while avoiding perpetual royalties but Wright specifically mentions
the Parliament as the venue where the scope of IP was decided in the Golden
Ecumene.

All this doesn't detract from Wright's vision, however. Highly recommended.

Rafal



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Dec  7 21:18:25 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 13:18:25 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Contradictions in Politics:
 Socialism/Democracy/Libertarianism/Republican
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031207121023.044b8d80@pop.earthlink.net>

Majority rules makes sense to me; especially if my needs are in the 
majority. That is why living in  America, it is easy to be (a) religious, 
wealthy and educated male; or, (b) Black, Hispanic, White uneducated and 
poor male or female.  This all depends on what mountain top one is peering 
down from.

I'm with Abraham Lincoln when he said that "...I would not be a slave, so I 
would not be a master."  However, according to the encumbrances of slavery 
in the early-mid 1800s I would probably be exactly where I am today, not 
with a or b.  These categories are quickly defusing, blurring, fuzzying, 
fading into the past.  But not everyone recognizes this, or even realizes 
it to be occurring.  Feminists still claim there is a glass ceiling, Jesse 
Jackson still hunts for global problems he can mediate, and the welfare and 
homeless still beg for money on the corner of Los Angeles's freeway off-ramps.

That "politics" will not find solutions to transhumanist problems is a 
pipe-dream - all light up with sugar plum fairies and dancing elves.  As 
Thomas Crown said in the "Thomas Crown Affair, "It's just a game.  It 
provides a venue to roll up shirt-sleeves, pump up our chests and vent, 
blame, and defend.  What better way to keep people off the streets? :-)

The human capacity for fairness or moral rightness makes the idea of 
democracy possible, albeit the human tendency toward obligatory of justice 
makes the idea of democracy necessary. Plato said that some of the 
"features of democracy ... will enable a "footing of equality, whether they 
be really equal or not."  Since when did futurists consider human beings 
and transhumans chattel?

Maybe Mark Twain, a favored American humorist/writer/thinker was more 
honest when he said that "I am a democrat only on principle," as it seems 
wholesome and caring to be democratic.  However, we do not  live in a 
"perfect" world in which people are treated "equally."  A physician of A 
PhD is often given more credence than her fellow "majority" - just listen 
to some soap-box academics.  Further, artists seem to think we are more 
in-touch, more intuitive, more spot on when it comes to visionary ideas and 
frowns upon the social ineptitude of the masses. We can pass the baton of 
disciplinary-snobbery around the Internet and we will discover how most 
humans hold onto their ideas like a lifeboat in the rough seas of political 
turmoil.

"Democracy is supposed to give you the feeling of choice," wrote Gore 
Vidal.  Sounds good.  But then he adds, "like Painkiller X and Painkiller 
Y. But they're both just aspirin."

The common thread between all the political agendas discussed over the past 
many years is the, "I'm right.  You are wrong." principle.

Freedom and equality are contradictions in terms, just as society and the 
individual are mutually exclusive.  How can I be free if my individual 
needs are not part of the majority?  Only if the majority is so confident 
that individuals are allowed to pursue and make their own choices.  In this 
country, it is the Democrats vs. the Republicans, but how is "a political 
order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are 
entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them" 
different than a democracy?  How is wanting the world to be healthy and 
prosperous not draw from the principles of socialism in which everyone is 
equal?  How is wanting to live indefinitely different from wanting eternal 
life in Heaven?  How does a desire to live in a pollution-free world where 
there is land yet to explore not environmentalist? Of course these are 
rhetorical questions used to show that while we may all want what seems to 
be the same thing, we approach it from different constructs for different 
purpose.

I can sum it up in meaningful directive in a one-liner clipped from another 
thread:

Max More wrote:

>However, I disagree that *anything* done to get ideas about liberty out 
>there is good. First impressions have a powerful influence on the human 
>mind. A poor first impression only increases the work to be done.

Why resort to outdated political models and religious views just because we 
want to go "mainstream"?  When did affirmative action find its way into 
transhumanism?  We must not bend over for every political or political 
group-think to soften and erode the values and principles of transhumanism 
just because we want to go mainstream.

BETTER, we must enable a sense of understanding, cooperation and 
willingness to work together.  We must invite others to learn about our 
ideals in ways that are non-threatening.  We must hold our own, stand 
strong, and educate the "mainstream."  Let's us not take our hard-earned 
sense of  the future down to a low common denominator.  Let us work toward 
raising the level of reason and vision to the rest  of the world.

Natasha
__________________________

"Two cheers for Democracy: one because it admits variety and two because it 
permits criticism.
E. M. Forster (1879-1970), British novelist, essayist. Two Cheers for 
Democracy, "What I Believe" (1951). Forster thought two cheers "quite 
enough: there is no occasion to give three." The third he reserved for the 
Republic of Love.

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that word I reach for my feather Boa!"
Allen Ginsberg (b. 1926), U.S. poet. Journals: Early Fifties Early Sixties, 
"New York City" (ed. by Gordon Ball, 1977), Oct. 1960 entry, "Subliminal."

"When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, 
as a rule the majority are wrong." Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926), U.S. trade 
unionist, co-founder of the U.S. Socialist Party. Speech, 12 Sept. 1918, 
Cleveland, Ohio, defending himself against charges of sedition. Found 
guilty, Debs was subsequently jailed for three years..

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and 
murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit 
suicide." John Adams (1735-1826), U.S. statesman, president. Letter, 15 
April 1814 (published in The Works of John Adams, vol. 6, 1851).

"Nor is the people's judgement always true: The most may err as grossly as 
the few."
John Dryden (1631-1700), English poet

"I swear to the Lord,
I still can't see,
Why Democracy means,
Everybody but me."
Langston Hughes (1902-67), U.S. poet, author. The Black Man Speaks, in Jim 
Crow's Last Stand (1943).

"Democracy don't rule the world,
You'd better get that in your head;
This world is ruled by violence,
But I guess that's better left unsaid."
Bob Dylan (b. 1941), U.S. singer, songwriter. "Union Sundown," on the album 
Infidels (1983).

"When people put their ballots in the boxes, they are, by that act, 
inoculated against the feeling that the government is not theirs. They then 
accept, in some measure, that its errors are their errors, its aberrations 
their aberrations, that any revolt will be against them. It's a remarkably 
shrewed and rather conservative arrangement when one thinks of it."
John Kenneth Galbraith (b. 1908), U.S. economist. The Age of Uncertainty, 
ch. 12 (1977).

"Democracy is the wholesome and pure air without which a socialist public 
organization cannot live a full-blooded life." Mikhail Gorbachev (b. 1931), 
Soviet president. Speech, 25 Feb. 1986, to 27th Party Congress, Moscow.

"The freeman, casting with unpurchased hand
The vote that shakes the turrets of the land."
Oliver Wendell, Sr. Holmes  (1809-94), U.S. writer, physician. Poetry: a 
Metrical Essay.

"Democracy with its semi-civilization sincerely cherishes junk. The 
artist's power should be spiritual.  But the power of the majority is 
material. When these worlds meet occasionally, it is pure coincidence."
Paul Klee (1879-1940), Swiss artist. The Diaries of Paul Klee 1898-1918, 
no. 747 (1957; tr. 1965), Jan. 1906 entry.


Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc
President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.transhuman.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/526e9d37/attachment.html>

From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sun Dec  7 19:12:46 2003
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:12:46 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [extropy-chat] same story, different spins
In-Reply-To: <20031207162129.44972.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031207162129.44972.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0312072010250.17015@hercules>

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>> coalition action in Afghanistan, it depends on which
>> news sources one reads.  Both sources are necessary
>> to even start to understand.
>
>Well, I wouldnt' say Fox has tried and convicted the Taliban. Their
>article clearly states that the Taliban has *claimed* responsibility,
>and is only making excuses about why they wound up killing only fellow
>afghans. The CNN simply didn't publish any claims of responsibility by
>parties like the Taliban.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/3296307.stm) and other
news sources says that no one has claimed responsibility, but that Taliban
were accused.

It shouldn't be so hard to find out *if* someone has really claimed
responsibilit or not. At least some of the news sources are lying, and it
doesn't help in the least.

Ciao,
Alfio


From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec  7 19:19:40 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 14:19:40 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] followup avoidance upon unexpected dissident
	responses
References: <000601c3bc52$976f9bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY><20031207001341.86452.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com><5.1.0.14.2.20031206172545.03ca2108@mail.earthlink.net>
	<n7n6tv8fgq8osoki4gpnhqr8kinqcpfj5j@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <005c01c3bcf7$1140a8a0$76cd5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 07, 2003 12:01 PM randy cryofan at mylinuxisp.com
wrote:
> Also, a former poster to this list, Anthony Garcia,
> was recently on the Houston PBS "connections"
> TV show.  He is a Texas Libertarian party activist
> and sometime candidate.  He "debated"/discussed
> various broad political issues with representatives
> of the local Democrat, Republican, and Green
> parties.  Interesting to me was how the moderator
> and Dem and GOP representatives completely
> ignored Anthony's occasional comments about
> broad issues regarding how the dems and gop
> use their power to keep 3rd party candidates off
> the ballot and away from the media. However,
> almost every comment from the dem and gop
> representatives, even when about seemingly
> trivial subject matter, prompted a followup from
> the moderator and the other major party candidate.

Well, I'm not sure of the selection process.  I've seen debates where
third party candidates have done well, but, typically, major party
candidates try to keep third party candidates out of debates or minimize
their impact in them.  This might happen by selecting a moderator who
does not take the third party candidates seriously.

Remember, too, major candidates don't want the situation to get out of
control.  Typically, they go for the so called center and ignore their
radical wings because they know their radical wings can't go anywhere
else.  Enter a third party candidate and that could change.  Now, the
mainstream candidate is given a dilemma: go more purist and alienate the
center or focus on the center and lose the radicals.  Most mainstream
candidates want to avoid that.

It's also like chess too.  In a lot of games, people use the strategy of
simplifying by trading pieces.  By simplifying the "candidate space,"
mainstream candidates can control the terms of debate and not have to
worry about losing support to radical or other factions within their
base -- or expending effort defeating them.  (Why are the Republicans
without any contenders for the Presidential nomination?  Well, Bush can
focus on the Democrats -- rather than fight a bitter primary like last
time and them have to fend off his opponents.  The same logic applies to
third parties.)

> When confronted with an unexpectedly dissident
> response, media hosts quickly change the subject,
> or break for a commercial, or inject an identifying
> announcement: "We are talking with [whomever]."
> The purpose is to avoid going any further into a
> politically forbidden topic no matter how much the
> unexpected response might seem to need a
> follow-up query. An anchorperson for the BBC
> World Service (December 26, 1997) enthused:
> "Christmas in Cuba: For the first time in almost
> forty years Cubans were able to celebrate
> Christmas and go to church!" She then linked up
> with the BBC correspondent in Havana, who observed,
> "A crowd of two thousand have gathered in the
> cathedral for midnight mass. The whole thing is
> rather low key, very much like last year."  Very
> much like last year? Here was something that craved
> clarification. Instead, the anchorperson quickly
> switched to another question: "Can we expect
> a growth of freedom with the pope's visit?"

The BBC is one of the most biased news services anyhow.  They make
statements like that all the time.  I wonder if part of it is just the
service trying to avoid anything that might make them personae non grata
in Cuba.

> On a PBS talk show (January 22, 1998), host
> Charlie Rose asked a guest, whose name I did
> not get, whether Castro was bitter about "the
> historic failure of communism". No, the guest
> replied, Castro is proud of what he believes
> communism has done for Cuba: advances in
> health care and education, full employment,
> and the elimination of the worst aspects of
> poverty.

Which is why people general hop on inner tubes from Key West to get to
Cuba.  I've heard the Cuban Coast Guard has to turn these immigrants
back, so many are trying to migrate to the Caribbean paradise.  Also,
note how those deluded enough to leave Cuba, quickly return when they
discover what a great land they've left.  This explains Florida's
declining Cuban population: more of them move back to live happy and
free under Castro.  (Sorry, I couldn't resist.:)

> Rose fixed him with a ferocious glare, then turned
> to another guest to ask: "What impact will the
> pope's visit have in Cuba?" Rose ignored the
> errant guest for the rest of the program.

I know you got this off another site, but have you ever watched Charlie
Rose?  He's not only politically biased and shows it, but he's a bad
interviewing.  He talks over his guests, ignores those he can't control,
and generally overtly steers the discussion.  Watching him, one gets the
feeling the guests are there merely as props  for him.  (This has
nothing to do with my disagreement with his particular politics, as I
find other Left-wing interviewers to be much better and even among the
best I know, such as Terry Gross (NPR) of Leonard Lopate (WNYC).)  So
I'm not surprised he would do this -- if, in fact, that's what he did.

But to turn this discussion into a positive direction:  How would you
get the media, etc. to pay more attention to radical or dissident views?
One thing to do might be to hire a polling agency to do a survey with so
called radical positions and see how many people hold them.  Let's say
you find 40% of those surveyed hold the radical position.  Yuo could
then use the poll to show how media coverage of such positions is far
lower than their actual representation in the population.  That might
shame some in the media toward mending their ways.  (Of course, I'm
assuming that these so called radical positions are more prevalent than
mainstream reporting would have us believe.:)

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Dec  7 19:38:34 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 11:38:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031207110754.02082990@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071041330.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Robin Hanson wrote:

> So they [goverment officials] want to declare that
> "nanobots" are impossible, with no more specific common definition of what
> the impossible things are than whatever it is that the public is afraid
> of.  As long as respectable scientists can be recruited who say they are
> impossible, this is the position the government agencies will take.  And
> given the vast money available, it was pretty sure that some respectable
> scientists would be found to take this position.  [snip]

I think people are missing a couple of important issues here.  Right now
a Drexler type assembler arm probably is *effectively impossible*.
[And one can comfortably ignore nanorobots.]  The reasons are poorly
developed methods and very high costs.

Lets see:
MECHANOSYNTHESIS: has been done on a limited scale with AFMs and
1-2 atoms.  No parallel AFMs in production to my knowledge.  There
is the Zyvex rotapod but it needs tool tips and needs to be scaled
down from MEMS to nanoscale.  That will happen probably if they
manage to make it through the decade and 5-20 nm litographic/MEMS
methods are developed.  (Right now we are looking at 65 nm circa 2006).

SYNTHETIC CHEMISTRY: it isn't sophisticated enough yet and the computational
capacity isn't up to the job.  The largest synthetic molecules that have
been made are things like Vitamin B-12, vancomycin and maitotoxin.  They
have atomic sizes ranging from ~200-500 atoms.  Even for the fine motion
controller which is 2600 atoms in size but probably only 1/500th to 1/1000th
of an 4,000,000 atom assembler arm design (not counting the motors and
computer interface you might need to control it).  [The reason the ratios
aren't exact is there is a fair amount of repitition in the assembler
arm design.]  Then you only have 2 people in the world (Merkle and Drexler)
who have ever designed nanoscale parts -- where does the rest of the
design come from?  Finally to assemble something with 4,000,000+ atoms
you are going to require *lots* of chemical reactions -- potentially
millions.  Even if you had the design in hand it is probably far too
complicated for the human mind and the current retrosynthetic analysis
programs are only capable of handling molecules from a few hundred
to a few thousand molecules in size.  The problem is the exponential
growth in the number of reactions you have to try as the nanoparts
increase in size.

ENZYMATIC CHEMISTRY: The problem here is that even though we are starting
to accumulate databases with thousands of enzymes (due to genome sequencing)
we don't know many of the structures yet -- though our rate of determining
them should increase significantly over the next couple of years.  Our
computer predictions of protein structure from amino acid sequence are
still pretty poor and our ability to design proteins has only begun to
develop in a few groups over the last 5-8 years.  And very few people
are working on de novo enzyme design.

Finally there is the issue of COST.  I've looked at this for ENZYMATIC
CHEMISTRY in [1].  You can disagree with my analysis but I would bet
they would not be low by more than an order of magnitude and its even
less likely that they are high.  The cost to design *just* the
enzymes for the Fine Motion Controller to do the assembly of smaller
chemical building blocks -- *if* we had lots of designers and some
reasonable skill in that process would be $5.8 million dollars.
For a nanoassembler arm the cost is $9 billioin dollars and for a
single nanorobot its $17 trillion dollars.  These figures do not
include the costs of the design of the nanoparts (nanosubcomponents)
of the finished nanomachines.  Since these amounts are significantly
beyond what most government government grants are for, at this time
you would have to recruit 5-10 groups to tackle the problems if
you really wanted to deal with them seriously.  That is the real
problem with Smalley's position -- an insufficient number of good
scientists have read Drexler's literature enough to want to take
a position against him.  That would allow us to attempt to enroll
the types of team leaders that can both bring home the money.

That's why one of the projects I'd like to work on is a complete
retrosynthetic analysis of the fine motion controller.  Its the
smallest nanopart Merkle & Drexler designed.  Its within 5x
of what has been done to date.  Once that has been accomplished
Smalleys position immediately starts to fall apart and the race
is on.

Now the good news is that natural trends in molecular biology,
synthetic chemistry, biochemical knowledge, computation, etc.
seem to be driving the costs down, in part due to the increase
in the knowledge base, better methods, working at smaller scales,
etc.  By 2010 things might start to look feasible for "moon shot"
type approaches and by 2020 things may really start to get feasible.

So I'm not so sure that there is a lot of politics involved (though
government officials might the impression out to the public that
they don't want to develop things that are dangerous -- but you
know that isn't true for DARPA and the pentagon.  The problem is
that most of the NNI work is being done by the NSF, NIH and
NASA which are probably a little more risk averse.

Robert



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Dec  7 20:09:04 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 12:09:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <004601c3bcea$26086780$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071147090.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

> This introduces severe limits on the kind of chemical interactions
> between parts of a protein - they cannot be cross-linked for higher
> strength, except by the use of other proteins or the limited expedient of
> S-S bridges, so only select proteins are cross-braced (see collagen
> formation)

You could take 2 of the stop codons and use them to create 2 new
amino acids that crosslink with something much stronger than an S-S
bond, design/evolve 2 new tRNAs, then kludge up Venter's minimal
organism so it only uses the remaining stop codon, then verify/evolve
receptors that can absorb the new amino acids from the medium
(I'd suspect minimal microorganisms will use universal amino
acid pickup receptors).  Voila -- an orgainsm into which you can
put new genetic sequences that will allow you to build much
stronger proteins/enzymes.  (I believe scientists at UCSD have
done between 1/10th and 1/5th of this already).

It is worth pointing out in [1], Table 1, I point out an alternate
genetic code that would allow 63 building blocks rather than than
just 21.  The era of whole genome engineering would allow one
to construct a variety of organisms capable of working with
different genetic codes.

> or else you'd need to have a bunch of specialized
> post-translational modificators for each protein, and a bunch of
> modificators for each modificator, and ...

How does the selenocysteine modification work?  At the tRNA level
or at the protein level?

> (a cell couldn't store enzyme information for making e.g. 20 000
> building blocks instead of 21) and see if they survive.

Well that isn't true -- there are organisms like Amoeba dubia
that have 670 million BP genomes, 20,000 building blocks
gives them 33,000 bp/building block which is probably enough
for 1500+ bases for each enzyme in a 10 step assembly process
and that doesn't include any reuse of parts of pathways.

> This is a severe limitation on the amount of searching in the
> design space you can do, even in millions of years.

Particularly if you find a basic set that solves most of the
problems most of the time.  I think plants that can tolerate
great extremes of heat and cold would be interesting to study
as they may have copied the enzymes that worked and simply
evolved them sufficiently to work at alternate temperatures.

Robert

1.  Bradbury, R. J., "Protein Based Assembly of Nanoscale Parts", (July 2001)
http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/Papers/PBAoNP.html



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Dec  7 20:13:15 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 12:13:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071147090.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071211110.1666-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> Well that isn't true -- there are organisms like Amoeba dubia
> that have 670 million BP genomes, [snip]

Sorry, correction, that is 670 billion BP genomes.
For those interested genome sizes (the DOGS database
[Dabase of Genome Sizes]) is a useful resource.

See: http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/databases/DOGS/

R.




From cphoenix at best.com  Sun Dec  7 21:07:58 2003
From: cphoenix at best.com (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:07:58 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
	<04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>
	<028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>
	<05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031207110754.02082990@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <3FD396AE.7B8A0241@best.com>

Robin Hanson wrote (and BCC'd to me--thanks!):
> Given the way this plays out, the studies
> they actually do of social implications will explicitly exclude all
> scenarios that they think have anything to do with the declared
> impossible dangerous nanobots.

Yes, I think you're very likely right.  And that avoidance could
backfire in the short term, and be quite dangerous in the long run.

There's another factor that is probably increasing public--and
scientific--fear of nanobots/assemblers.  I just read a paper by Michael
Lissack: http://emergence.org/redefinition.pdf that describes the way
people respond to unfamiliar concepts.  In general, people map the
concept to the nearest "glom": a fixed and primitive set of
associations.

Now let's apply this.  An assembler is a small device, active, made of
stiff parts with a stiff shell (association: chitinous), moves around,
has stereotyped behavior, can sneak into objects and corrupt or eat
them, can reproduce... need I go on?  It's a bug, plain and simple.  And
we know how people react to bugs.  (Note that "bug" also means
pathogen.)

There are a few people who get lots of practice at thinking with
precision about novel and unfamiliar concepts.  These people are capable
of refusing to glom new concepts, and instead treating them as
"indexicals"--terms that must be interpreted with precision--and working
till they figure out the intended meaning.  For example, those who make
a point of reading science outside their discipline will be continually
confronted with new jargon that must be interpreted carefully.  An even
stronger and more common example: each and every symbol in a computer
program is an indexical, so programmers must become very good at
figuring out indexicals.  But it seems safe to assume that most people
will not be good at this--when confronted with new concepts, they will
form gloms all over the place, and pick the easiest interpretation as
Lissack explained.

Even most scientists will not have much experience in overcoming
glom-type thinking.  In their own sub-field, they know all the jargon
and concepts, and can think with precision--as long as nothing new comes
along.  This phenomenon will be familiar to anyone who's tried to
communicate with scientists about something new.

It's worth noting that molecular nanotech has found good acceptance
among programmers and polymaths, and poor acceptance elsewhere.  Most
descriptions of MNT have failed to take into account the glom-thinking
process of the audience.  And so the descriptions evoked our ancient
fear and revulsion toward bugs.  This may have been a major spin
mistake.

Now that we know nanofactories are easier and more efficient than
assemblers, we may be able to move away from the insect-visions of
earlier MNT discussion.  It should be noted that bugs aren't the only
unfortunate association waiting to be glommed to.  The story of the
Sorcerer's Apprentice--runaway unstoppable productivity--goes back to
ancient Egypt.  Communicating about MNT without evoking fear-ridden
gloms will take quite a lot of care.

Chris

--
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Dec  7 21:23:53 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 21:23:53 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] AIRCAR: Boeing X-50 offers cheap alternative
In-Reply-To: <200312071612.hB7GCiH22605@tick.javien.com>
References: <200312071612.hB7GCiH22605@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <3FD39A69.7070207@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 21:14:38 -0800 (PST) Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> http://www.boeing.com/phantom/crw.html
> 
> I think that Boeing's Canard Rotor Wing test aircraft, the X-50
> Dragonfly, promises personal air-car capabilities sooner than Moller or
> Bell/Augusta.
>

Neat design! But at present it is a military, unmanned testbed only.

"Under an agreement with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency,
Boeing will build and flight test two unmanned technology demonstrators
to assess and validate this advanced rotorcraft concept".

Apparently Boeing hope to develop manned versions for the military in
the future.

"Although the CRW demonstrator vehicles are UAVs, the potential exists
for development of both manned and unmanned versions of the vehicle.
Missions for such a vehicle include reconnaissance, armed escort,
tactical air support, communications/data relay and logistics resupply".

How many of the military X-series technology test machines made it
through to a general public version? Not many. And if they get any
really good results, they will probably be kept secret for years.

So, considering that they only just began flight testing (tethered
hover) this summer, a general public, air-car type version is many years
away, if ever.

BillK





From jonkc at att.net  Sun Dec  7 21:18:42 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 16:18:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031207105429.02057e00@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <019e01c3bd07$c7a7ceb0$97fe4d0c@hal2001>

"Robin Hanson" <rhanson at gmu.edu> Wrote:

> There is an article in the latest New Scientist on how to break it.

I know nothing about network quantum encryption, I've never heard of it
before and the article doesn't explain how it works; but as for breaking
point to point quantum encryption it only has 2 suggestions:

1) Look over my shoulder when I decrypt the message.

2) Fire a massive Laser at me that is so powerful it damages my
cryptographic equipment and hope I'm too dumb to notice.

Apparently quite a bit of money is going into developing quantum encryption,
I'm a little surprised because public key encryption is much easier to use
and seems safe enough.  The only conclusion I can come up with is that
somebody with money thinks a practical quantum computer will soon become a
reality. If that happens then quantum encryption will be the only way to
keep a secret.

  John K Clark     jonkc at att.net






From cphoenix at best.com  Sun Dec  7 21:41:16 2003
From: cphoenix at best.com (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:41:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: fwd -- Robert Bradbury post
References: <01bb01c3bcfb$926dfa00$cf994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3FD39E7C.B35D3AA2@best.com>


Damien Broderick forwarded me a post that
Robert Bradbury wrote:
> I think people are missing a couple of important issues here.  Right now
> a Drexler type assembler arm probably is *effectively impossible*.
> [And one can comfortably ignore nanorobots.]  The reasons are poorly
> developed methods and very high costs.

Robert, I don't think anyone is saying that we could build such a thing
today.  That's not the important issue, and using words like
"impossible" and "ignore" obscures the issues that are important.  Try
these questions instead:

Actually doing it:

Would general-purpose diamondoid manufacturing be worth trillions in
2015?  (My answer: Yes.  It would be decades ahead of other technology
road maps, and could produce a wide range of products.)

Could we build it in ten years at a cost of multiple billions?  (My
answer: Yes, given ten years of targeted funding, we could probably find
and refine some technology to do mechanochemistry.)

Learning about it:

How much would it cost today to get more information about timelines and
capabilities?  (Not much.  A few theoretical physicists and chemists to
review Nanosystems.  A few more chemists and computers to do preliminary
mechanochemical simulation.  Some experimental physicists, mechanical
engineers, and a polymath or two to look for cheap ways to bootstrap.)

How important are these questions?  (With our current information, they
look very important.)


You mentioned several expensive bootstrap pathways, but you did not
consider several others.

Dip-pen Nanolithography:  Has been done with multiple "inks", multiple
tips, arrays of tips, re-registration, 2.5-nm precision.  BTW, parallel
AFMs from the Millipede project have already been applied to DPN. 
"We're up to a 10,000 pen array now, where you have 10,000 individual
pens that can grab 10 000 different chemical agents from ink wells." 
http://www.materialstoday.com/pdfs_6_5/Gould.pdf

Atom holography:  I haven't heard anything about it recently, but a few
years ago they were able to deposit complex patterns of atoms by
shooting them through a programmable grid.  Apparently this was not
merely masking, but interference.  

Bose-Einstein Condensates: One more way of handling very small groups of
atoms with high precision.  Last I heard, they could make them travel
along switchable wires.  I don't know if they've got single-atom control
yet, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Sub-wavelength optics: At last count, I knew at least four ways of
breaking the lambda/2 barrier.  Of course most of them haven't been
applied to fabrication.  I mention them as an indication that nm-scale
fabrication has not been fully explored and might turn out to be
significantly easier than the methods you considered.

You mention the cost of designing the parts to be fabricated.  If
diamondoid mechanochemistry works as Drexler, Merkle, and Freitas
predict, then the design cost should be very low compared with today's
synthetic chemistry designs.  The set of reactions to choose from would
be far smaller, and the results effectively digital.  You can't assume
that the design cost per atom in a nanodevice will be any higher than
the design cost per transistor in a CPU.  

Also note that for most products of interest, a few good designs could
be re-used and re-combined to make a wide range of products.  Levels of
abstraction have been extremely useful in computers (both hardware and
software), and if chemistry can be made digital, levels of abstraction
will work just as well in designing MNT-built products.  

Chris

--
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Dec  7 22:19:18 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 09:19:18 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001>
	<04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001>
	<028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune>
	<05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<00b901c3bcd0$bba24820$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <003e01c3bd10$282bee80$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Technotranscendence wrote:

> On Sunday, December 07, 2003 3:37 AM Brett Paatsch
> bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au wrote:
> > Two questions then, one sort of scientific or
> > at least empirical, the second political.

[snip]

> > 2) If neither Drexler (and associates) nor
> > Smalley (and associates) were to *accept* the
> > burden of proof scientifically what happens by
> > default politically?
> 
> I don't understand the use of "politically" in the above question.  Do
> you mean that the science will drive the politics? 

No sorry. I should have been clearer. I meant what do you think is
likely to be the outcome of holding the viewpoint that the burden of
proof is on Smalley if it is adopted by folks such as yourself and John
for 'scientific reasons' (perhaps validly) but it is not adopted by 
Smalley. I guess I was wondering if either you or John or others 
would change your views on where the burden of proof would lie
if you were concerned that nothing or little might happen politically 
if the burden was left with Smalley. For me, not leaving the burden 
with Smalley, who is unlikely to want to accept it, is just plain good 
political sense. To me its obvious that it behoves those who are 
aware that they live in a political system where persuasion matters
for the implementation of policy that those who don't like the current
policy direction either accept the political burden of trying to persuade
or they accept in the alternative the consequences, risks and policy
direction that follows from their not doing so. 

Regards,
Brett



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Dec  7 21:53:43 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 22:53:43 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <019e01c3bd07$c7a7ceb0$97fe4d0c@hal2001>
References: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031207105429.02057e00@mail.gmu.edu>
	<019e01c3bd07$c7a7ceb0$97fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <20031207215343.GB5783@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 04:18:42PM -0500, John K Clark wrote:

> Apparently quite a bit of money is going into developing quantum encryption,

That's because it's a brand new field in crypto snake oil.

> I'm a little surprised because public key encryption is much easier to use
> and seems safe enough.  The only conclusion I can come up with is that

Entangled photons are just used to distribute a shared secret (symmetric
session key). It's supposed to be a tamper-proof way to rekey remotely. 
It's not sooo tamperproof, but definitely better than to send your session 
keys via snail mail.

There have been excessive discussion of this technology on diverse
lists, cryptography@ included. Several attacks have been proposed.
(I haven't been keeping track of details, because it's boring).

> somebody with money thinks a practical quantum computer will soon become a

Nope. It's just about milking gullible fools. Application niches
targeted are securing financial crypto fiber lines and ground-LEO
sat rekeying (they don't yet work in free atmosphere over this range,
but eventually will). Tamper detection is definitely a boon here.

> reality. If that happens then quantum encryption will be the only way to
> keep a secret.

Nope, QM is only useful for number factoring, and despite encouraging
movements in solid state entanglement we're as far removed from QM
as ever. Nevermind the issue of how this scales to high qubit numbers
(it doesn't).

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/827d5b5c/attachment.bin>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Dec  8 01:22:55 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 17:22:55 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <000801c3b84d$2c2f8450$68c31b97@administxl09yj>
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031207163902.02c692d0@pop.earthlink.net>

Tonight @ 9 PM on the Travel Channel will be "Giant Planes" covering the 
future of transportation.

(11/26/03 "Airbus Unveils Giant Jet Airbus 
<http://www.travelmole.com/news_detail.php?news_id=99071&PHPSESSID=8f391fda3ab7c8b99938d5a52da44aa1>showed 
off its new <http://www.airbus.com/A380/default1.aspx>Airbus 380, a jumbo 
jet that could carry as many as 900 passengers Tuesday. Virgin Atlantic has 
reportedly ordered six of the colossal carriers. The plane will begin 
testing next year.")


Natasha 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031207/5dd00353/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  8 00:01:49 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 16:01:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031207215343.GB5783@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031208000149.97520.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

I recall on the extropy list of years gone past, that Eugen used to
post long posts rambling on, like he'd been on a caffiene drip for the
last 96 hours, about all sorts of things. What ever happened to that
posting technique?

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From scerir at libero.it  Mon Dec  8 00:05:06 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 01:05:06 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <011c01c3bcea$f7ab1760$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000301c3bd1e$f093ea40$f0c7fea9@scerir>

Quantum information is physical and has "permanence". 
That is because there is a no-cloning (and a stronger 
no-cloning) theorem and also a no-deleting
(and a stronger no-deleting) theorem. (Deleting is 
different from erasure, which is allowed).
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~schmuel/papers/pb00.pdf
http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd/481/jozsa.pdf
The above theorems are connected to the possibility
of FTL signals http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0305145
and perhaps also to a possible general principle of 
conservation of quantum information.
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0306044
Classical information is physical but has no "permanence", 
that is to say it can be cloned, deleted, and of course 
erased. 
That "permanence" of quantum information **could** be
the conceptual reason of so many difficulties to reach a 
perfect quantum cryptography.
For a general, and clean, review of the present situation:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0312011
 






From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Mon Dec  8 01:38:30 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 20:38:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071147090.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <00b401c3bd2b$fd0da880$6501a8c0@dimension>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>

> On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

>
> > (a cell couldn't store enzyme information for making e.g. 20 000
> > building blocks instead of 21)
>
> Well that isn't true -- there are organisms like Amoeba dubia
> that have 670 million BP genomes, 20,000 building blocks
> gives them 33,000 bp/building block which is probably enough
> for 1500+ bases for each enzyme in a 10 step assembly process
> and that doesn't include any reuse of parts of pathways.

### I agree that an organism could be made to store information about 20 000
building blocks - but could it have evolved this information on its own?
(which is what I wanted to question in the sentence you quoted) Even an
organism with 21 aminoacids and only about 30 000 genes (or 60 000 or 100
000, or whatever), like a human, has under natural conditions an early
mortality of about 90%, due to mutations in crucial genes. It would be
difficult to imagine a bug dependent on every single one of the 20 000
blocks and 200 000 enzymes and who knows how many control elements, and
still able to proliferate without recourse to error-checking methods that
would stop its ability to evolve (or force it to have a complex mechanism
for artificially evolving itself without random mutation).

As I was saying, using the clunky living organisms as a proof of principle
for blitz-fast molecular nanotech is valid precisely because of the
evolutionary limitations under which organisms evolved. Once we increase our
computational capability by another 10 orders of magnitude and our knowledge
about chemistry by another 10 Terabytes or so (purely out-of-the-hat filler
numbers), the nanotechnologist, free from the evolutionary limitations, will
be able to use biotechnological approaches to develop MNT.

Rafal



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Dec  8 02:15:14 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Alexander Lee)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 21:15:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <012801c3bcd5$a882b4a0$9ccd5cd1@neptune><5.2.1.1.2.20031207105429.02057e00@mail.gmu.edu>
	<019e01c3bd07$c7a7ceb0$97fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <Law9-OE199hf9Vu60To000051ec@hotmail.com>

I think you're right. The real reason there's so much funding for quantum
encryption is because whomever gets it first will have "unbreakable"
encryption for a while. It's like nuclear weapons were, you don't want to be
the one without it.

Public key encryption is pretty strong and easy to use, but it has a few
flaws that theoretically a really big gov't computer could use to break it.
A lot of encryption systems that use public key really use it to generate a
120-160bit session key and exchange it with their partner. Although there
are no documented cracks of 120 bit encryption through brute force, it's
theoretically possible.

Harvey pointed out a lot of common vulnerabilities, but most of them can be
avoided by using proper techniques to avoid timing, social engineering, etc.

The big benefit of this is that it allows for a secure key transmission
technique. Proper use of certificates should prevent a man in the middle
exploit.

Nonetheless, crypttech is growing by leaps and bounds as corporations now
need encryption where previously just terrorists and govt's needed it.

BAL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John K Clark" <jonkc at att.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution


> "Robin Hanson" <rhanson at gmu.edu> Wrote:
>
> > There is an article in the latest New Scientist on how to break it.
>
> I know nothing about network quantum encryption, I've never heard of it
> before and the article doesn't explain how it works; but as for breaking
> point to point quantum encryption it only has 2 suggestions:
>
> 1) Look over my shoulder when I decrypt the message.
>
> 2) Fire a massive Laser at me that is so powerful it damages my
> cryptographic equipment and hope I'm too dumb to notice.
>
> Apparently quite a bit of money is going into developing quantum
encryption,
> I'm a little surprised because public key encryption is much easier to use
> and seems safe enough.  The only conclusion I can come up with is that
> somebody with money thinks a practical quantum computer will soon become a
> reality. If that happens then quantum encryption will be the only way to
> keep a secret.
>
>   John K Clark     jonkc at att.net
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From neptune at superlink.net  Mon Dec  8 03:22:21 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 22:22:21 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <020801c3bb97$2650ef40$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><027201c3bc25$420b8950$11ff4d0c@hal2001><04b801c3bc48$25dfd880$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><001e01c3bc7f$d02c2b90$defe4d0c@hal2001><028001c3bc86$c38f64e0$8bce5cd1@neptune><05be01c3bc9d$5bdb6c60$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><00b901c3bcd0$bba24820$9ccd5cd1@neptune>
	<003e01c3bd10$282bee80$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <00bb01c3bd3a$7eee38c0$bcce5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 07, 2003 5:19 PM Brett Paatsch
bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au wrote:
> No sorry. I should have been clearer. I meant
> what do you think is likely to be the outcome
> of holding the viewpoint that the burden of
> proof is on Smalley if it is adopted by folks
> such as yourself and John for 'scientific
> reasons' (perhaps validly) but it is not adopted
> by Smalley. I guess I was wondering if either
> you or John or others would change your
> views on where the burden of proof would lie
> if you were concerned that nothing or little
> might happen politically if the burden was left
> with Smalley. For me, not leaving the burden
> with Smalley, who is unlikely to want to accept
> it, is just plain good political sense. To me its
> obvious that it behoves those who are aware
> that they live in a political system where
> persuasion matters for the implementation of
> policy that those who don't like the current
> policy direction either accept the political
> burden of trying to persuade or they accept in
> the alternative the consequences, risks and policy
> direction that follows from their not doing so.

It depends on whether people who agree with Smalley have the capability
and the will to try to prevent their views from being proved wrong.  In
the long run, they don't.  In the short run, they might drive research
underground or to less friendly societies (Red China, for instance).
They might do this as well by lending credence to anti-technology groups
and policies -- not so much just pulling public funds from these
programs but also passing laws against anyone doing it and also shifting
the culture toward other things.  (Passing laws would be initiating
force.  I don't believe Smalley's called for that -- unless I've misread
him.)

A better solution would be, again, to decouple public funding and
scientific research to prevent politics from having a say in science as
well as corrupting it.  However, even in a free market, chances are, one
will have to convince others to fund research.  It's just that one
wouldn't have only one source of such funding.  (In fact, in any
society, unless you're in control, you'll have to convince others.)

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From hal at finney.org  Mon Dec  8 03:36:56 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 19:36:56 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
Message-ID: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>

Unfortunately I don't have time to write about all the issues that
I see regarding the nanotech debate, or to organize my thoughts as
well as I should.  It's disappointing that the recent nanotech bill
has explicitly removed funding for Drexlerian nanotech.  But this just
reinforces that Brett is right: at least in practice, given the current
political situation, the burden is on the pro nanotech camp to produce
a more convincing case for the technology.

But I don't see that happening, at least not yet.  The initial response
seems to be to try to "spin" the debate into a huge victory for the
home team.  Contrast that with some of the comments in the article
I pointed to last week on the economics of nanotech by Brad DeLong,
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/002838.html.
Some quotes:

> Brad -- if you pursue this, I strongly recommend you leave out the
> Drexler stuff. The man is, IMHO, a snake oil salesman who doesn't know
> his stuff. The Chemical and Engineering News debate pointed to by drk
> above, at http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html,
> shows the difference between someone who actually knows his chemistry
> (Richard Smalley) and someone who doesn't.

> Apropos "Drexlerian" nanotechnology:
> http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/8148counterpoint.html
> I saw Drexler speak over a decade ago in front of a group of physicists
> at Stanford. I remember thinking at the time that did not stand up well
> to questioning by hard scientists. I'd put my money on Smalley.

I think the perception by those who are not already nanotech proponents
is that Smalley won the debate.

And I also object to some of the tactics being used in this spin
doctoring.  Smalley is being misrepresented and taken out of context.
>From the Foresight press release: "In the current C&E News exchange,
Smalley now agrees that assemblers (without impossible "magic fingers")
could use something like enzymes or ribosomes as tools for doing precise
chemistry."  This makes it sound like Smalley has conceded that Drexler's
ideas for nanotech could work.  But in fact, Smalley was attempting
to show that to the extent that nanotech needs to rely on things like
enzymes and ribosomes, it will share the limitations of those systems,
such as reliance on water and the inability to make strong objects,
hence that nanotech could not meet its claimed goals.

And about this water business, which has also been trumpeted as showing
that Smalley is ignorant of chemistry (a claim which sounds absurdly
arrogant to the unbiased spectator).  Maybe there are some enzymes
which can work in polar solvents or even in gas or vacuum.  But ribosomes
don't, and so Smalley's overall point still holds.  The chemistry of water
dominates virtually everything about proteins, enzymes (which are a subset
of proteins), and ribosomes (which are built equally of RNA and protein).

So what does Drexler really mean when he says that nanotech will work
like enzymes?  As Smalley asks, "do you think it is really possible to
do enzymelike chemistry of arbitrary complexity with only dry surfaces
and a vacuum?"  I think the answer Drexler would give is basically yes,
albeit not of "arbitrary" complexity (no system could achieve that goal).
He does believe that he can achieve and surpass the power of enzyme-like
systems using dry surfaces and a vacuum.  He refers to this somewhat
obliquely in his reply: "Bound groups adjacent to reactive groups can
provide tailored environments that reproduce familiar effects of solvation
and catalysis."

I've read Nanosystems, and it's always bothered me that the technology
described there is so different from what most nanotech fans are
familiar with.  Drexler describes the famous robot arm; you can see a
picture here, http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/images/fig13.14left.jpg.
He goes into a lot of detail about how it would work and how strong it
would be for mechanosynthesis.

But he doesn't use it!  The proposed manufacturing system that he
describes in some detail only uses giant robot arms in a final assembly
stage, to manipulate relatively large, pre-built blocks that are a
cubic micron in size, far larger than the arm above (which is only 0.1
micron long).  Instead, the actual molecular manipulation and assembly
is done by means of a "mill".

This is a system which holds molecular fragments on miniature pallets
attached to 4 nm wide assembly belts. The belts run past each other such
that the pallets are pressed together, and possibly rotated or manipulated
in some way, so that the payload molecules react, transferring one or
more atoms from one pallet's payload to the other.

These mills would gradually build up larger and larger pieces, which
would eventually be transferred to appropriately scaled-up mill systems.
These would use the same principles, now working with pieces with
perhaps thousands of atoms, attaching them together in various ways.
Eventuallly we get up to the micron size, which will have billions of
atoms, and at that point he uses almost-macro-scale robot arms to start
attaching these "bricks" together.

This molecular mill system provides a possible context to understand
Drexler's comparison of nanotech assembly to enzymes.  Enzymes bring
reactants together in a carefully controlled environment.  The active
site is surrounded by atoms which provide the exact pattern of positive
and negative charge, hydrophobic and hydrophilic regions, acidic or base
pH, necessary to promote the desired reaction.  This is what Smalley
means when he talks about biologically catalyzed chemistry occuring
as the interaction of a dozen or more atoms, which would seemingly be
impossible using robot arms.

But it is conceivable that a mill could provide a similar degree of
control over the external environment as what we get in an enzymatic
active site.  The pallets that hold the reactants can be designed
to have desired patterns of charge, ionization and electron binding.
When we bring the reactants together, surrounded by the two pallets that
held them, the environment surrounding the reactants can therefore be
controlled to a considerable degree.  The reactants can even be held
in pouches or grooves within the pallets to provide for full 360 degree
control over the local environment.

This is what I think Drexler means in the quote above, "Bound groups
adjacent to reactive groups can provide tailored environments that
reproduce familiar effects of solvation and catalysis."  The bound groups
are part of the pallets that hold the reactants; solvation, that is,
the effects of water molecules, can be mimicked by means of patterns of
charge; and catalysis achieved by carefully adjusting the properties of
the atoms lining the pallets so as to provide the necessary lowering of
energy barriers.

I think it is rather difficult to interpret Drexler's comment in terms
of robot arms.  They have a limited flexibility in terms of tailoring
the environment in the near vicinity of the reaction.  It would be
extremely complicated to recreate the effects of solvation (the widespread
presence of water molecules shielding and modifying electrical effects)
and catalysis using robot arms, raising fat-finger problems.

The point of this rather lengthy digression is that Drexler and other
nanotech proponents are not doing a good job of explaining their design
concepts.  This is in part why they are so commonly misunderstood.
And it seems almost willful.  Drexler is trying to explain exactly
how his system will work: "In machine-phase chemistry, conveyors and
positioners (not solvents and thermal motion) bring reactants together."
But this terminology is complete generic and unspecific: conveyors and
positioners.  It applies to mills, but could also apply to robot arms,
where reactants are conveyed to the tip and then positioned to be applied
to the work piece.

Didn't anyone reading this exchange wonder about Drexler's insistence
that "fingers" are not needed for his assembly process?  What is a robot
arm if not a finger, in this context?  Do people realize that Drexler
has moved away from arm-based assembly, perhaps due to some of the very
objections that Smalley has (re-) discovered?

Of course, I'm not even 100% sure that my interpretation is right, either.
I've explained above how I think his comments relate to the designs
in Nanosystems.  But maybe I'm wrong, maybe he does still plan to use
robot arms.

Why should I have to guess?  And why should Smalley?  This continued
evasiveness and refusal to plainly specify a design strategy
forces nanotech critics to extrapolate their own understanding and
interpretations.  And once this happens, the nanotech proponents sit back
and smugly call "strawman".  Drexler and Smalley are talking past each
other, because Drexler refuses to plainly state how his manufacturing
system will work, contenting himself with telling Smalley that all his
guesses are wrong.

This isn't a game of 20 Questions.  If nanotech were the dominant
paradigm, this lack of specificity might be acceptable.  But when you
are on the outside looking in, it will not succeed.  All you're going
to do is make people confused and angry.

I share Smalley's frustration when he writes, "it would be helpful to
all of us who take the nanobot assembler idea of 'Engines of Creation'
seriously if you would tell us more about this nonaqueous enzymelike
chemistry."  Rather than lobbying and spinning the debate, I'd suggest
that nanotech proponents work harder at fleshing out and clearly
describing their proposals.  Give your critics something to criticize, and
at least the debates won't be as empty as the Smalley-Drexler exchange.

Hal


From neptune at superlink.net  Mon Dec  8 03:53:28 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 22:53:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
Message-ID: <011b01c3bd3e$d7d3a660$bcce5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 07, 2003 10:36 PM Hal Finney hal at finney.org wrote:
> Unfortunately I don't have time to write about all
> the issues that I see regarding the nanotech
> debate, or to organize my thoughts as well as
> I should.  It's disappointing that the recent
> nanotech bill has explicitly removed funding
> for Drexlerian nanotech.  But this just reinforces
> that Brett is right: at least in practice, given the
> current political situation, the burden is on the
> pro nanotech camp to produce a more
> convincing case for the technology.

I think the only thing that will convince some is actual nanotechnology.
That being said, perhaps -- and I don't have time to read your whole
post, so forgive me if you mention (or someone else already mentioned)
this -- the way to turn things around -- and I actually don't mind no
public funding for this:) but I'd like to convince private sponsors and
see the research aboveboard -- is to get critics of nanotech like
Smalley to articulate what would be the minimum short of a full-blown,
working assembler to get them to agree nanotechnology is possible and
even practical.

In other words, one might say to Smalley, if it's possible to build X or
control process Y on a nanoscale, would you agree that it's possible to
have full-blown Drexlertech?  (X and Y would be stuff that is either
doable now or will be doable in short order.)  Smalley can even fill in
the X and Y above -- provided it's not something too off the wall.  (If
he says you have to bring Socrates back to life...:)

35% awake now.

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Dec  8 04:44:47 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 23:44:47 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
Message-ID: <017001c3bd46$057f6020$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Hal Finney wrote,
> Unfortunately I don't have time to write about all the issues 
> that I see regarding the nanotech debate, or to organize my 
> thoughts as well as I should.

> The 
> initial response seems to be to try to "spin" the debate into 
> a huge victory for the home team.

> I think the perception by those who are not already nanotech 
> proponents is that Smalley won the debate.

> And I also object to some of the tactics being used in this 
> spin doctoring.  Smalley is being misrepresented and taken 
> out of context.

> I've read Nanosystems, and it's always bothered me that the 
> technology described there is so different from what most 
> nanotech fans are familiar with.

> The point of this rather lengthy digression is that Drexler 
> and other nanotech proponents are not doing a good job of 
> explaining their design concepts.  This is in part why they 
> are so commonly misunderstood. And it seems almost willful.

> Why should I have to guess?  And why should Smalley?  This 
> continued evasiveness and refusal to plainly specify a design 
> strategy forces nanotech critics to extrapolate their own 
> understanding and interpretations.  And once this happens, 
> the nanotech proponents sit back and smugly call "strawman".  
> Drexler and Smalley are talking past each other, because 
> Drexler refuses to plainly state how his manufacturing system 
> will work, contenting himself with telling Smalley that all 
> his guesses are wrong.

> This isn't a game of 20 Questions.  If nanotech were the 
> dominant paradigm, this lack of specificity might be 
> acceptable.  But when you are on the outside looking in, it 
> will not succeed.  All you're going to do is make people 
> confused and angry.

> I share Smalley's frustration when he writes, "it would be 
> helpful to all of us who take the nanobot assembler idea of 
> 'Engines of Creation' seriously if you would tell us more 
> about this nonaqueous enzymelike chemistry."  Rather than 
> lobbying and spinning the debate, I'd suggest that nanotech 
> proponents work harder at fleshing out and clearly describing 
> their proposals.  Give your critics something to criticize, 
> and at least the debates won't be as empty as the 
> Smalley-Drexler exchange.

Hear, Hear!  I, too, am frustrated by the lack of scientific or engineering
rigor for many of our futuristic ideas.  Nanotech is merely one of many
obvious examples.  We have no shortage of fan club members who insist on the
viability of these technologies.  We have business models, organizations and
personalities promoting this stuff.  But what we lack is actual engineering
research, design work, or technical specifications that actually have
anything to do with the technology itself.  Virtually all of our
transhumanist writings have been written at the philosophical level or the
speculation level.  Very little of it actually is rigorous enough to analyze
or use by anybody interested in building this technology.  We will continue
to have little to no effect on lobbying or future technologies until we
actually get some engineers working on this stuff.  Military, corporate and
even private labs will continue to ignore us because we have nothing to add
to the technology.  Arm-chair pontificating, arguing on the network, and
amateur calculations on the back of napkin just aren't good enough.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From alito at organicrobot.com  Mon Dec  8 07:09:36 2003
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 17:09:36 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071041330.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071041330.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <1070867376.6256.13.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 05:38, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> SYNTHETIC CHEMISTRY: it isn't sophisticated enough yet and the computational
> capacity isn't up to the job.  The largest synthetic molecules that have
> been made are things like Vitamin B-12, vancomycin and maitotoxin.  They
> have atomic sizes ranging from ~200-500 atoms.  Even for the fine motion
> controller which is 2600 atoms in size but probably only 1/500th to 1/1000th
> of an 4,000,000 atom assembler arm design (not counting the motors and
> computer interface you might need to control it).

Current synthetic molecules can be a bit bigger than the ones you
pointed out:
http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/9293/Apr05_93/11.htm shows synthesis of a
pure hydrocarbon sphere of 1134 carbon atoms (2.2k atoms overall).

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=24856 shows
total chemical synthesis of a 238 amino-acid chain.  (This last one is
from 1998, don't know if this has been bettered).

alejandro




From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec  8 07:30:52 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 08:30:52 +0100
Subject: [Posting style] Re: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBBCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <3FD428AC.1010403@mail.tele.dk>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

I have purposedly copied the entire content of the posting. But cannot 
bring myself to top-post. So please read on at the bottom.


>>From 2theadvocate.com: After 20 years of research, an encryption process is
> emerging that is considered unbreakable because it employs the mind-blowing
> laws of quantum physics. In November, a small startup called MagiQ
> Technologies Inc. began selling what appears to be the first commercially
> available system that uses individual photons to transfer the numeric keys
> that are widely used to encode and read secret documents.
> MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this will
> appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and
> other organizations that transmit sensitive information. "We think this is
> going to have a huge, positive impact on the world," said Bob Gelfond,
> MagiQ's founder and chief executive. Encryption schemes commonly used now
> are considered safe, though they theoretically could be broken someday. But
> even before that day arrives, Gelfond believes quantum encryption is
> superior in one important way. In some super-high-security settings, people
> sharing passwords and other information must have the same key, a massive
> string of digits used to encode data. Sometimes the keys will be transferred
> by imperfect means -- via courier or special software. They are not changed
> very often and can be susceptible to interception.
> Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of physics:
> Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic particles exist in
> multiple possible states at once, however hard as that may be to imagine,
> until something interacts with them.

I have noticed that some posters post massive blocks of text, as the 
above. (Giu1i0 this is not personal) Being a web designer and usability 
geek I have long wanted to say something about it.

The shape of the text makes it easier to scan/read a big block of text. 
A big square lump of text like the above is *very* difficult to read. 
The overall graphic layout of the text doesn't give me any landmarks 
that I can use for orientation.

So if I read the text and loose my orientation, I have to re-read 
several lines to find it again.


Usually if a text looks like above, I don't bother reading it. I am 
shure that many other reacts likewise.

Having a massive block of text also makes it difficult to reply to a 
specific point in the text. The newsreader will allredy have placed 
quotemarks in irritating places.

So generally it is better to split up a text in related paragraphs.


I have some links about it here
-------------------------------
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9703b.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9710a.html


And a link for writing better email subjects
--------------------------------------------
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/980906.html

That is generally not a big problem on this list, but imagine having to 
scan through the archives a few years down, trying to find a particular 
posting. Then you really appreciate a really clear subject.


I have tried to reformat the posting at the bottom of this page, to show 
what I mean.


regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark


##################################

 >From 2theadvocate.com:

After 20 years of research, an encryption process is emerging that is 
considered unbreakable because it employs the mind-blowing laws of 
quantum physics.

In November, a small startup called MagiQ Technologies Inc. began 
selling what appears to be the first commercially available system that 
uses individual photons to transfer the numeric keys that are widely 
used to encode and read secret documents.

MagiQ (pronounced "magic," with the "Q" for "quantum") expects this will 
appeal to banks, insurers, government agencies, pharmaceutical companies 
and other organizations that transmit sensitive information. "We think 
this is going to have a huge, positive impact on the world," said Bob 
Gelfond, MagiQ's founder and chief executive.

Encryption schemes commonly used now are considered safe, though they 
theoretically could be broken someday. But even before that day arrives, 
Gelfond believes quantum encryption is superior in one important way.

In some super-high-security settings, people sharing passwords and other 
information must have the same key, a massive string of digits used to 
encode data. Sometimes the keys will be transferred by imperfect means 
-- via courier or special software. They are not changed very often and 
can be susceptible to interception.

Quantum encryption employs one of the defining discoveries of physics: 
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, which says subatomic particles exist 
in multiple possible states at once, however hard as that may be to 
imagine, until something interacts with them.



From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec  8 08:44:26 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 09:44:26 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071041330.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071041330.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <3FD439EA.8000905@mail.tele.dk>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> I think people are missing a couple of important issues here.  Right now
> a Drexler type assembler arm probably is *effectively impossible*.
> [And one can comfortably ignore nanorobots.]  The reasons are poorly
> developed methods and very high costs.

I usually don't post "me to" posts, but this is a very good overview of 
the possible routes to nanotech.

I strongly believe myself that the road to nano goes through enzyme 
chemistry. Ensymes are the closest thing to nanotech that we currently 
have a chance of understanding and synthesizing. They also have most of 
the features of small nanobots, fast, efficient and reusable.

Which is why protein folding and proteomics is so important.

Organic chemistry/biology also gives us a lot of flexible reusable 
designs to borrow from.



regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark



From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec  8 08:48:01 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 09:48:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
References: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
Message-ID: <3FD43AC1.1010501@mail.tele.dk>

Hal Finney wrote:

> I think the perception by those who are not already nanotech proponents
> is that Smalley won the debate.


How can you not win, if you can clearly show that it is scary for the kids.

Now if only he can make Drexler call him a nazi, then the debate will be 
completely over.



regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark

;-)



From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec  8 09:10:49 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 10:10:49 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] theobiology
In-Reply-To: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031205230445.69884.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FD44019.5020605@mail.tele.dk>

The Avantguardian wrote:

> In my experience there are generally two types of religious folk. The 
> first are the brainwashed sheep that send off their cash to any 
> huckster with enough charisma to wave a 1000 year old book around in 
> front of them and tell them they are doomed if they don't convert.
>  
> The second kind are very bright skeptical people that have examined 
> the evidence thoroughly and made an informed decision that the 
> universe is governed by a living rational force or entity. Usually 
> these people are deeply spiritual although they tend to hold no stock 
> in the traditional organized religions as they recognize these to be 
> scams and tools of power on major scale. 


If they have "examined the evidence thoroughly and made an informed 
decision" they are either not very bright nor very sceptical...

Post modern self-invented religious views or no more correct than those 
in a 2000 year old book, unless supported by evidence.

There is simply no evidence that points in the direction of a rational 
force or entity.

That is why it is called "belief" and not "support of a theory".

 > Some of the most celebrated geniuses in history have been of the
 > second type

This is called "argument from authority", and is rather irellevant:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

> This is because when you have a very high IQ you are good at seeing 
> patterns of information. When you see so much pattern in the universe, 
> so little of which can be explained by mere science, it engenders 
> faith that there is SOMETHING out there calling the shots. 

It might. Thought I would say that if a lot of random stuff happens, 
then there will allways be patterns. And the human mind being an 
efficient pattern recogniser will look for these patterns and apply 
useless meaning to them.



regards Max M Rasmsusen, Denmark



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Dec  8 09:34:37 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 20:34:37 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>
	<20031206195800.GC5783@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <012001c3bd6e$7fa86360$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> I personally expect crosslinked polymer as structure bulk, not
> diamond nor graphenes.

Interesting. I think I can see why crosslinked polymers might appeal
given disulphide bonds already feature in routine protein chemistry,
but I see protein design as pretty complex, requiring a solvent, and
very hard to do computationally (I presume you don't just want to stuff
a volume with any old shape). If diamonoid forms could be produced
they would seem to have the advantage of being conceptually easier to
design with. Is your expectation for cross-linked polymer bulk structures
based on  the view that diamondoid would be too difficult or rather that
designer protein chemistry would be relatively easy?

Regards,
Brett 




From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec  8 11:34:50 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 12:34:50 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spanish Cryonics Society
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBGEBFCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

The Spanish Cryonics Society (SEC) is a non profit Society whose aim is: "to
gather all interested persons, and to promote all activities deemed
appropriate to achieve, through medical and scientific means, extending or
suspending human life while preserving the identity of the person as well as
all his physical and mental skills.
To achieve this aim, the following activities are performed:
Supporting the investigation and the application of all current and future
medical and scientific means that may permit achieving the objectives
stated;
Facilitating the approval by the Spanish Law of all means which may permit
achieving the objectives stated;
Promoting collaboration with Health Authorities, as well as with medical and
scientific societies, nationally and worldwide;
An important objective of the Society is ensuring that everyone who has been
treated is protected, when appropriate, with biological and legal means to
maintain suitable conditions for his preservation, until Science permits his
complete recovery." (translated from Spanish by yours truly).
I attended a SEC meeting in Madrid on December 6, 2003. We decided to
relaunch the activities of the Society, in particular in terms of spreading
awareness of cryonics in Spain, establishing contacts with life insurance
providers, establishing a solid Internet presence, developing a media
strategy, and solving all issues related to Spanish Law and Health
Authorities. The Society will offer advice to all members and interested
persons for understanding cryonic science, technologies and procedures,
contacting cryonic service providers such as Alcor and the Cryonics
Institute, selecting suitable life insurance terms, and solving all issues
related to Spanish Law and Health Authorities. All developments will be
posted to the website of the SEC.
The Spanish Cryonics Society wishes to develop collaborations with all the
main players in the field of cryonics. In the next few days SEC officers
will begin contacting cryonicists individually.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031208/8bbca79a/attachment.html>

From extropy at audry2.com  Mon Dec  8 14:41:26 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 22:41:26 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <000001c3b8a4$7156ff20$6501a8c0@SHELLY> (spike66@comcast.net)
References: <000001c3b8a4$7156ff20$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <200312081441.hB8EfQ201341@igor.synonet.com>


"Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net> writes:

> The equations for power requirements as a function of rotor
> length are well understood Don.  Textbooks on VTOL design
> are available at your local university.  There is a very 
> good reason why choppers have long rotors, and why sailplanes
> with long skinny wings have a more efficient glide slope
> than high powered aircraft.

Jet VTOL is possible, and has been don. It's called the Harrier.

Having listened to on take off at an airshow (500m away), I would not
want my neighbor to use one for his daily commute though.

Major


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  8 14:02:14 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 14:02:14 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Consensus :Expressio unius est exclusioalterius
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311280748500.15427-100000@server.aeiveos.com><00a201c3b5cc$f477beb0$3bb5ff3e@artemis><000f01c3b5e4$0c2f4020$0200a8c0@etheric><01bc01c3b5e8$a6f96c30$3bb5ff3e@artemis><006801c3b60f$42d8e060$0200a8c0@etheric><028601c3b612$a1527c70$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
	<010601c3b631$4044a880$0200a8c0@etheric>
	<00a101c3b6b9$323b7bf0$3bb5ff3e@artemis>
	<uupusv8tn9pesisud0kac7d508apnukh2s@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <03fb01c3bd93$e1c2fb80$62256bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "randy" <cryofan at mylinuxisp.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Consensus :Expressio unius est
exclusioalterius


> On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:41:42 -0000, Dirk wrote
> >
> >The Consensus:-
> >The political party for the new millennium
> >http://www.theconsensus.org
>
>
> I really like your new political party. It aligns fairly well with my
> own political beliefs.  However, since there probably only about a
> dozen people in the entire world who adhere to these same political
> beliefs, I doubt it will take the world by storm, and the chances of
> it making any dent here in the USA is of course nil.

Or anywhere, probably.
However, I'm giving it my best shot so if in future anyone says '...so what
did you do?' when I whine on about how crap everything is I'll just point
them to some history.

> But how do you feel about the European welfare states? You wrote:
>
> "From the Right we believe in individual responsibility to balance
> individual rights and that less government is best government - that
> governments should regulate, but not act as an employer or wealth
> producer. "
>
> This would seem to cast the European welfare states in a less
> favorable light?

Specifically I'm not in favour of govts taking wadges of cash from one
section of society and handing it to another.
Govts should govern ie regulate, so that the basic rules under which a
society operates creates the greatest good for the greatest number, and do
it without sacrificing the least capable members.

> You also wrote:
> "We are nationalists in that we believe that every major cultural
> group should have its own homeland and live under laws of its own
> choosing and in its own way. Also that the independent nation state is
> the last line of defence for the common people against exploitation by
> unrestrained Global Capitalism. We are 'inclusive nationalists' in
> that we believe that all of our citizens have equal rights and are
> equally welcome irrespective of race. So if you are looking for
> nationalists who are not racists, sexists or into euphemisms such as
> 'traditional values', here we are. Our nationalism is a celebration of
> our future, not the past."

> I completely agree about having homelands and nation as small and as
> homogeneous as possible.  This increases the available amount of
> Social Capital, which gives more leverage to the citizens over those
> entities and persons who have more financial leverage.

I think that form of nationalism is essential if we want to get the chance
of creating posthuman species and radically differing societies.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  8 14:07:23 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 14:07:23 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age
References: <3FCDE00E.9050506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>	<3FCDEE02.8030308@mail.tele.dk>
	<008f01c3ba4b$72dbb220$2bb26bd5@artemis>
	<3FCF15EA.8070508@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <041f01c3bd94$9a348ad0$62256bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Boredom in old age


> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
> > LSD gave me a big boost in my 30s.
>
> Can you say a bit more?

It opened up a whole new way of looking at the world.
The interesting thing for me at the time was not that I was incapable of
seeing it without LSD, but that until that point I had been incapable of
even imagining it.

It reminds me of a passage I read in an SF book that went something like -
'alien mindfuck, a mentals state so bizarre that even as you experience it
you won't know what it feels like'.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec  8 14:09:39 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 14:09:39 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031203221744.05506008@mail.comcast.net>
	<3FCF11B2.1000308@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <042901c3bd94$eb4e69e0$62256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline


> David Lubkin wrote:
> >
> > The nevers surprise me, particularly for "Two Century Biological
Lifespans."
>
> Apparently what they meant is we would go straight from lifespans
> shorter than two centuries to indefinite lifespans. (Drexler even gives
> 1967 for indefinite lifespan.)


Personally, I prefer 1953.
However, the real question is when will life expectance be extended by
medical technique to an equivalent of the 'singularity' ie when will life
expectancy be rising at >1 yr per yr? I'd say that would be around the 2020
mark.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  8 16:22:38 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 08:22:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Very interesting interview to John Smart
Message-ID: <20031208162238.7325.qmail@web41313.mail.yahoo.com>

It includes several "predictions"...
 
http://www.speculist.com/archives/000473.html#more
 
Transhumanistically yours,



La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031208/3e8c8bc8/attachment.html>

From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec  8 16:54:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 08:54:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312080824160.24629-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Hal Finney wrote:

> It's disappointing that the recent nanotech bill
> has explicitly removed funding for Drexlerian nanotech.

But it didn't Hal!  The study people are all talking about
in the oringally proposed Senate bill was explitly for
"self-assembly"  (I checked that section of the 4 bills
in the congressional records yesterday).

Self-assembly isn't in the index in Nanosystems.  He mentions
it once commenting on how it might be used for the assembly
of molecular electronics in a 1987 paper and he then discusses
it more extensively in his Annual Review paper on Molecular
Nanomachines in 1994.  Without rereading the paper I think
much of that discussion may be about biological nanomachines.

You should go read my comments, esp. those of the last couple
of days on nanodot.org.  What Eric was driving towards was
"directed molecular assembly" and that isn't what the bill
proposed to study.  Since the original bill was heavily
contributed to by the NanoBusiness Alliance I'm wondering
if they messed up and used the wrong term.  Or perhaps
some of the molecular electronics folks wanted a study
to show how difficult self-assembly was (perhaps to justify
increased funding).

At any rate it would appear that someone deleted the study
from the floor of the Senate sometime between when it was
proposed (January) and when it got sent to committee (September).
I would love to know who and why.

> But he doesn't use it!  The proposed manufacturing system that he
> describes in some detail only uses giant robot arms in a final assembly
> stage, to manipulate relatively large, pre-built blocks that are a
> cubic micron in size, far larger than the arm above (which is only 0.1
> micron long).

That is because MEMS hasn't scaled down to electronic scales yet
because it hasn't had to.  For there to be a use for it people
would have to believe it would work and that generally isn't
true.   The studies I cite below are making it a bit harder
to hold that position however.

> This isn't a game of 20 Questions.  If nanotech were the dominant
> paradigm, this lack of specificity might be acceptable.  But when you
> are on the outside looking in, it will not succeed.  All you're going
> to do is make people confused and angry.

Drexler does cite a set of concrete paths in Table 16.1 in Nanosystems.
If you think about them in detail it becomes obvious that one could
probably write a book about each of the 4 stages he proposes.  Eric
really withdrew from MNT to a large degree after the first Scientific
American critiques.

> I share Smalley's frustration when he writes, "it would be helpful to
> all of us who take the nanobot assembler idea of 'Engines of Creation'
> seriously if you would tell us more about this nonaqueous enzymelike
> chemistry."

Plan to read the following:

Ralph C. Merkle, Robert A. Freitas Jr., "Theoretical analysis of a
carbon-carbon dimer placement tool for diamond mechanosynthesis," J.
Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 3(August 2003):319-324.
http://www.rfreitas.com/Nano/DimerTool.htm or
http://www.rfreitas.com/Nano/JNNDimerTool.pdf

Jingping Peng, Robert A. Freitas Jr., Ralph C. Merkle, "Theoretical Analysis
of Diamond Mechanosynthesis. Part I. Stability of C2 Mediated Growth of
Nanocrystalline Diamond C(110) Surface," J. Comp. Theor. Nanosci. 1(March
2004). In press.

David J. Mann, Jingping Peng, Robert A. Freitas Jr., Ralph C. Merkle,
"Theoretical Analysis of Diamond Mechanosynthesis. Part II. C2 Mediated
Growth of Diamond C(110) Surface via Si/Ge-Triadamantane Dimer Placement
Tools," J. Comp. Theor. Nanosci. 1(March 2004). In press.

They survived review by the hard-core computational chemists at Zyvex.

Robert




From colinmagee3282 at hotmail.com  Mon Dec  8 16:55:05 2003
From: colinmagee3282 at hotmail.com (Colin Magee)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 11:55:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Caltech Extropians and Transhumanists
Message-ID: <Law14-F89mOhanH2dCe0001ffd1@hotmail.com>

            I am curious to know if anybody here knows of any major 
scientists/researchers at Caltech who are sympathetic to or interested in 
Transhuman/Extropian issues.They could be in any one of the following 
fields:nanotechnology,artificial intelligence,biotechnology,computer 
science,cognitive science,neuroscience,or any other major field of interest 
to Extropians/Transhumanists.Two of the major Transhumanist/Extropian 
thinkers-Ray Kurzweil and Marvin Minsky are from MIT and so is Eric 
Drexler(although I don't know if he specifically identifies himself as an 
Extropian/Transhumanist-but since I am somewhat of a novice in this area,I 
could be mistaken).I was just wondering if there is anyone from Caltech 
similar in stature to Ray Kurzweil or Marvin Minsky interested in this 
area.Any thoughts or ideas would be appreciated.

                                                                             
                 Sincerely,
                                                                             
                 Colin Magee

_________________________________________________________________
Get holiday tips for festive fun. 
http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx



From iph1954 at msn.com  Mon Dec  8 17:10:09 2003
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 12:10:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
Message-ID: <BAY5-F12wo95EFk2H3b0001d6ac@hotmail.com>

CRN was recently invited to comment on the published report of a UK 
government workshop exploring likely developments in nanotechnology, and 
associated ELSI issues. You can view our commentary here - 
http://www.crnano.org/RSWorkshop1.htm

We welcome your feedback and questions.

Mike Treder
Executive Director
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
http://CRNano.org

_________________________________________________________________
Cell phone ?switch? rules are taking effect ? find out more here. 
http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx



From hal at finney.org  Mon Dec  8 19:43:40 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:43:40 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
Message-ID: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>

Mike Treder writes:

> CRN was recently invited to comment on the published report of a UK 
> government workshop exploring likely developments in nanotechnology, and 
> associated ELSI issues. You can view our commentary here - 
> http://www.crnano.org/RSWorkshop1.htm

Just kind of a nitpick, following along with my rant last night:

"Foundational work in the field, especially Nanosystems (Drexler, 1992),
has laid out a detailed theoretical approach to nanoscale mechanochemical
systems and other nanoscale machinery that has never been successfully
criticized."

It's never been successfully criticized!  After eleven years!  What, was
it divinely inspired?  Did the hand of God reach down and write this book?
Because no human being can create a 556 page book without error.

These kinds of claims smack of cultishness rather than science.  They make
belief in nanotech sound like a matter of faith and religion.

And if in fact this book has managed to avoid "successful" criticism for
so long, that is an indictment of the book, not a compliment.  It means
that the book is so vague, circumspect, or confusing that critics are
unable to grapple with it.

Every author knows that his ideas are imperfect.  He should be writing
so as to seek and invite criticism, in order to improve the quality of
his concepts and advance the state of knowledge.  But I don't find this
attitude in Nanosystems.  I don't see any admissions of imperfection,
or expressions of uncertainty.  The overall tone is one of supreme
confidence.  Even though each chapter closes with a list of open problems,
they are mostly of the form, find even more examples to show all of the
ways that nanotech can work.

It may be that Nanosystems is written this way intentionally, because it
means to be as much a political as a technical book.  It does not exist
to invite people to criticize its proposed nanotech manufacturing system,
but rather to convince people that they should support investment and
research towards the technology.

Whether this is true or not, the fact is that the book has failed to
generate an engaged and dynamic intellectual debate about the prospects
for nanotech.  Instead it is largely used as a political bludgeon,
as in the "never been criticized" quote above.

I'd suggest that what we need today are works that get criticized.
Criticism is how science advances.  Avoiding criticism, such as by
the tactic I discussed earlier of shifting the burden of proof, is a
counter-productive strategy which must be abandoned.  Your critic is
your best friend.

Hal


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Dec  8 19:54:51 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 19:54:51 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Computing in 2004--and Beyond
Message-ID: <3FD4D70B.70305@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

PC World magazine has a look into the future -
<http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113444,00.asp>

How will the PC change during the coming year? The next five years? We
consult the experts and come up with answers.

Highlights:

According to IDC, flat-panel display shipments will surpass those of
tubes for the first time in 2004.

Rumors abound that Tejas, Intel's successor to Prescott, will debut near
the end of 2004 with speeds from 5 to 7 GHz.

Moore's law--the concept that chip performance will double every 18
months or so--is alive and well. Researchers are just beginning to build
chips with circuits only 65nm wide, and IBM and AMD are among those
working to develop a 45nm process. Intel envisions paring that to 22nm
by the year 2011.

"The PCs we'll buy just three years from now will have features, user
interfaces, and expansion options that are radically different from
those in the systems we're using today," predicts Microprocessor
Report's Glaskowsky.


BillK





From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  8 21:03:31 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:03:31 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
References: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>
Message-ID: <003001c3bdce$bf082300$af994a43@texas.net>

Although I agree with Hal's general position here, I think the precise
statement in question was poorly expressed rather than madly hubristic:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 1:43 PM

> "Foundational work in the field, especially Nanosystems (Drexler, 1992),
> has laid out a detailed theoretical approach to nanoscale mechanochemical
> systems and other nanoscale machinery that has never been successfully
> criticized."
>
> It's never been successfully criticized!  After eleven years!  What, was
> it divinely inspired?

I believe this assertion (often repeated by Drexler et al) means:
`Criticisms of its key arguments have never been successful in persuading
its author and supporters of their alleged error/s' or `It has successfully
surmounted critical challenges, often by showing they were ill-framed or
ignored arguments advanced in the text'. Whether this formulation would be
justified is, of course, another question, and needs to be dealt with on a
continuing challenge-and-response basis by Foresight. I agree with Hal that
the current formulation conveys a tone of absurd doctrinal confidence.

Damien Broderick



From hal at finney.org  Mon Dec  8 21:02:28 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 13:02:28 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
Message-ID: <200312082102.hB8L2S911116@finney.org>

Hal Finney wrote:

: It's disappointing that the recent nanotech bill
: has explicitly removed funding for Drexlerian nanotech.

Robert Bradbury replied:

> But it didn't Hal!  The study people are all talking about
> in the oringally proposed Senate bill was explitly for
> "self-assembly"  (I checked that section of the 4 bills
> in the congressional records yesterday).

I am going by
http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2003_11_23_nanobot_archive.html#106969756709919883,
which indicates that the original House version of the bill funded
research to study "molecular manufacturing", while that phrase got
changed in the Senate to "molecular self-assembly", and that's what's
in the final bill.  The former term would cover Drexler-style nanotech,
while the latter apparently does not.  And according to the article this
was an explicit and politically motivated decision to remove funding
from the field.

Hal


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Dec  8 21:11:46 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:11:46 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312080824160.24629-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <023901c3bdcf$e33224a0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Hal Finney wrote:
>
> > It's disappointing that the recent nanotech bill
> > has explicitly removed funding for Drexlerian nanotech.
>
> But it didn't Hal!  ...

> ....the original bill was heavily
> contributed to by the NanoBusiness Alliance I'm wondering
> if they messed up and used the wrong term.  Or perhaps
> some of the molecular electronics folks wanted a study
> to show how difficult self-assembly was (perhaps to justify
> increased funding).
>
> At any rate it would appear that someone deleted the study
> from the floor of the Senate sometime between when it was
> proposed (January) and when it got sent to committee (September).
> I would love to know who and why.

Surely this stuff must be available online somewhere. The record
of changes made in parliament in Australia is the Hansard and
its available online the following day.

I'd imagine it would be similar with whatever the equivalent record
is in the US. Does anyone know what it is?

3 back issues of Science for November arrived in the mailbox
recently and in one of them I noted that Brownback seems to
be trying to get "human organism" whatever that means (that's part
of the problem) excised from things that can be patented. This
would affect the amount of work that would be able to be done
in that area.

I think it might be useful if extropes and transhumanists added
another image to the notion of the singularity as a technological
spike. The picture is of a political spring that gets overcompressed
whenever the rate of change gets too fast. It pushes back against
the technology slowing at least to some extent (an extent much stronger
than I think is commonly recognized) the rate of technological change.

On the broad canvas of human history I think one could bet confidently
on technology. But in 2003 the one that made the bet might not be alive
to collect or to see the singularity because of the political spring pushing
back.

Regards,
Brett














From hal at finney.org  Mon Dec  8 21:37:42 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 13:37:42 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Caltech Extropians and Transhumanists
Message-ID: <200312082137.hB8LbgH11362@finney.org>

Colin Magee writes:
>             I am curious to know if anybody here knows of any major 
> scientists/researchers at Caltech who are sympathetic to or interested in 
> Transhuman/Extropian issues.They could be in any one of the following 
> fields:nanotechnology,artificial intelligence,biotechnology,computer 
> science,cognitive science,neuroscience,or any other major field of interest 
> to Extropians/Transhumanists.Two of the major Transhumanist/Extropian 
> thinkers-Ray Kurzweil and Marvin Minsky are from MIT and so is Eric 
> Drexler(although I don't know if he specifically identifies himself as an 
> Extropian/Transhumanist-but since I am somewhat of a novice in this area,I 
> could be mistaken).I was just wondering if there is anyone from Caltech 
> similar in stature to Ray Kurzweil or Marvin Minsky interested in this 
> area.Any thoughts or ideas would be appreciated.

I am a Caltech alumnus myself, as is my wife, Fran, and my son is in his
junior year there now.  I know of at least one other recent list member,
Damien Sullivan, who is a relatively recent graduate and still has a
home page at http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~phoenix/.

I don't know if there is much transhumanist interest on campus.
One relevant area of research is nanotech, where especially William
Goddard's group at http://www.wag.caltech.edu/, the Materials and
Process Simulation Center, does all kinds of of molecular modelling
and simulation.  They have won awards from the IMM and Foresight for
their research.

The MSC has an interesting program coming up in April,
http://www.wag.caltech.edu/PASI/, a two week workshop/tutorial intended
to introduce the techniques of molecular modelling, aimed at Latin
American instructors and researchers.  The recommended reading list
includes Drexler's canon: Engines, Unbounding and Nanosystems.  Sounds
like it would be a fun workshop to sit in on.

Another Caltech affiliated list member is Patrick Wilken,
http://www.klab.caltech.edu/~patrickw/, a biologist with an interest in
the neurological aspects of consciousness.  There was also an event held
earlier this year in April between Caltech and the Art Center College
of Design to create a melding of art and technology.  It sounded great
but I was not able to attend.

The Caltech group affiliated with this event was the Center for
Neuromorphic Systems, http://www.cnse.caltech.edu/.  That's an
interdisciplinary effort in an area that I find very promising,
encompassing wireless networking, ubiquitous computing, Vingean
localizers, augmented reality, all that stuff.  This may well
revolutionize the way we communicate and gather information about the
world over the next two decades.

I'm curious, what is your connection or interest in Caltech, if any?

Hal Finney


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  8 21:38:58 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 13:38:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312082102.hB8L2S911116@finney.org>
Message-ID: <20031208213858.854.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Hal Finney <hal at finney.org> wrote:
> Hal Finney wrote:
> 
> : It's disappointing that the recent nanotech bill
> : has explicitly removed funding for Drexlerian nanotech.
> 
> Robert Bradbury replied:
> 
> > But it didn't Hal!  The study people are all talking about
> > in the oringally proposed Senate bill was explitly for
> > "self-assembly"  (I checked that section of the 4 bills
> > in the congressional records yesterday).
> 
> I am going by
> http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2003_11_23_nanobot_archive.html
> #106969756709919883,
> which indicates that the original House version of the bill funded
> research to study "molecular manufacturing", while that phrase got
> changed in the Senate to "molecular self-assembly", and that's what's
> in the final bill.  The former term would cover Drexler-style
> nanotech, while the latter apparently does not.  And according to
> the article this was an explicit and politically motivated
> decision to remove funding from the field.

Not surprised. But what about molecular self-assembly leaves out
Drexler style nanotech? I'd think that would be MORE accurate than just
molecular manufacturing, which IMHO seems to just be about making small
stuff, not stuff that can remake itself...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Dec  8 21:51:27 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 21:51:27 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Even a little tipple shrinks your brain
Message-ID: <3FD4F25F.6010709@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920730,00.html>

JUST a few alcoholic drinks a week may be enough to shrink the brain,
according to US research.

Middle-aged men and women who consume moderate amounts of alcohol on a
regular basis tend to have lower concentrations of brain tissue than
teetotallers or occasional drinkers, scientists have discovered.

While heavy drinking has long been linked to a decrease in brain size,
which can lead to impaired mental abilities, the study from Johns
Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, suggests that a lower intake
of alcohol may also be risky.

It also found that a moderate intake of alcohol had no effect on a
person?s risk of stroke. Previous research had indicated that sensible
drinking might offer a measure of protection.

As the volunteers? alcohol intake rose, the scans showed an increasing
volume in the ventricular and sulcal regions of the brain ? "empty"
areas that contain only cerebrospinal fluid and no nervous tissue.

-------

Bother! Luckily I only use 10% of my enormously large brain, so I should
be OK for a while.  ;)

BillK








From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec  8 22:09:23 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 17:09:23 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Even a little tipple shrinks your brain
Message-ID: <146040-22003121822923181@M2W079.mail2web.com>


From: BillK 

<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920730,00.html>

>JUST a few alcoholic drinks a week may be enough to shrink the brain,
according to US research.<


So what does this mean:  We will be stupid but athletic?  Nimble thinkers
but a whole lot of heart?

Natasha

"Small head, big heart."

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  8 22:14:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 14:14:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <3FD4F25F.6010709@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031208221441.21689.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920726,00.html

Don't know what took the Brits so long, but they finally made it a
crime to steal someone's organs without their consent, or that of next
of kin. This comes on the heels of a major scandal in which doctors
removed organs and tissues without consent and did not return them to
their owners. This will certainly be useful for cryonicists. The last
thing you want is to pay $50k for a neurosuspension when some bloke has
gone and made off with your brain....



=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  8 22:45:51 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 14:45:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Even a little tipple shrinks your brain
In-Reply-To: <146040-22003121822923181@M2W079.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20031208224551.50519.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> From: BillK 
> 
> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920730,00.html>
> 
> >JUST a few alcoholic drinks a week may be enough to shrink the
> brain, according to US research.<
> 
> 
> So what does this mean:  We will be stupid but athletic?  Nimble
> thinkers but a whole lot of heart?

Who says you need all that brain anyways? Fat brains don't mean
smarts.... just look at all that homo erectus accomplished on only 800
cc of grey matter.... those spaces are not a loss of brain tissue, they
are an increase in cooling capacity... ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Dec  8 22:48:41 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 17:48:41 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Even a little tipple shrinks your brain
In-Reply-To: <3FD4F25F.6010709@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3FD4F25F.6010709@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3FD4FFC9.1000704@pobox.com>

BillK wrote:
> <http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920730,00.html> 
> Bother! Luckily I only use 10% of my enormously large brain, so I should
> be OK for a while.  ;)

Unfortunately, BillK, this is a TOTAL URBAN LEGEND.  You do not use only 
10% of your brain any more than you use only 10% of your blood.

Seriously, being human is dangerous enough without deliberately making it 
worse.  You don't have the neurons to spare.  Neither do I.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec  8 23:26:22 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:26:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312082102.hB8L2S911116@finney.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312081508260.31948-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Hal Finney wrote:

> I am going by
> http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2003_11_23_nanobot_archive.html#106969756709919883,

The House bill seems to be dated May 1st.  The Senate bill (labeled 189 es) that
Howard cites is the copy that is sent to the Senate (presumably immediately after
it was submitted (S. 189 (enr)) both the (enr) and (es) versions were presumably dated
in January.  The S. 189 (is) is the version is I believe the version that came
out of committee in September and finally got voted on.  The S. 189 (rs) version
shows all of the stuff they deleted/changed in the committee.  Neither the (rs)
or the (is) versions have the study in them.  That means the study was most
likely deleted from the floor of the Senate sometime between January and
September unless the committee made a mistake in its editing of the (rs) version.

There is a possibility that a Senate-House conference committee met sometime
between January and September to resolve the differences and the study got
thrown out in that process.  I'm not sure where to find those records.

But I believe Howard and perhaps CMP Cientifica are citing older bills and
not the final version signed by President Bush.

If we want to know why politics is so complex this is sure a good example.

Robert

The pointers for the bills and definitions can be found in my post to
the thread: http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/04/0216244
under the specific post by me at: Sunday December 07, @10:59AM (#11)




From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Mon Dec  8 23:51:51 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:51:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Immortality
Message-ID: <20031208235151.28088.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com>


Question: If you could live forever, would you and why? 

Answer: ?I would not live forever, because we should not live forever, because if we were supposed to live forever, then we would live forever, but we cannot live forever, which is why I would not live forever.?   -- Miss Alabama in the 1994 Miss USA contest 




La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031208/5e388889/attachment.html>

From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec  8 23:55:03 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:55:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <023901c3bdcf$e33224a0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312081527090.31948-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Surely this stuff must be available online somewhere. The record
> of changes made in parliament in Australia is the Hansard and
> its available online the following day.
>
> I'd imagine it would be similar with whatever the equivalent record
> is in the US. Does anyone know what it is?

At least some of it is:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/billsindex.html

I don't know if everything is documented.

This is an interesting URL:

http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=9263039933+3+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve

If it documents all of the activity on the bill then it would probably not
explain where the study got lost.

My guess might be S11478 on Sept. 15th.

But in the early versions of the bill (S. 189 (es)) it was in Section 5b
and it isn't in S 189 (is or rs) (where Section 5 became Section 4).
You can search on "Self-Assembly".

This would make a great detective story...

As I believe Hal pointed out there was a House bill floating around
(H.R. 766) from Feb. 13 to May 6th which does have a section in
section 8b which calls for a study of "Molecular Manufacturing".
That text is in the version that was "reported to the house" (rh).

So someplace, perhaps when the bills were brought together, the
studies didn't get resolved with each other.

Robert




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec  9 00:12:48 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 16:12:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
In-Reply-To: <000401c3bca9$6212ccc0$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <20031209001248.32536.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> You know that one of the present political
> problems in UE (or EU) is whether they
> should introduce in the Constitution
> the word Christ or the expression Christian
> values, or not. The general opinion was:
> "No, we do not need these terms". But
> an influent Italian (urged by the Vatican)
> said: "What is the meaning of Sunday, then?".
> So, the problem now becomes: should we 
> introduce Sunday in the Constitution?

Huh?  Sunday is a day of the week.  It has historic
origins, but it has lost its religious meanings
(alternately, its religious origins have been subsumed
into common secular practice)...albeit on a level of
policy too low to belong in the Constitution,
analogous to overtime and minimum wage laws.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 01:20:01 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 17:20:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
In-Reply-To: <20031209001248.32536.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031209012001.689.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> > You know that one of the present political
> > problems in UE (or EU) is whether they
> > should introduce in the Constitution
> > the word Christ or the expression Christian
> > values, or not. The general opinion was:
> > "No, we do not need these terms". But
> > an influent Italian (urged by the Vatican)
> > said: "What is the meaning of Sunday, then?".
> > So, the problem now becomes: should we 
> > introduce Sunday in the Constitution?
> 
> Huh?  Sunday is a day of the week.  It has historic
> origins, but it has lost its religious meanings
> (alternately, its religious origins have been subsumed
> into common secular practice)...albeit on a level of
> policy too low to belong in the Constitution,
> analogous to overtime and minimum wage laws.

On the contrary, it has not lost its religious meanings whatsoever.
Given that the sabbath was originally Saturday and was changed to
Sunday specifically by the Church (and other judeo-christian sects and
religions still do worship on Saturday), any recognition of Sunday as
the EU standard 'day of rest' is an implicit recognition of an act of
the Catholic Church in particular.

The only people who think it has lost its meaning are people who are
ignorant of history and religion. If the EU really wanted to stick it
to the church, they should have the guts to make Saturday the official
day of rest and have the work week start on Sunday....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  9 02:25:50 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 20:25:50 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
References: <20031209012001.689.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00d601c3bdfb$c5718ce0$af994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:20 PM

> If the EU really wanted to stick it
> to the church, they should have the guts to make Saturday the official
> day of rest and have the work week start on Sunday....

Hey! What about us Wodan-worshippers?

Damien Broderick



From cphoenix at best.com  Tue Dec  9 02:29:05 2003
From: cphoenix at best.com (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 21:29:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
References: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>
	<003001c3bdce$bf082300$af994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3FD53371.89A3D694@best.com>

Never having been successfully criticized is an attribute common to most
(ideally all) current scientific theories.  I'm surprised that the
statement sounds hubristic or doctrinal.  

Perhaps the problem can be found in Damien's two interpretations, which
are not even very similar to each other.  I completely agree with his
second restatement, the one about how it has successfully surmounted
critical challenges by showing that they're just plain weak.  That's
what I meant, and I think the history of the debate supports that
statement.

If "never been successfully criticized" doesn't sound like that, then we
should change the formulation.

Chris

Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> Although I agree with Hal's general position here, I think the precise
> statement in question was poorly expressed rather than madly hubristic:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 1:43 PM
> 
> > "Foundational work in the field, especially Nanosystems (Drexler, 1992),
> > has laid out a detailed theoretical approach to nanoscale mechanochemical
> > systems and other nanoscale machinery that has never been successfully
> > criticized."
> >
> > It's never been successfully criticized!  After eleven years!  What, was
> > it divinely inspired?
> 
> I believe this assertion (often repeated by Drexler et al) means:
> `Criticisms of its key arguments have never been successful in persuading
> its author and supporters of their alleged error/s' or `It has successfully
> surmounted critical challenges, often by showing they were ill-framed or
> ignored arguments advanced in the text'. Whether this formulation would be
> justified is, of course, another question, and needs to be dealt with on a
> continuing challenge-and-response basis by Foresight. I agree with Hal that
> the current formulation conveys a tone of absurd doctrinal confidence.
> 
> Damien Broderick

--
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Tue Dec  9 02:27:50 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 12:57:50 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868B7@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>

Just be sensitive to everyone and make all the days official days of rest. I
could live with that :-)

Emlyn

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damien Broderick [mailto:thespike at earthlink.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, 9 December 2003 11:56 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:20 PM
> 
> > If the EU really wanted to stick it
> > to the church, they should have the guts to make Saturday 
> the official
> > day of rest and have the work week start on Sunday....
> 
> Hey! What about us Wodan-worshippers?
> 
> Damien Broderick
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Tue Dec  9 03:28:12 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 20:28:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [SK] Re: again with the gun stats
Message-ID: <3FD5414C.479A1E07@mindspring.com>

In a message dated 12/4/2003 4:57:16 AM Pacific Standard Time,
fortean1 at mindspring.com fwded:


       It is documented that states that pass right-to-carry laws experience a
       minimum of a 12% greater decrease in violent crime than states without
       such laws. (Dr John Lott, "More Guns, Less Crime"; University of
       Chicago Press) Furthermore, Lott shows that spree killings are reduced
       by 80% over non-right-to-carry states.

    Lott is also under investigation by the National Academy of Sciences for
academic fraud for this work, and in a bizaare
twist he pretended to be one of his ex-grad students to defend himself on the
internet.  If the guy was in a university and
not at AEI he would have been fired long ago.
 

Ben Avery

-----------------------

Some references:

   http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issuebriefs/lott.asp
   
http://markarkleiman.blogspot.com/2003_01_01_markarkleiman_archive.html#90242658

-- 
Jim Lippard

-----------------------

Sigh.  Not only was Lott's book published by the university press I used to 
work for (I'm a Chicago B.A.), but he has degrees from UCLA (and worked 
there). I just hope he wasn't an English major.

Jack Kolb
Dept. of English, UCLA

------------------------

Is Dr. John Lott the only source for such statistics?  If so
this "factoid" certainly has legs -- I've seen it quoted by 
practically every gun carrier and wannabe gun carrier.  

I went to the National Center for Disease Control and looked at
their statistics re gun usage in accidental deaths, but the 
detailed report can only be gotten by mail (I sent for it).

Are there any readily available critiques of his facts? Aside,
of course, from the fact that he seems to be a lying liar.

Don


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 03:30:13 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:30:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] French assistance request...
In-Reply-To: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868B7@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>
Message-ID: <20031209033013.37439.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

I am trying to get a good navigational chart of Clipperton Island (a
French posession) in the eastern Pacific and would like to find an ENC
database (Electronic Navigational Chart) that conforms to the
international S-57 standard. As it seems that each nation takes care of
its own navigational chart distribution, I was hoping someone who is
French, or French literate, could locate such a chart database for me
somewhere on the French government internet sites. Finding such a file
without knowing the lingo is a bit tough.... so much for my three years
of French in high school...

All I've been able to obtain so far on the greater internet is a very
low resolution scanned image of a 1956 map that has no depth soundings
or other information.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  9 03:44:31 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 19:44:31 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <20031208221441.21689.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002e01c3be06$c14399a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
> 
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920726,00.html
> 
> Don't know what took the Brits so long, but they finally made it a
> crime to steal someone's organs without their consent...

It's still legal, even encouraged in this country.  I don't
recall giving my consent to have my foreskin removed.

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  9 04:11:32 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 20:11:32 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <200312081441.hB8EfQ201341@igor.synonet.com>
Message-ID: <003f01c3be0a$87794d10$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net> writes:
> 
> > The equations for power requirements as a function of rotor
> > length are well understood Don.  Textbooks on VTOL design
> > are available at your local university...
> 
> Jet VTOL is possible, and has been don. It's called the Harrier.
> 
> Major

Harrier?  How about the stunning Lockheeed Martin F22 and 
that failed F23 built by that other company whose name I
can never recall (or rather shall go mercifully unmentioned 
in light of the recent events so eloquently enumerated in
the 15 December 03 issue of Business Week.)

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_50/b3862001_mz001.htm  

These aircraft put the Harrier to shame, more shame than
is already being generously and deservedly heaped upon the 
afore nonmentioned company.  In any case, VTOL is inherently 
noisy, violent, windy and dangerous. 

spike



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec  9 04:35:20 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 23:35:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] French assistance request...
In-Reply-To: <20031209033013.37439.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000301c3be0d$ddf418c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> I am trying to get a good navigational chart of Clipperton 
> Island (a French posession) in the eastern Pacific and would 
> like to find an ENC database (Electronic Navigational Chart) 
> that conforms to the international S-57 standard. 

You might be able to purchase these from a url I found.
<http://www.cartographic.com/xq/ASP/AreaID.4/RegionID.68/CategoryID.2/Produc
tID.3/australia_and_oceania/clipperton_island/qx/topographic_maps.asp>.  You
have to click in the column labeled "Browse Types" to see descriptions of
different map types.  Unfortunately, I couldn't find any free online
versions.  All I can find is a single low-res cartoon drawing which must be
the one you saw.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 04:45:19 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 20:45:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] thank evolution for the interstate highway system
In-Reply-To: <003f01c3be0a$87794d10$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031209044519.45036.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Harrier?  How about the stunning Lockheeed Martin F22 and 
> that failed F23 built by that other company whose name I
> can never recall (or rather shall go mercifully unmentioned 
> in light of the recent events so eloquently enumerated in
> the 15 December 03 issue of Business Week.)
> 

What ever happened to the F12? That F22 can only do vectored thrust. It
can't take off vertically. Besides, it was nowhere near as beautiful as
the F-23 (ducking....)
  
> 
> These aircraft put the Harrier to shame, more shame than
> is already being generously and deservedly heaped upon the 
> afore nonmentioned company.  In any case, VTOL is inherently 
> noisy, violent, windy and dangerous. 

Nah, they just aren't trying to cancel out the noise with symmetrical
waves. 

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 04:49:28 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 20:49:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] French assistance request...
In-Reply-To: <000301c3be0d$ddf418c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031209044928.64556.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > I am trying to get a good navigational chart of Clipperton 
> > Island (a French posession) in the eastern Pacific and would 
> > like to find an ENC database (Electronic Navigational Chart) 
> > that conforms to the international S-57 standard. 
> 
> You might be able to purchase these from a url I found.
>
<http://www.cartographic.com/xq/ASP/AreaID.4/RegionID.68/CategoryID.2/Produc
>
tID.3/australia_and_oceania/clipperton_island/qx/topographic_maps.asp>.
>  You
> have to click in the column labeled "Browse Types" to see
> descriptions of
> different map types.  Unfortunately, I couldn't find any free online
> versions.  All I can find is a single low-res cartoon drawing which
> must be the one you saw.

Well, the cartoon one is often lifted from the CIA World Factbook, but
the one I am referring to was linked to by the micronation of Molossia
(an enclave micronation in the Nevada desert), which gives a bit more
detail, but not much.

I was hoping to find a chart for free, since the US govt provides chart
databases free for download, the socialist French should do at least as
well as those damned capitalist imperialist agressor running dog
bastards in DC. ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec  9 05:05:59 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 23:05:59 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
References: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>
	<003001c3bdce$bf082300$af994a43@texas.net>
	<3FD53371.89A3D694@best.com>
Message-ID: <013201c3be12$24a6b620$af994a43@texas.net>


Chris Phoenix sez:

> Never having been successfully criticized is an attribute common to most
> (ideally all) current scientific theories.

Really? You must be using these words in a rather unusual way. Do you assert
that George Gamow's version of the Big Bang persists unchanged, unchallenged
and uncriticized? Or Guth's, for that matter? The original Crick&Watson
model of DNA and its protein expression? Plate tectonics? Solar system
formation? Quark theory unaltered since Gell-Mann's first salvo? Sure,
*something* persists throughout all the challenges and responses, but it
would unbelievable if Drexler's every word stood inviolate more than a
decade later, which appears to be implied by the statement Hal and I are
independently objecting to. (Maybe this is word-chopping, I'm not sure; but
you can be certain that your antagonists will chop with a will if you give
their blades an unnecessary opening.)

Damien Broderick



From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Tue Dec  9 06:04:46 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 00:04:46 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] NYTimes on primate neurological structures
In-Reply-To: <20031209044928.64556.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000301c3be0d$ddf418c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<20031209044928.64556.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9epatv8rnub29n2hr5793ndt47vc9goefo@4ax.com>

good  stuff:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/09/science/09BRAI.html?pagewanted=1


-------------



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Dec  9 06:45:18 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 17:45:18 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
References: <20031209012001.689.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <008401c3be20$02c98ce0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> On the contrary, it [sunday] has not lost its religious meanings
> whatsoever. 

[snip]

> If the EU really wanted to stick it to the church, they should
> have the guts to make Saturday the official day of rest and 
> have the work week start on Sunday....

Mike sometimes your 'diplomacy' cracks me up :-) 

Deep within the intestines of the EU must lie an entire faction 
seething with resentment but waiting, hoping, and planning that 
one day they may summon the courage to emerge victorious and
"stick it to the church" over Sunday!  :-)

Thanks Mike ! 

Brett







From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec  9 06:53:25 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:53:25 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Optical Force Clamps Allow Observation Of Single RNA
	Polymerase Enzyme
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEBHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From FuturePundit: Steven M. Block, a professor of biological sciences and
of applied physics at Stanford University, and his team have developed
two-dimensional optical force clamps that can monitor the action of a single
RNA polymerase (RNAP) enzyme.
In a new study in the journal Nature, Block and his colleagues present
strong evidence to support this proofreading hypothesis. Their results --
based on actual observations of individual molecules of RNAP -- are posted
on Nature's website: http://www.nature.com. In another set of experiments
published in the Nov. 14 issue of Cell magazine, the researchers discovered
that RNAP makes thousands of brief pauses as it pries open and copies the
DNA double helix.
"Together these two papers push the study of single proteins to new limits,"
Block said. "We've been able to achieve a resolution of three angstroms --
the width of three hydrogen atoms -- in our measurements of the progress of
this enzyme along DNA. In so doing, we've been able to visualize a
backtracking motion of just five bases that accompanies RNAP
error-correction or proofreading."
This is an example of why the rate of advance in biological science is not
constant. The development of instrumentation that can study components of
biological systems down on the scale at which they operate will allow these
systems to be figured out orders of magnitude more quickly. The biggest
reason we still know only a small fraction of what there is to understand
about cells and diseases is that we can't watch what happens down at the
level at which events actually take place. Continued advances in the ability
to build smaller devices and smaller sensors will make observable that which
it has previously never been possible to observe.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/0eb02850/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec  9 06:54:39 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:54:39 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Lifeline Nutraceuticals and CereMedix
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEBICBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Found via Longevity Meme: An article in the Denver Post sheds some more
light on what Lifeline Nutraceuticals and CereMedix have been up to with
their new antioxidant supplement. There is talk of a human trial next year,
which would be the first step towards the needed widespread scientific
confirmation of their claims. This article is also a telling insight into
the damage that the snake oil "anti-aging" industry has done to the
prospects of any legitimate product. We all have to be skeptical (of
Lifeline as well) because so many hucksters, frauds and suave marketing
departments make millions by selling worthless junk.
As the body ages, it produces more and more free radicals and its own
antioxidants are unable to fight this process, causing eroding vitality and
death. One would have to eat more than 30 pounds of fruits a day for the
body to absorb enough vitamins to fend off disease. The only other way to
slow the body's own suicide clock lies deep inside our genetic material,
according to Dr. S. Jay Olshansky, an expert on aging and mortality at the
University of Illinois at Chicago. CereMedix's peptide stimulates the body's
production of three antioxidants that work together to eliminate free
radicals. Olshansky is an outspoken critic of scams in the anti-aging
marketplace. He would not comment directly on Lifeline's supplement, but
said, "If they can up-regulate the body's own production of free-radical
scavengers, they may be onto something."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/1459b389/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec  9 06:55:52 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:55:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Novel Gene Therapy Delivery Uses Stem Cells That
	Target, Attack Tumors
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEBICBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Science Daily: Genetically engineered stem cells can find tumors and
then produce biological killing agents right at the cancer site, say
researchers at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, who
have performed a number of successful "proof of concept" experiments in
mice.
This novel treatmentmay offer the first gene therapy "delivery system"
capable of homing in on and then attacking cancer that has metastasized --
wherever it is in a patient's body. And the stem cells will not be rejected,
even if they are not derived from the patient. The system has been tested in
mice with a variety of human cancers, including solid ones such as ovarian,
brain, breast cancer, melanoma and even such blood-based cancer as leukemia.
"This drug delivery system is attracted to cancer cells no matter what form
they are in or where they are," says Michael Andreeff, M.D., Ph.D.,
professor in the Departments of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and
Leukemia. "We believe this to be a major find."
In the novel delivery system, researchers isolate a small quantity of MSC
from bone marrow, and greatly expand the quantity of those cells in the lab.
They then use a virus to deliver a particular gene into the stem cells. When
turned on, this gene will produce an anti-cancer effect. When given back to
the patient through an intraveneous injection, the millions of engineered
mesenchymal progenitor cells will engraft where the tumor environment is
signaling them, and will activate the therapeutic gene.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/15619a63/attachment.html>

From cphoenix at best.com  Tue Dec  9 07:04:36 2003
From: cphoenix at best.com (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 02:04:36 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
References: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>
	<003001c3bdce$bf082300$af994a43@texas.net>
	<3FD53371.89A3D694@best.com>
	<013201c3be12$24a6b620$af994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3FD57404.4871572@best.com>

Well, no, I didn't mean that the original unchanged description of
scientific theories had never been successfully criticized.  I meant
that the scientific theories we follow today have usually not had major
contradictions pointed out--if they had, we wouldn't still be following
them, would we?  Except as engineering approximations, of course.  And
there are some famous areas where two excellent theories contradict, and
other areas in ferment so that the time since last criticism is quite
short, and still others where the basic theory is solid but not all the
wrinkles and mechanisms are pinned down yet.

But that's beside the point.  Because now that you mention it, I'm not
aware of any need for any significant alteration of anything Drexler
wrote in Nanosystems.  Of course, Nanosystems is not his original word
on the subject.  There are several things that have been changed and
improved between Engines and Nanosystems--most importantly, in my
opinion, the shift from assemblers to nanofactories.  But aside from an
unimportant typo I found, and an obscure point Jeffrey Soreff told me
about (a slight overestimate in the probability of satisfying a surface
constraint, in Section 9.5.3), I don't know of any errors.  At all.  Not
even little ones.  At this point, I haven't even heard of any
predictions in Nanosystems that have been disproved.  

Hm... I guess if you count the fact that the planetary gear breaks at
incredibly high speeds, there might be two errors.  

Feel free to correct me, anyone.  If not...  Perhaps this is why those
who have actually studied Nanosystems have such high respect for Drexler
and are willing to go so far out on a limb to defend his work and
promote his theories.

Chris

Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> Chris Phoenix sez:
> 
> > Never having been successfully criticized is an attribute common to most
> > (ideally all) current scientific theories.
> 
> Really? You must be using these words in a rather unusual way. Do you assert
> that George Gamow's version of the Big Bang persists unchanged, unchallenged
> and uncriticized? Or Guth's, for that matter? The original Crick&Watson
> model of DNA and its protein expression? Plate tectonics? Solar system
> formation? Quark theory unaltered since Gell-Mann's first salvo? Sure,
> *something* persists throughout all the challenges and responses, but it
> would unbelievable if Drexler's every word stood inviolate more than a
> decade later, which appears to be implied by the statement Hal and I are
> independently objecting to. (Maybe this is word-chopping, I'm not sure; but
> you can be certain that your antagonists will chop with a will if you give
> their blades an unnecessary opening.)
> 
> Damien Broderick

--
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  9 07:27:33 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:27:33 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031208000149.97520.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031207215343.GB5783@leitl.org>
	<20031208000149.97520.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 04:01:49PM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> I recall on the extropy list of years gone past, that Eugen used to
> post long posts rambling on, like he'd been on a caffiene drip for the
> last 96 hours, about all sorts of things. What ever happened to that
> posting technique?

Posting doesn't get anything done, and I do have a life these days.
It's very possible that I'll be gone (virtually, for good?) in a few
months.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/0690f8a2/attachment.bin>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec  9 07:47:36 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 23:47:36 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] planes
In-Reply-To: <20031209044519.45036.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <004801c3be28$b7374d90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> 
> What ever happened to the F12?

Do you mean the Flying Dorito?  Cancelled by the Bottom Up review.
The A12 Avenger II which was suppose to replace the A6, 
was ultimately deemed as too expensive and was cut by then SecDef 
Dick Cheney becoming the largest defense contract cancellation 
in the history of the Department of Defense. 

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-12.htm


> That F22 can only do vectored thrust. It
> can't take off vertically.

It can take of vertically, if you don't have ordinance
or much fuel aboard.  {8-]

http://popularmechanics.com/science/military/2002/5/flexible_flyer/print
.phtml

> Besides, it was nowhere near as beautiful as
> the F-23 (ducking....)

Surely Mike means NOT!  As soon as we saw the mockup
of the x35, we knew we were going to win.  I bought a
bunch of LM stock that day.  I lost most of my money,
but thats a different story.  We figured no self-respecting
AF officer would fly such a thing as the x35, nor any
Naval Aviator would want to fly "Monica."

http://www.ebtx.com/oats/x32vsx35.htm

Of course, had the services chosen the x-35, then at least
the army would no longer suffer the ignominy of having
the ugliest plane, the A-10 Warthog.

http://members.aol.com/cbmjets/homepage/A10.html

In any case, we are seeing perhaps the end of the line
for fighter planes.  Humanity doesn't need them anymore.
I don't suspect they will be much use in our last remaining
great conflict: the massive culture war the west faces against
the Taliban, the Al Qaida and their ilk.

I am interested in seeing the civil applications
of a ducted fan lifting system.

spike



From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 08:36:26 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 00:36:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312081508260.31948-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031209083627.85550.qmail@web41206.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

If we want to know why politics is so complex this is
sure a good example.

Robert

        ------------------------------

What's so complex?  Smalley is a meta-honcho--likely
on the short list for honcho--near the summit a
multi-billion dollar public research money pile. 
Quite a career accomplishment.  

The top down approach to nano reaches out from the
broad margins of current capabilities, can absorb
research billions easily, and can deliver
immediately-usable science and tech as it expands
those margins.

The bottom up approach can only deliver theoretical
analysis (though providing tangible improvements in
the requisite analytical tools), can't deliver new
tech at the same rate, or the same dollars per gizmo,
can't IMO absorb a comparable quantity of research
monies, and can't deliver 'product' in the short term.
 And Drextech's perception as 'out there' science,
whether warranted or no, doesn't help.

The politicos responsible for committing public funds
to scientific research, and the scientific luminaries
who advise them, deal in BIG budgets and need to
demonstrate BIG results.  Top down is their ticket. 
Drextech is not.

And from a purely political/competitive stand point,
in so far as Smalley sees himself on a course to be
for the NNI what Oppenheimer was for the Manhattan
Project, why he want to promote Drexler, the "Founder
of Nanotech"?  It could only make Smalley look
smaller.

But this is all obvious.  Isn't it?

Best, Jeff Davis

   "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                           Ray Charles

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From hemm at br.inter.net  Tue Dec  9 11:07:27 2003
From: hemm at br.inter.net (Henrique Moraes Machado)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 09:07:27 -0200
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <Law9-F543EJnl1AtfqK00012b1b@hotmail.com>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20031207163902.02c692d0@pop.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <005601c3be44$a1bdf420$fe00a8c0@HEMM>

Nice. But it's only more of the same. 
What I would really like to see is something more revolutionary than evolutionary. For instance, if we build many space elevators around the globe, people could travel between them using ships that would never need to land. It's some crazy idea, but it's an idea. Ok, it's not possible today, but could be considered.
On the other hand there are other means of transportation that could be used today and are so neglected. Such as dirigibles and ekranoplanes (http://www.ae.metu.edu.tr/~gulkiz/wig.html)


-----Mensagem Original----- 
De: Natasha Vita-More 
Para: ExI chat list 
Enviada em: domingo, 7 de dezembro de 2003 23:22
Assunto: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


Tonight @ 9 PM on the Travel Channel will be "Giant Planes" covering the future of transportation.

(11/26/03 "Airbus Unveils Giant Jet Airbus showed off its new Airbus 380, a jumbo jet that could carry as many as 900 passengers Tuesday. Virgin Atlantic has reportedly ordered six of the colossal carriers. The plane will begin testing next year.")


Natasha 



_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From trichrom at optusnet.com.au  Tue Dec  9 11:23:09 2003
From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (Rob KPO)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 21:23:09 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] planes
References: <004801c3be28$b7374d90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000a01c3be46$d84b2f60$0200a8c0@snasa>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 5:47 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] planes



> > That F22 can only do vectored thrust. It
> > can't take off vertically.
>
> It can take of vertically, if you don't have ordinance
> or much fuel aboard.  {8-]
>
> http://popularmechanics.com/science/military/2002/5/flexible_flyer/print
> .phtml
>

Vertical take-off is not a capability of the F22, vertical climb - yes,
takeoff - no. Perhaps it has the thrust level and thrust control to do it,
but it isnt capable of sitting on it's tail for starter's! The link provided
is about the F35 which does have a VSTOL variant that can take off and land
vertically.

Sorry for interrupting, but I cant resist on that topic!!!

Regards

Rob KPO



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Tue Dec  9 12:14:48 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 05:14:48 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [TLCB] Re: French assistance request...
Message-ID: <3FD5BCB8.68D696DB@mindspring.com>

Terry

How about passing this back to Mike as I don't know his email address, and 
my mail will most likely bounce from the other servers.

Mike

Did you check out this www site?
http://www.cartographic.com/xq/ASP/AreaID.34/qx/nautical_charts.asp

Looks like they might have something, but AT A COST!!

Some links:  http://www.connectedglobe.com/millennium/ip.html

Mac
At 09:08 PM 12/8/2003 -0700, Terry W. Colvin wrote:
>I am trying to get a good navigational chart of Clipperton Island (a
>French posession) in the eastern Pacific and would like to find an ENC
>database (Electronic Navigational Chart) that conforms to the
>international S-57 standard. As it seems that each nation takes care of
>its own navigational chart distribution, I was hoping someone who is
>French, or French literate, could locate such a chart database for me
>somewhere on the French government internet sites. Finding such a file
>without knowing the lingo is a bit tough.... so much for my three years
>of French in high school...
>
>All I've been able to obtain so far on the greater internet is a very
>low resolution scanned image of a 1956 map that has no depth soundings
>or other information.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  9 14:33:27 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 15:33:27 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <Law9-OE199hf9Vu60To000051ec@hotmail.com>
References: <019e01c3bd07$c7a7ceb0$97fe4d0c@hal2001>
	<Law9-OE199hf9Vu60To000051ec@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031209143327.GY4452@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 09:15:14PM -0500, Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> I think you're right. The real reason there's so much funding for quantum
> encryption is because whomever gets it first will have "unbreakable"

Do you trust the laws of physics (these you know, that is, and you do know
that we know our current physics is inconsistent, and hence knowably
incomplete?) or those of mathematics?

Cryptoanalysis is a mature, understood discipline. There are several 
independant-fields-of-theory production-quality PKI systems.

Not many people understand QM, even less people understand the limitations
of hardware using QM (single-photon source? proof of entanglement? detection
of cloning?). 

http://www.interhack.net/people/cmcurtin/snake-oil-faq.html

> encryption for a while. It's like nuclear weapons were, you don't want to be
> the one without it.

The only provably secure cryptosystem is one-time pad, generated
using a good source of entropy and properly whitened. The second best one
is a good (hairy territory, this) PRNG seeded by a shared secret. PKI
is where you're stuck with no shared secret, and only open channels. 
 
> Public key encryption is pretty strong and easy to use, but it has a few

Please refrain from using blanket statements about a domain you obviously
don't understand. "pretty strong" is meaningless without an attack model,
"easy to use" is ridiculous, unless you refer to peer-reviewed
implementations of PKIs, which have an empiric record track of being
insecure. People who thought PKI was easy to write kept producing buggy
shitware. Because they thought it "easy to use".

They're not the weak link in majority of cases, agreed.

> flaws that theoretically a really big gov't computer could use to break it.
> A lot of encryption systems that use public key really use it to generate a
> 120-160bit session key and exchange it with their partner. Although there

All PKI systems are used for symmetric encryption key exchange. In fact, most
PKI has considerable weaknesses, if it's being used for something else than
that.

> are no documented cracks of 120 bit encryption through brute force, it's
> theoretically possible.

The key size is useless without knowing the algorithm complexity. No, it is not possible
to brute-force a symmetric crypto key within its viability window. It is
perfectly possible (though impractical) to use key sizes which cannot
be brute-forced, period. This includes QC, because not all algorithms
can profit from QC parallelism; nevermind that you can't scale to
high qubit numbers (barring error-correction, the problem is energy
efficiency being worse than classical computation).
 
> Harvey pointed out a lot of common vulnerabilities, but most of them can be
> avoided by using proper techniques to avoid timing, social engineering, etc.
> 
> The big benefit of this is that it allows for a secure key transmission
> technique. Proper use of certificates should prevent a man in the middle
> exploit.

You cannot detect a MITM with PKI alone. The QM is there as an (imperfect)
tampering detection.
 
> Nonetheless, crypttech is growing by leaps and bounds as corporations now
> need encryption where previously just terrorists and govt's needed it.

Please do not assume reading Slashdot is sufficient to understand
cryptography (No, reading cryptography@ over years is not sufficient, 
either, or just reading <http://www.cacr.math.uwaterloo.ca/hac/> ,
but it's a first start if you want to understand the basics
of cryptography).

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/b908e24e/attachment.bin>

From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec  9 14:36:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 06:36:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031209083627.85550.qmail@web41206.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312090628240.17591-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Jeff Davis wrote:

> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
>
> If we want to know why politics is so complex this is
> sure a good example.
>
> What's so complex?  Smalley is a meta-honcho--likely
> on the short list for honcho--near the summit a
> multi-billion dollar public research money pile.

Jeff, I did not interject that statement as a comment
on Smalley v. Drexler.  I interjected it based on the
fact that in spite of a hour or more looking through
the U.S. legislative processes I cannot determine
accurately how/when the studies got deleted from
the bills.  I think around May the House bill got
sent to the Senate, but the Senate bill didn't get
sent to committee until September.  I think sometime
between those dates some reconciliation took place
between the bills but I'm unsure who did it and
when it took place.

And I may be all wrong because the published paper
trail (that I've been able to find thus far) is
complex in and of itself and that is still probably
less complex than what actually took place.

Robert




From fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Dec  9 15:43:12 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:43:12 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
Message-ID: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac>

Michael Shermer wrote an article critical of life extension in a recent
Scientific American:

http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0001AF03-A8B1-1F57-905980A84189EEDF

Subsequent article in CSICOP touched on skeptical views on life extension
and global warming:

http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/abuses/

Olga





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 16:07:10 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:07:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] planes
In-Reply-To: <004801c3be28$b7374d90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031209160710.32690.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > 
> > What ever happened to the F12?
> 
> Do you mean the Flying Dorito?  Cancelled by the Bottom Up review.
> The A12 Avenger II which was suppose to replace the A6, 
> was ultimately deemed as too expensive and was cut by then SecDef 
> Dick Cheney becoming the largest defense contract cancellation 
> in the history of the Department of Defense. 
> 
> http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-12.htm
> 

Nah, I meant the F-12, which was listed for years in Aviation Leak's
annual military inventory as being a Mach 2 VTOL fighter in
development.

The Flying Dorito, known in one part of Boston as the Calzone of Doom
and in another part as the Scone That Never Was (depending on your
ethnicity), was a fun plane to not work on. We worked really hard not
developing that plane, I'll tell ya, but I can't tell you what I did or
what contractor I worked for, or I'll have to give you the Nacho
Sleeper.

> 
> > That F22 can only do vectored thrust. It
> > can't take off vertically.
> 
> It can take of vertically, if you don't have ordinance
> or much fuel aboard.  {8-]
> 

Hey, that is an F-35. You're one engine short of an F-22...

> 
> > Besides, it was nowhere near as beautiful as
> > the F-23 (ducking....)
> 
> Surely Mike means NOT!  As soon as we saw the mockup
> of the x35, we knew we were going to win.  I bought a
> bunch of LM stock that day.  I lost most of my money,
> but thats a different story.  We figured no self-respecting
> AF officer would fly such a thing as the x35, nor any
> Naval Aviator would want to fly "Monica."
> 
> http://www.ebtx.com/oats/x32vsx35.htm

Of COURSE the Lockheed plane is scarier lookin than the Boeing lawn
dart, it's the freakin' Hunchback of San Jose. The Boeing plane looks
just right for the leading part in Of Mice and Men, "I'm gonna pet him
and hug him and name him George...." Odd, but in a giggle funny way....

However, that ISN'T the plane contest I'm talkin bout, you're pullin
one a them fancy Kaliforny bait and switch scams on me. The F-23 is
indeed a far more attractive aircraft than the F-22.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-23.htm

> 
> Of course, had the services chosen the x-35, then at least
> the army would no longer suffer the ignominy of having
> the ugliest plane, the A-10 Warthog.
> 
> http://members.aol.com/cbmjets/homepage/A10.html

Ugliness is an asset on the battlefield. Do you want enemy troops to
have wet dreams about your aircraft, or do you want them to have the
fear of death and destruction?

> 
> In any case, we are seeing perhaps the end of the line
> for fighter planes.  Humanity doesn't need them anymore.
> I don't suspect they will be much use in our last remaining
> great conflict: the massive culture war the west faces against
> the Taliban, the Al Qaida and their ilk.
> 

I suspect that the need for fighter planes will never end. Whatever is
the high terrain in warfare, that is where the knights will congregate.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 16:17:30 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:17:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <005601c3be44$a1bdf420$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <20031209161730.47694.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>

Well, atmospheric transportation has hit a wall of diminishing returns
on velocity, so the new plenum of progress is number of passengers and
cost efficiency. The Airbus entry is certainly a step in that
direction. Boeing has had designs for similar aircraft out for years
with little market interest up to now. Maybe that will change and
Boeing will do something now that Condit is canned.

Skyhooks are not a really time efficient means of getting from point A
to point B on earth. You may go faster in terms of peak velocity, but
the route is many times longer, going up to geosynch, around (at 23k
altitude, half circumference is 160,000 miles) and back down, for a
total route length of over 200,000 miles. You are going to have a trip
time of over 20 hours, more like 30-40 hours at best, going that way.

Why not jump in a 747-XFXL (extrafat, extralong) and travel in comfort
at mach .97 and do it in 15 hours?

--- Henrique Moraes Machado <hemm at br.inter.net> wrote:
> Nice. But it's only more of the same. 
> What I would really like to see is something more revolutionary than
> evolutionary. For instance, if we build many space elevators around
> the globe, people could travel between them using ships that would
> never need to land. It's some crazy idea, but it's an idea. Ok, it's
> not possible today, but could be considered.
> On the other hand there are other means of transportation that could
> be used today and are so neglected. Such as dirigibles and
> ekranoplanes (http://www.ae.metu.edu.tr/~gulkiz/wig.html)
> 
> 
> -----Mensagem Original----- 
> De: Natasha Vita-More 
> Para: ExI chat list 
> Enviada em: domingo, 7 de dezembro de 2003 23:22
> Assunto: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
> 
> 
> Tonight @ 9 PM on the Travel Channel will be "Giant Planes" covering
> the future of transportation.
> 
> (11/26/03 "Airbus Unveils Giant Jet Airbus showed off its new Airbus
> 380, a jumbo jet that could carry as many as 900 passengers Tuesday.
> Virgin Atlantic has reportedly ordered six of the colossal carriers.
> The plane will begin testing next year.")
> 
> 
> Natasha 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Tue Dec  9 16:11:35 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 11:11:35 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
Message-ID: <Law9-F8ul0lJkdPbXNp000178d7@hotmail.com>

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
>Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 15:33:27 +0100

>Please refrain from using blanket statements about a domain you obviously
>don't understand. "pretty strong" is meaningless without an attack model,
>"easy to use" is ridiculous, unless you refer to peer-reviewed
>implementations of PKIs, which have an empiric record track of being
>insecure. People who thought PKI was easy to write kept producing buggy
>shitware. Because they thought it "easy to use".

Please refrain from using blanket statements about a domain you obviously 
don't understand.

"Pretty strong" is not meaningless. As a cryptography consumer, I won't 
write the software myself but I need to know that it is difficult or 
pratically impossible to compromise.

>The key size is useless without knowing the algorithm complexity. No, it is 
>not possible
>to brute-force a symmetric crypto key within its viability window.

The key size is not useless. Of course to make a perfect valuation you need 
to know what algorithm is used.

>All PKI systems are used for symmetric encryption key exchange. In fact, 
>most
>PKI has considerable weaknesses, if it's being used for something else than
>that.
See, here's another of your blanket statements. Not All PKI systems are used 
for symmetric encryption. There are plenty of insecure systems that use PKI 
for things they shouldn't use them for.

>Please do not assume reading Slashdot is sufficient to understand
>cryptography (No, reading cryptography@ over years is not sufficient,
>either, or just reading <http://www.cacr.math.uwaterloo.ca/hac/> ,
>but it's a first start if you want to understand the basics
>of cryptography).
Everyone knows that true cypherpunks learn from reading Cryptonomicon, not 
slashdot. Man, I thought you would have known that.

I'm not trying to get into a pissing match with you, just trying to ablate 
your abrasiveness a little.

BAL

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>Reply-To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
>Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 15:33:27 +0100
>
>On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 09:15:14PM -0500, Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> > I think you're right. The real reason there's so much funding for 
>quantum
> > encryption is because whomever gets it first will have "unbreakable"
>
>Do you trust the laws of physics (these you know, that is, and you do know
>that we know our current physics is inconsistent, and hence knowably
>incomplete?) or those of mathematics?
>
>Cryptoanalysis is a mature, understood discipline. There are several
>independant-fields-of-theory production-quality PKI systems.
>
>Not many people understand QM, even less people understand the limitations
>of hardware using QM (single-photon source? proof of entanglement? 
>detection
>of cloning?).
>
>http://www.interhack.net/people/cmcurtin/snake-oil-faq.html
>
> > encryption for a while. It's like nuclear weapons were, you don't want 
>to be
> > the one without it.
>
>The only provably secure cryptosystem is one-time pad, generated
>using a good source of entropy and properly whitened. The second best one
>is a good (hairy territory, this) PRNG seeded by a shared secret. PKI
>is where you're stuck with no shared secret, and only open channels.
>
> > Public key encryption is pretty strong and easy to use, but it has a few
>
>Please refrain from using blanket statements about a domain you obviously
>don't understand. "pretty strong" is meaningless without an attack model,
>"easy to use" is ridiculous, unless you refer to peer-reviewed
>implementations of PKIs, which have an empiric record track of being
>insecure. People who thought PKI was easy to write kept producing buggy
>shitware. Because they thought it "easy to use".
>
>They're not the weak link in majority of cases, agreed.
>
> > flaws that theoretically a really big gov't computer could use to break 
>it.
> > A lot of encryption systems that use public key really use it to 
>generate a
> > 120-160bit session key and exchange it with their partner. Although 
>there
>
>All PKI systems are used for symmetric encryption key exchange. In fact, 
>most
>PKI has considerable weaknesses, if it's being used for something else than
>that.
>
> > are no documented cracks of 120 bit encryption through brute force, it's
> > theoretically possible.
>
>The key size is useless without knowing the algorithm complexity. No, it is 
>not possible
>to brute-force a symmetric crypto key within its viability window. It is
>perfectly possible (though impractical) to use key sizes which cannot
>be brute-forced, period. This includes QC, because not all algorithms
>can profit from QC parallelism; nevermind that you can't scale to
>high qubit numbers (barring error-correction, the problem is energy
>efficiency being worse than classical computation).
>
> > Harvey pointed out a lot of common vulnerabilities, but most of them can 
>be
> > avoided by using proper techniques to avoid timing, social engineering, 
>etc.
> >
> > The big benefit of this is that it allows for a secure key transmission
> > technique. Proper use of certificates should prevent a man in the middle
> > exploit.
>
>You cannot detect a MITM with PKI alone. The QM is there as an (imperfect)
>tampering detection.
>
> > Nonetheless, crypttech is growing by leaps and bounds as corporations 
>now
> > need encryption where previously just terrorists and govt's needed it.
>
>Please do not assume reading Slashdot is sufficient to understand
>cryptography (No, reading cryptography@ over years is not sufficient,
>either, or just reading <http://www.cacr.math.uwaterloo.ca/hac/> ,
>but it's a first start if you want to understand the basics
>of cryptography).
>
>-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
>______________________________________________________________
>ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
>8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
>http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
><< attach4 >>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

_________________________________________________________________
Our best dial-up offer is back.  Get MSN Dial-up Internet Service for 6 
months @ $9.95/month now! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 16:33:37 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:33:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [TLCB] Re: French assistance request...
In-Reply-To: <3FD5BCB8.68D696DB@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031209163337.39489.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Terry
> 
> How about passing this back to Mike as I don't know his email
> address, and 
> my mail will most likely bounce from the other servers.
> 
> Mike
> 
> Did you check out this www site?
> http://www.cartographic.com/xq/ASP/AreaID.34/qx/nautical_charts.asp
> 
> Looks like they might have something, but AT A COST!!

Scale 1:500,000 
Producer Military Topographic Directorate of the General Staff 
Vintage 1980-1981 
Projection Gauss-Kruger 
Language Russian 
Size 3x2 degrees 
Contours 50 meters 
Status Available Immediately in raster or paper format 
Sheet Count 1 
Base price (Paper) $79.00  per sheet  

This is a low resolution contour map that does not provide any
hydrometric topography. Saw it already, doesn't suit my needs.

> 
> Some links:  http://www.connectedglobe.com/millennium/ip.html

Found that page a while back. Thanks.

An ENC database is a file containing both geographic and hydrographic
topological data, depth soundings, and other GIS data that conforms to
the International Geophysical S-57 standard. The US has been creating
such charts for all of its territorial waters and posessions, even
uninhabited Navassa Island has been digitally charted. Other major
nations are supposed to be doing the same thing with their own
posessions and waters, which I why I want someone literate in French to
find such a chart on French government servers that is available to the
public.

> 
> Mac
> At 09:08 PM 12/8/2003 -0700, Terry W. Colvin wrote:
> >I am trying to get a good navigational chart of Clipperton Island (a
> >French posession) in the eastern Pacific and would like to find an
> ENC
> >database (Electronic Navigational Chart) that conforms to the
> >international S-57 standard. As it seems that each nation takes care
> of
> >its own navigational chart distribution, I was hoping someone who is
> >French, or French literate, could locate such a chart database for
> me
> >somewhere on the French government internet sites. Finding such a
> file
> >without knowing the lingo is a bit tough.... so much for my three
> years
> >of French in high school...
> >
> >All I've been able to obtain so far on the greater internet is a
> very
> >low resolution scanned image of a 1956 map that has no depth
> soundings
> >or other information.
> >
> >=====
> >Mike Lorrey
> 
> 
> -- 
> ?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992,
> Frank Rice
> 
> 
> Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) <
> fortean1 at mindspring.com >
>      Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
> Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html
> >
> Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
>       U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
> ------------
> Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
>    TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam
> veterans,
> Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From hemm at br.inter.net  Tue Dec  9 17:21:12 2003
From: hemm at br.inter.net (Henrique Moraes Machado)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 15:21:12 -0200
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <20031209161730.47694.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01d101c3be78$d84bb8e0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>


As I said, crazy idea. :)
Just a paradigmatic issue. I wouldn't like to be forever tied to conventional airplanes.
I wouldn't even mind to travel slower than mach .97 (or much slower) aboard a dirigible for instance. It's not a matter of speed. 

The transports need a revolution. When we had only horses, the trains were revolutionary. Then the automobiles and finally airplanes. Nothing new since then. And there goes one hundred years.
One might point that there are rockets and stuff, but how many people do you know have used rockets for transportation? Not practical.
I've seen (discovery channel, internet) many ideas that could change radically the transports but I don't see any of these ideas being implemented.


-----Mensagem Original----- 
De: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
Para: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at br.inter.net>; "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Enviada em: ter?a-feira, 9 de dezembro de 2003 14:17
Assunto: Re: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


| Well, atmospheric transportation has hit a wall of diminishing returns
| on velocity, so the new plenum of progress is number of passengers and
| cost efficiency. The Airbus entry is certainly a step in that
| direction. Boeing has had designs for similar aircraft out for years
| with little market interest up to now. Maybe that will change and
| Boeing will do something now that Condit is canned.
| 
| Skyhooks are not a really time efficient means of getting from point A
| to point B on earth. You may go faster in terms of peak velocity, but
| the route is many times longer, going up to geosynch, around (at 23k
| altitude, half circumference is 160,000 miles) and back down, for a
| total route length of over 200,000 miles. You are going to have a trip
| time of over 20 hours, more like 30-40 hours at best, going that way.
| 
| Why not jump in a 747-XFXL (extrafat, extralong) and travel in comfort
| at mach .97 and do it in 15 hours?
| 
| --- Henrique Moraes Machado <hemm at br.inter.net> wrote:
| > Nice. But it's only more of the same. 
| > What I would really like to see is something more revolutionary than
| > evolutionary. For instance, if we build many space elevators around
| > the globe, people could travel between them using ships that would
| > never need to land. It's some crazy idea, but it's an idea. Ok, it's
| > not possible today, but could be considered.
| > On the other hand there are other means of transportation that could
| > be used today and are so neglected. Such as dirigibles and
| > ekranoplanes (http://www.ae.metu.edu.tr/~gulkiz/wig.html)



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  9 17:28:47 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:28:47 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <012001c3bd6e$7fa86360$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
References: <200312060543.hB65hqM30870@finney.org>
	<20031206195800.GC5783@leitl.org>
	<012001c3bd6e$7fa86360$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <20031209172847.GD4452@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 08:34:37PM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> > I personally expect crosslinked polymer as structure bulk, not
> > diamond nor graphenes.
> 
> Interesting. I think I can see why crosslinked polymers might appeal
> given disulphide bonds already feature in routine protein chemistry,

No, the simple reason is processivity and energy use. Even if I can
deposit about everything chemically stable, but have to do it
at a MHz..GHz rate by a resonant tooltip I'm burning lots of juice
for a glacially slow deposition. 

With a monomer I just have to squirt it out, and to initiate it.
With a cumulene as linear monomer I can in fact make pretty good
diamond, if I have the F-tipped carbon nanotube as a tool, but
I can also change the polymer deposited (a continuum between diamond
and graphene) by controlling the tip movement, and quench radicals
with a gas jet. It might be not perfect, but it's orders of 
magnitude faster, and gets the job done.

> but I see protein design as pretty complex, requiring a solvent, and

Proteins are very good for purification, autoassembly and part ligation,
all in one step, and a vast existing infrastructure (biotechnology) to
produce them. This is sufficient for assembling cellular architectures,
anything regular, but is lousy for structural material (you won't get 
much better than spider silk, and that's not too thermally stable) and 
for nonregular complex shapes.

You can of course add artificial amino acids to the repertoire, it's
been done already. The problem is that the information required for folding
guidance dilutes your functionality concentration. It takes a lot of blahblah
to create the functional envelope for the enzyme core (the periphery
has also functionality, of course, but I'm simplifying this for the
sake of argument).

> very hard to do computationally (I presume you don't just want to stuff

PFP/iPFP is making nice progress. They've invented a brand new fold the
other day, and forecast the structure very nicely, too. You need basically 
a self-bootstrapping high-precision forcefield, and custom hardware to 
implement it (Blue Gene is pretty close to that) to do it robustly and quickly.

The PFP/iPFP is not a boolean event (now we've got it! The Holy Grail! etc.),
you just get lucky more and more often.

> a volume with any old shape). If diamonoid forms could be produced
> they would seem to have the advantage of being conceptually easier to
> design with. Is your expectation for cross-linked polymer bulk structures

I would forget machine-phase for time being. This is almost irrelevant
for bootstrap. I'm not sure machine-phase is exclusive means of fabbing
for mature nanotechnology either.

> based on  the view that diamondoid would be too difficult or rather that
> designer protein chemistry would be relatively easy?

Right now hacking biology is our strongest tool. The second closest 
being self-assembly by supramolecular chemistry. But here you have
to synthesize everything from scratch, so you're stuck with very
primitive structures, and lousy yield. Manipulative proximal probe
is even more limited, if we're trying to do single-molecule chemistry.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/7b43d33c/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec  9 17:49:55 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:49:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <Law9-F8ul0lJkdPbXNp000178d7@hotmail.com>
References: <Law9-F8ul0lJkdPbXNp000178d7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031209174955.GF4452@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:11:35AM -0500, Brian Lee wrote:

> I'm not trying to get into a pissing match with you, just trying to ablate 
> your abrasiveness a little.

I flame with a purpose. I'm sick and tired of pretend knowledge
about a complex field. The only thing I learned about cryptography
in all those years is that I don't know what the fuck I'm talking
about.

Misunderstandements about system security and cryptography can in
future get your, and -- most importantly -- other people's ass
killed. This is not a hyperbole. Bad crypto already kills people,
just not thousands or millions. Not yet.

The right frame of mind before this is humility, and readiness
to learn. In any case: do not spread actual misinformation
without checking back with people who know.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031209/81593beb/attachment.bin>

From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec  9 18:03:40 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:03:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312081527090.31948-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312090957320.21534-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> But in the early versions of the bill (S. 189 (es)) it was in Section 5b
> and it isn't in S 189 (is or rs) (where Section 5 became Section 4).
> You can search on "Self-Assembly".
>
> This would make a great detective story...

The above is wrong!  I had the order of the bills incorrect.

If you start at http://thomas.loc.gov/ and search on "S189" you
will get the 4 versions in the correct order with explanations.
The text appears in S.189(es).  Then go to the es/enr versions
and go to "Bill Summary & Status file" to get a list of the pages
in the Congressional Record.

In section 5b it says "the National Research Council shall conduct
a one-time study to determine the technical feasibility of molecular
self-assembly for the manufacture of materials and devices at the
molecular scale."

The text shows up in the debate on the floor on November the 18th.
Documents S15101/S15102 in the Congressional Record. The changes
appear to be coming into the version of the bill from Senators
Allen (VA) and Wyden (OR). The text is not in earlier versions
of the bill.

Sorry for the confusion.
Robert




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 18:11:33 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 10:11:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
In-Reply-To: <01d101c3be78$d84bb8e0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <20031209181133.84129.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

Akranoplans are interesting ideas, but I suspect that the danger of
collision with ships would be a problem as would dealing with heavy
seas. Doesn't matter if you are going mach .75 25 feet over the ocean
if the waves are 100 feet high...

The real revolution in transportation is in residential ships like
Residensea. When you can telecommute, then ocean cruise ships will make
a comeback.

--- Henrique Moraes Machado <hemm at br.inter.net> wrote:
> 
> As I said, crazy idea. :)
> Just a paradigmatic issue. I wouldn't like to be forever tied to
> conventional airplanes.
> I wouldn't even mind to travel slower than mach .97 (or much slower)
> aboard a dirigible for instance. It's not a matter of speed. 
> 
> The transports need a revolution. When we had only horses, the trains
> were revolutionary. Then the automobiles and finally airplanes.
> Nothing new since then. And there goes one hundred years.
> One might point that there are rockets and stuff, but how many people
> do you know have used rockets for transportation? Not practical.
> I've seen (discovery channel, internet) many ideas that could change
> radically the transports but I don't see any of these ideas being
> implemented.
> 
> 
> -----Mensagem Original----- 
> De: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> Para: "Henrique Moraes Machado" <hemm at br.inter.net>; "ExI chat list"
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Enviada em: ter?a-feira, 9 de dezembro de 2003 14:17
> Assunto: Re: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
> 
> 
> | Well, atmospheric transportation has hit a wall of diminishing
> returns
> | on velocity, so the new plenum of progress is number of passengers
> and
> | cost efficiency. The Airbus entry is certainly a step in that
> | direction. Boeing has had designs for similar aircraft out for
> years
> | with little market interest up to now. Maybe that will change and
> | Boeing will do something now that Condit is canned.
> | 
> | Skyhooks are not a really time efficient means of getting from
> point A
> | to point B on earth. You may go faster in terms of peak velocity,
> but
> | the route is many times longer, going up to geosynch, around (at
> 23k
> | altitude, half circumference is 160,000 miles) and back down, for a
> | total route length of over 200,000 miles. You are going to have a
> trip
> | time of over 20 hours, more like 30-40 hours at best, going that
> way.
> | 
> | Why not jump in a 747-XFXL (extrafat, extralong) and travel in
> comfort
> | at mach .97 and do it in 15 hours?
> | 
> | --- Henrique Moraes Machado <hemm at br.inter.net> wrote:
> | > Nice. But it's only more of the same. 
> | > What I would really like to see is something more revolutionary
> than
> | > evolutionary. For instance, if we build many space elevators
> around
> | > the globe, people could travel between them using ships that
> would
> | > never need to land. It's some crazy idea, but it's an idea. Ok,
> it's
> | > not possible today, but could be considered.
> | > On the other hand there are other means of transportation that
> could
> | > be used today and are so neglected. Such as dirigibles and
> | > ekranoplanes (http://www.ae.metu.edu.tr/~gulkiz/wig.html)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From jacques at dtext.com  Tue Dec  9 18:36:34 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 19:36:34 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [TLCB] Re: French assistance request...
In-Reply-To: <20031209163337.39489.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031209163337.39489.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FD61632.607@dtext.com>

Mike,

The French organism responsible for the ENC charts is 
http://www.shom.fr/ Send them an email and they will tell you if/where 
you can find the ENC chart for Clipperton Island.

http://www.primar-stavanger.org/ commercializes some such charts, 
including French ones. They have a "Chart catalogue" java app that you 
can download.

CC to me if you want me to read some other message about this, as I 
don't monitor the list in a systematic way.

And don't go bombing the little atoll, please. I might want to retire 
there and play with the crabs.

Jacques

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> An ENC database is a file containing both geographic and hydrographic
> topological data, depth soundings, and other GIS data that conforms to
> the International Geophysical S-57 standard. The US has been creating
> such charts for all of its territorial waters and posessions, even
> uninhabited Navassa Island has been digitally charted. Other major
> nations are supposed to be doing the same thing with their own
> posessions and waters, which I why I want someone literate in French to
> find such a chart on French government servers that is available to the
> public.




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec  9 18:35:03 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 13:35:03 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <20031209143327.GY4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <000801c3be83$2c2bff60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Eugen Leitl wrote,
> Please refrain from using blanket statements about a domain 
> you obviously don't understand.

and

> Please do not assume reading Slashdot is sufficient to 
> understand cryptography

This is a big problem with Extropians and Transhumanists in general.  All we
seem to have is a discussion group with armchair quarterbacks and amateurs
arguing over star-trek science.  Where are all the real experts in our
favorite fields?  I feel like I am beating a dead horse, but it has to be
said.

We have to move beyond the fan-club stage and create develop expertise and
involvement to create the future.  Educating the public, lobbying our
governments, and discussing this stuff is only the first step.  And even
that step is misguided without a proper understanding of the technologies.
We are becoming a cargo cult that doesn't understand what we are really
promoting.  How can we break out of this feel-good mode and into the real
work?  Self-education, grassroots efforts, and garage tinkering worked well
in the industrial age, but won't be good enough for the future.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec  9 18:46:57 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 13:46:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <000c01c3be84$d63c9180$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Olga wrote,
> Subsequent article in CSICOP touched on skeptical views on life extension
and global warming:
>
> <http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/abuses/>

Excellent article.  At first, skepticism was a scientific tool used to
critically analyze assumptions and verify facts.  Now we have copycats who
are acting like skeptics to give their unfounded beliefs an air of
scientific authority.  As the article notes, people who are "skeptical"
about evolution or global warming are merely pretending to be skeptics
without the underlying science.  This is the same as Christian "Scientists"
or Creation "Science" trying to pretend that their religious beliefs are as
rigorous as real science.  It is too easy to fall into this trap.  People
easily fall into a mode where they act like they are experts and they have
no real concept of how science or the underlying technology really work.  I
am afraid that there are more faux experts than real experts in the public
spotlight today.  It is easier to be a consumer, commentator, political
activists, strategy consultant, public educator, or whatever in a field of
"expertise" without really going through all the trouble of really learning
the field.  This is the biggest threat to science and by extension to
transhumanism facing us today.  The world of science is being diluted with
pseudoscience, and it is very difficult for the laypeople to tell the
difference.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 19:10:56 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:10:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [TLCB] Re: French assistance request...
In-Reply-To: <3FD61632.607@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <20031209191056.91846.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- JDP <jacques at dtext.com> wrote:
> Mike,
> 
> The French organism responsible for the ENC charts is 
> http://www.shom.fr/ Send them an email and they will tell you
> if/where 
> you can find the ENC chart for Clipperton Island.
> 
> http://www.primar-stavanger.org/ commercializes some such charts, 
> including French ones. They have a "Chart catalogue" java app that
> you can download.
> 
> CC to me if you want me to read some other message about this, as I 
> don't monitor the list in a systematic way.

Thank you very much for your response, Jaques. I will see what I can
accomplish through these links.

> 
> And don't go bombing the little atoll, please. I might want to retire
> there and play with the crabs.

Well, I'd rather play with some of the tourists than the crabs, myself
(unless they, the crabs, saute well).

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Tue Dec  9 19:15:52 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 14:15:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
Message-ID: <Law9-F420eGlnaTq2bq0001f925@hotmail.com>

Of course I too am sick and tired of people spouting off about things which 
they know nothing.

I'm moderately familiar with what crypto to use in which situation and what 
provides an acceptible level of risk. Of course nothing is impregnable (even 
one-time pads have social engineering vulnerabilities), but there are 
acceptible encryption schemes and methods that have never known to be 
compromised (like the 128 bit RC4 cipher used in many SSL implementations).

My first point was attempting to relay that as technology power increases, 
these theoretical vulnerabilities to brute force cracks will become actual, 
and whomever has the next level of encryption will be at an advantage. An 
advantage as huge as nuclear weapons were.

Since

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
>Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:49:55 +0100
>
>On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:11:35AM -0500, Brian Lee wrote:
>
> > I'm not trying to get into a pissing match with you, just trying to 
>ablate
> > your abrasiveness a little.
>
>I flame with a purpose. I'm sick and tired of pretend knowledge
>about a complex field. The only thing I learned about cryptography
>in all those years is that I don't know what the fuck I'm talking
>about.
>
>Misunderstandements about system security and cryptography can in
>future get your, and -- most importantly -- other people's ass
>killed. This is not a hyperbole. Bad crypto already kills people,
>just not thousands or millions. Not yet.
>
>The right frame of mind before this is humility, and readiness
>to learn. In any case: do not spread actual misinformation
>without checking back with people who know.
>
>-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
>______________________________________________________________
>ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
>8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
>http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
><< attach4 >>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

_________________________________________________________________
Cell phone ?switch? rules are taking effect ? find out more here. 
http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 19:32:05 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:32:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <000c01c3be84$d63c9180$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031209193205.10451.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> Olga wrote,
> > Subsequent article in CSICOP touched on skeptical views on life
> > extension and global warming:
> >
> > <http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/abuses/>
> 
> Excellent article.  At first, skepticism was a scientific tool used
> to critically analyze assumptions and verify facts.  Now we have
> copycats who are acting like skeptics to give their unfounded
> beliefs an air of scientific authority.  As the article notes,
> people who are "skeptical"about evolution or global warming are
> merely pretending to be skeptics without the underlying science. 

I am sorry, Harvey, but global warming does not deserve to be included
in this. The author makes a ludicrous claim that we should not be
skeptical about something that is allegedly happening right now.
Bullshit. UFO adherents claim that we are being invaded and abducted
right now. So freakin what? Does that mean we should not be skeptical
of the scientific investigations of psychologists into the memories of
abductees? Hell no. Does it mean we should not be skeptical about the
laboratory results of samples taken from alleged landing/crash sites?
Hell no.

Global warming? What global warming? I've got two feet of snow in my
front yard and winter hasn't even officially STARTED yet. You think I'm
unduly skeptical about the claims ONLY of scientists who have a
socialist agenda? Do you think I am unduly skeptical when scientists
who developed much of the base data the UN makes its claims on say that
their data is not being properly used or interpreted by the UN??? Do
you think I am unduly skeptical when my own cousin, a published
scientist with degrees from BU and UMO, and who is doing his doctorate
at the University of Aukland, and who happens to actually BE a
climatologist, says that most of the claims of global warming
proponents are absolute bullshit, and the rest are not anthropogenic in
nature? 

Given the immense cost of completely changing our entire economic and
governmental structures that is being demanded by global warming
proponents, we need to be EXTREMELY skeptical of the claims of these people.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 19:35:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:35:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 04:01:49PM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > I recall on the extropy list of years gone past, that Eugen used to
> > post long posts rambling on, like he'd been on a caffiene drip for
> the
> > last 96 hours, about all sorts of things. What ever happened to
> that
> > posting technique?
> 
> Posting doesn't get anything done, and I do have a life these days.
> It's very possible that I'll be gone (virtually, for good?) in a few
> months.

WHAT? What is up?

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec  9 19:37:49 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 11:37:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031209083627.85550.qmail@web41206.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031209193749.17194.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> If we want to know why politics is so complex this is
> sure a good example.
> 
> Robert
> 
>         ------------------------------
> 
> What's so complex?  Smalley is a meta-honcho--likely
> on the short list for honcho--near the summit a
> multi-billion dollar public research money pile. 
> Quite a career accomplishment.  
> 
> The top down approach to nano reaches out from the
> broad margins of current capabilities, can absorb
> research billions easily, and can deliver
> immediately-usable science and tech as it expands
> those margins.

I'm not too concerned, myself. So what if they are leery of even
allowing potentially grey gooish technolgies be developed? What they
intend to fund will build a lot of the tools that will be needed to
accomplish a self assembler technology anyways. All this does is ensure
that the self-assembler technology will be developed solely as a
private enterprise, with no federal mucking about or potential military confiscation.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From rhanson at gmu.edu  Tue Dec  9 21:20:15 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 16:20:15 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <000c01c3be84$d63c9180$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/9/2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
><http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/abuses/>
>
>Excellent article.  ...  People
>easily fall into a mode where they act like they are experts and they have
>no real concept of how science or the underlying technology really work.  I
>am afraid that there are more faux experts than real experts in the public
>spotlight today.  It is easier to be a consumer, commentator, political
>activists, strategy consultant, public educator, or whatever in a field of
>"expertise" without really going through all the trouble of really learning
>the field.  This is the biggest threat to science and by extension to
>transhumanism facing us today.  The world of science is being diluted with
>pseudoscience, and it is very difficult for the laypeople to tell the
>difference. ...

I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if you think the
situation was ever any different.  It seems to me that this is the way it
has always been.




Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec  9 22:53:50 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 17:53:50 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <20031209193205.10451.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <009501c3bea7$5304df70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> I am sorry, Harvey, but global warming does not deserve to be 
> included in this.

I disagree.  Most reputable scientists believe that the earth is warming and
that humans are accelerating this.  There are only a small percentage of
scientists who dispute this, and they seem to be right-wing extremists or
funded by big energy corporations.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec  9 22:59:43 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 17:59:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <009601c3bea8$2277b700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if 
> you think the situation was ever any different.  It seems to 
> me that this is the way it has always been.

I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.  University studies
are supported by specific corporations now.  Discoveries are proprietary and
patented instead of peer-reviewed.  More money is spent on lawyers to
prevent flaws from being exposed rather than confirmation studies being
performed.  Corporate fraud has moved into the realms of computer science
and biology more than ever before.  Areas of research that used to be purely
scientific are now overrun with corporate lawyers, politicians, ethics
advisors, and a whole host of non-technical people trying to control
technology that they don't understand.  Doctors used to make medical
decisions, now non-medical professionals in HMOs do.  Scientists used to
direct research, now corporate boards of directors do.  Researchers used to
choose research paths, now venture capitalists do.  The control and
(mis)representation of technology has shifted from the scientists to the
eco-political realm.  This shift is new and has completely changed the
dynamic of how science is done.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec  9 23:11:56 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 15:11:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] planes
In-Reply-To: <20031209160710.32690.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031209231156.93688.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ugliness is an asset on the battlefield. Do you want
> enemy troops to
> have wet dreams about your aircraft, or do you want
> them to have the
> fear of death and destruction?

I dunno.  If the enemy really doesn't want to hurt my
craft because they wouldn't dare mar such a thing of
beauty, the enemy really doesn't want to hurt my
craft.  That can be a useful form of limited
invulnerability.  ;)


From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Wed Dec 10 03:00:47 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 19:00:47 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <009501c3bea7$5304df70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLCEIJCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>

 Harvey wrote:
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
>
>
> Mike Lorrey wrote,
>> I am sorry, Harvey, but global warming does not deserve to be
>> included in this.
>
> I disagree.  Most reputable scientists believe that the earth is
> warming and that humans are accelerating this.  There are only a
> small percentage of scientists who dispute this, and they seem to be
> right-wing extremists or funded by big energy corporations.

### Are you sure about this? Most reputable climate scientists profess to
have insufficient knowledge about the degree of warming, if any, or the
degree of human complicity, if any, to make any firm policy recommendations
(except "Spend more on research"). Admitting that "some" warming might occur
(with a 95% confidence interval sometimes larger than the postulated
effect), and vaguely surmising that humans might have "some" influence,
doesn't make most scientists into global warming believers.

Rafal




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec 10 00:09:42 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 16:09:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <002e01c3be06$c14399a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031210000942.77373.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-920726,00.html
> > 
> > Don't know what took the Brits so long, but they
> finally made it a
> > crime to steal someone's organs without their
> consent...
> 
> It's still legal, even encouraged in this country. 
> I don't
> recall giving my consent to have my foreskin
> removed.

At the time, you were probably the (effectively) legal
property of those who had just given birth to you, on
the grounds that you were not (yet) mentally competent
to give consent.  Similarly, you probably did not give
consent to be removed from that warm, nourishing
pocket of flesh where you had gestated - most people
who undergo that experience are quite upset about it
at the time - nor, thereafter, to be fed, clothed, or
sheltered.

Now, there may be something to be said for adjusting
the standards of age-related mental competency.  But
the fundamental legal concept (a newborn person is not
a full citizen until a certain event happens - an
event that is likely, even automatic, for all citizens
before they gain much power to protest about it, to
avoid abuse of the rule) remains sound.


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Dec 10 00:16:22 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:16:22 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <009601c3bea8$2277b700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <003001c3beb2$d7ae8220$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Harvey Newstrom  wrote:

> Robin Hanson wrote,
> > I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if 
> > you think the situation was ever any different.  It seems to 
> > me that this is the way it has always been.
> 
> I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.  University
> studies are supported by specific corporations now.  Discoveries
> are proprietary and patented instead of peer-reviewed.  More
> money is spent on lawyers to prevent flaws from being exposed 
> rather than confirmation studies being performed.  Corporate 
> fraud has moved into the realms of computer science and 
> biology more than ever before.  Areas of research that used to
> be purely  scientific are now overrun with corporate lawyers,
> politicians, ethics advisors, and a whole host of non-technical 
> people trying to control technology that they don't understand.
>  Doctors used to make medical decisions, now non-medical 
> professionals in HMOs do.  Scientists used to direct research,
> now corporate boards of directors do.  Researchers used to
> choose research paths, now venture capitalists do.  The control
> and (mis)representation of technology has shifted from the
> scientists to the eco-political realm.  This shift is new and has
> completely changed the dynamic of how science is done.

Maybe you are right Harvey. Maybe you are not. Why don't you
tackle something with a slightly narrower scope and give more 
evidence for what your saying? The broad brush stuff can only be
accepted or rejected wholesale and mostly its rejected not explicitly
because its disagreed with but implictly because the difficulty of 
untangling it is too great. If you don't get engagement you can't get
persuasion. Trust me I know :-)

Often the posters on the Exi list are encouraged to do more, or
try different things. This is seldom bad advice in itself but would
overwhelming silence on the list (as does pops up from time to
time) be interpreted by you as success as everyone had gone off
to do stuff? If you have some specific things you'd like to see done
perhaps you could state them? I thought the recent discussion about
nanotechnology would have been useful to anybody interested and 
willing to actually listen. I agree with Hal that critics are our friends 
(or at least can be :-). 

I can empathise with frustration and perhaps sometimes the list
functions as a fraternity of the frustrated but there is little point just
howling at the moon. 

Regards,
Brett




From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 10 00:15:17 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:15:17 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
References: <20031210000942.77373.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <014901c3beb2$b2cde540$d8994a43@texas.net>


Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> It's still legal, even encouraged in this country.
> I don't recall giving my consent to have my foreskin
> removed.

Wow, that's disgraceful! Do you know the name of the lucky transplant
recipient?

Damien Broderick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 01:24:40 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 17:24:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLCEIJCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>
Message-ID: <20031210012440.97549.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal at smigrodzki.org> wrote:
>  Harvey wrote:
> > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
> >
> >
> > Mike Lorrey wrote,
> >> I am sorry, Harvey, but global warming does not deserve to be
> >> included in this.
> >
> > I disagree.  Most reputable scientists believe that the earth is
> > warming and that humans are accelerating this.  There are only a
> > small percentage of scientists who dispute this, and they seem to
> be
> > right-wing extremists or funded by big energy corporations.
> 
> ### Are you sure about this? Most reputable climate scientists
> profess to
> have insufficient knowledge about the degree of warming, if any, or
> the
> degree of human complicity, if any, to make any firm policy
> recommendations
> (except "Spend more on research"). Admitting that "some" warming
> might occur
> (with a 95% confidence interval sometimes larger than the postulated
> effect), and vaguely surmising that humans might have "some"
> influence,
> doesn't make most scientists into global warming believers.

Rafal is right, and the "2,500" scientists you said signed onto the
Climat Change report were most definitely NOT all climatologists, or
even hard scientists. A lot of them were sociologists, psychologists,
and other people completely unqualified to judge.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 01:30:17 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 17:30:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] HUMOR: The Jones have the bomb...
Message-ID: <20031210013017.99090.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.videoranch.com/NNSlarge.html

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From megao at sasktel.net  Wed Dec 10 01:46:33 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 19:46:33 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] HUMOR: The Jones have the bomb...
References: <20031210013017.99090.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FD67AF9.8048421D@sasktel.net>

Not Found

The requested URL /Temporary
Items/home/vranch/html/www/Xmas/html/popup_functions.js was not
found on this server.


Apache/1.3.26 Server at www.videoranch.com Port 80

"Pharmer Mo"



Mike Lorrey wrote:

> http://www.videoranch.com/NNSlarge.html
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 10 02:59:56 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 18:59:56 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <20031210000942.77373.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003301c3bec9$b12b3a50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> > > crime to steal someone's organs without their
> > consent...
> > 
> > It's still legal, even encouraged in this country. 
> > I don't recall giving my consent to have my foreskin
> > removed.
> 
> At the time, you were probably the (effectively) legal
> property of those who had just given birth to you, on
> the grounds that you were not (yet) mentally competent
> to give consent...

Of course.  I have a friend whose job it was to meet with
African immigrant families to explain to them that it is
illegal in this country to do female circumcision, not to
mention cruel and ill-advised.  I have often inquired why
she has no counterpart arguing the same for the male children.

I do not recall the event of course, but I would suppose it
to be painful as all hell.  I feel sorry for my infant self.

spike






From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 10 03:04:07 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 19:04:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <014901c3beb2$b2cde540$d8994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <003401c3beca$471a4100$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
> 
> Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > It's still legal, even encouraged in this country.
> > I don't recall giving my consent to have my foreskin
> > removed.
> 
> Wow, that's disgraceful! Do you know the name of the lucky transplant
> recipient?
> 
> Damien Broderick

HEY!  Thats a hell of an idea Damien!  Restoration
thru transplantation.  I would imagine that there are
those who undergo circumcision as adults (for whatever
reason, perhaps having become engaged to an Israeli
princess.)  Organ donation!  Come to think of it, one
could even sell the thing, much like they sell kidneys
in some parts of the world.

spike 



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Dec 10 03:24:52 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 22:24:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <003401c3beca$471a4100$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <014901c3beb2$b2cde540$d8994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031209221508.032bd8f0@mail.comcast.net>

At 07:04 PM 12/9/2003 -0800, Spike wrote:

> > > It's still legal, even encouraged in this country.
> > > I don't recall giving my consent to have my foreskin
> > > removed.
>
> > Wow, that's disgraceful! Do you know the name of the lucky transplant
> > recipient?
>
>HEY!  Thats a hell of an idea Damien!  Restoration
>thru transplantation.  I would imagine that there are
>those who undergo circumcision as adults (for whatever
>reason, perhaps having become engaged to an Israeli
>princess.)  Organ donation!  Come to think of it, one
>could even sell the thing, much like they sell kidneys
>in some parts of the world.

Nah, I'm sure the part went to a specialty food market, when you consider 
how many ethnic groups use body parts of exotic animals as ingredients in 
aphrodisiacs or for life-extension.

There are a few contextual jokes on your name I could make but I'm still 
recovering from the 23-part pun I posted to another group yesterday.


-- David Lubkin.




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 03:58:43 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 19:58:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] HUMOR: The Jones have the bomb...
In-Reply-To: <3FD67AF9.8048421D@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <20031210035843.48655.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

Works fine on IE

--- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> Not Found
> 
> The requested URL /Temporary
> Items/home/vranch/html/www/Xmas/html/popup_functions.js was not
> found on this server.
> 
> 
> Apache/1.3.26 Server at www.videoranch.com Port 80
> 
> "Pharmer Mo"
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > http://www.videoranch.com/NNSlarge.html
> >
> > =====
> > Mike Lorrey
> > "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
> >                                        - Gen. John Stark
> > "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
> >                                        - Mike Lorrey
> > Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> > Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> > http://photos.yahoo.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From megao at sasktel.net  Wed Dec 10 03:57:01 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 21:57:01 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] HUMOR: The Jones have the bomb...
References: <20031210013017.99090.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FD6998C.D2BA088B@sasktel.net>


I googled and found:

Dark Thoughts...
... nuclear war. Now, thanks to the grey market, anyone with a gold card

can buy their way to neighbourhood nuclear superiority. On ...
members.shaw.ca/triviaqueen/dark_end.htm     - 6k - Cached - Similar
pages

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> http://www.videoranch.com/NNSlarge.html
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 04:44:52 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 23:44:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <003001c3beb2$d7ae8220$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <00e301c3bed8$5d188fd0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Brett Paatsch wrote,
> 
> Harvey Newstrom  wrote:
> 
> > Robin Hanson wrote,
> > > I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if you 
> > > think the situation was ever any different.  It seems to me that 
> > > this is the way it has always been.
> > 
> > I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.
>
> Maybe you are right Harvey. Maybe you are not. Why don't you
> tackle something with a slightly narrower scope and give more 
> evidence for what your saying?

I wasn't aware that anybody needed evidence of what I was saying.  Robin
seemed to agree with me, but thought this was the way things had always
been.  He certainly didn't dispute my assessment of how things are now.  My
entire diatribe was a long expansion of how I agreed with Hal and that he
was exactly right in his assessments of nanotechnology.  In fact, I believe
his assessment applies to a lot of other areas as well.  So far everybody is
in agreement.

What exact points did you disagree with, and what exact evidence did you
want to see?  Do you doubt that pseudoscience is confusing the public?  Do
you doubt HMOs have taken medical decisions away from doctors?  Do you doubt
that scientific research is now owned more by corporation backers and less
by public universities?  I am not sure exactly what points you think require
further evidence.

Or was it my suggestions you disliked.  Do you disagree that we have more
talk here than action?  Do you disagree that we should go beyond the
fan-club stage and start actually creating the future ourselves?  You asked
me to give more evidence for what I was saying, but I don't know exactly
what you disagreed with.

> If you have some specific things you'd like
> to see done perhaps you could state them?

I would like Extropians to get real technology jobs, practice radical
life-extension techniques, sign up for cryonics, start real think-tanks,
produce real solutions, start real development projects, and write
scientifically rigorous papers to present our ideas.

> I thought the recent discussion about nanotechnology would have been 
> useful to anybody interested and willing to actually listen. I agree 
> with Hal that critics are our friends

I agree with Hal as well.  My entire diatribe was a big expansion on how I
agree with Hal.  As Hal pointed out, the nanotech stuff is not very well
presented or supported.  We need to do a better job in providing evidence
for our ideas.  I am not sure why you are implying that I missed Hal's
excellent points.  I was writing to say that Hal was right on the money and
that his observations apply in other areas as well.

> I can empathise with frustration and perhaps sometimes the
> list functions as a fraternity of the frustrated but there is 
> little point just howling at the moon. 

Sadly, this is the primary cause why people drop out of the list.
Discussions here seem to be incompatible with getting real work done.
Eugen, Eliezer and many others have specifically questioned whether this
list detracts from their serious interests elsewhere.  The list does seem to
have a history of losing people as soon as they really get serious.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 04:45:17 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 23:45:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <20031210012440.97549.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00e401c3bed8$6c2ae630$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> Rafal is right, and the "2,500" scientists you said signed
> onto the Climat Change report were most definitely NOT all 
> climatologists, or even hard scientists. A lot of them were 
> sociologists, psychologists, and other people completely 
> unqualified to judge.

I never mentioned 2,500 scientists or the Climate Change report.  I don't
believe that petitions and voting are a means to scientific truths.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 04:45:41 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 23:45:41 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLCEIJCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>
Message-ID: <00e501c3bed8$7a042050$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Rafal wrote,
> ### Are you sure about this? Most reputable climate
> scientists profess to have insufficient knowledge about the 
> degree of warming, if any, or the degree of human complicity, 
> if any, to make any firm policy recommendations (except 
> "Spend more on research").

Yes.  There is no doubt that the globe is actually warming.  If you want to
argue whether humans are causing it or whether it is a natural cycle, that
is a different argument.  If you want to discuss the politics of what we
should do about it, and who specifically should do what, that is another
argument.  But if you want to argue that the Earth is not getting warmer as
a local trend in the last few decades, this just isn't supported by any
evidence or science.  Ignoring all the hype about carbon-dioxide, causes,
politics, and doomsday, the fact is that there is a current warming trend
occurring.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Dec 10 05:59:56 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:59:56 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <00e301c3bed8$5d188fd0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <007501c3bee2$d6bb6ec0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> Brett Paatsch wrote,
> > 
> > Harvey Newstrom  wrote:
> > 
> > > Robin Hanson wrote,
> > > > I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as
> > > > if you think the situation was ever any different.  It seems
> > > > to me that this is the way it has always been.
> > > 
> > > I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.
> >
> > Maybe you are right Harvey. Maybe you are not. Why don't
> > you tackle something with a slightly narrower scope and give
> > more evidence for what your saying?
 
> What exact points did you disagree with, and what exact evidence
> did you want to see? 

I don't so much disagree with you as think you are re-voicing fuzzy
generalisations as a result of frustration. I thought if you homed in 
a bit you might get better purchase and less frustration. 

> I am not sure exactly what points you think require further 
> evidence. Or was it my suggestions you disliked. 

I didn't dislike them. I'm not on your case. 

> Do you disagree that we have more  talk here than action?

No I don't disagree. I just make the point that this is a chat list. 
Even says so right there in the subject header.  

>  Do you disagree that we should go beyond the
> fan-club stage and start actually creating the future ourselves? 

I have no view on the matter as I find your initial proposition too
fuzzy. I wondered if you'd want to expand on it, hence my question
which you've respond to below. 
 
> > If you have some specific things you'd like
> > to see done perhaps you could state them?
> 
> I would like Extropians to get real technology jobs, practice 
> radical life-extension techniques, sign up for cryonics, start real 
> think-tanks, produce real solutions, start real development 
> projects, and write scientifically rigorous papers to present our
> ideas.

Ok. But as extropes together or as individuals that just happen 
to frequent the Exi list?  The reason I ask is that I think one of the 
biggest questions is whether transhumanists should form a political
force. I do see merit in that proposition. I can see good arguments
for and against it. I thought that the WTA might become a political
organisation yet Exi might stay out of politics and that might give the
best of both worlds. 

> > I can empathise with frustration and perhaps sometimes the
> > list functions as a fraternity of the frustrated but there is 
> > little point just howling at the moon. 
> 
> Sadly, this is the primary cause why people drop out of the list.
> Discussions here seem to be incompatible with getting real work
> done.

Well the universe is contingent. Time spent typing posts to Exi is 
time not available for other things but people sometimes pick up 
stuff when they are just being people and talking to other people
too. 

> Eugen, Eliezer and many others have specifically questioned
> whether this list detracts from their serious interests elsewhere.

I reckon that's a good question I think but its always a personal 
one. Each of us should perhaps ask ourselves it but I doubt we 
can answer for otheres. Do you think the Exi chat list actually
works as a sort of drug that steals our creative juices or something?

Regards,
Brett




From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Wed Dec 10 06:21:45 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:51:45 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868C7@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>


> Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > It's still legal, even encouraged in this country.
> > I don't recall giving my consent to have my foreskin
> > removed.
> 
> Wow, that's disgraceful! Do you know the name of the lucky transplant
> recipient?
> 
> Damien Broderick

Yes, it was our PM, John Howard. It was for an eyelid replacement. They took
a bit too much skin though, which explains his eyebrows...

Emlyn



From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 10 06:26:26 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 00:26:26 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <00e501c3bed8$7a042050$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <02eb01c3bee6$8e073b60$d8994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 10:45 PM

> There is no doubt that the globe is actually warming.  If you want to
> argue whether humans are causing it or whether it is a natural cycle, that
> is a different argument.

In Oz:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8118124%255E27
02,00.html

Average yearly temperatures are projected to rise by as much as 2C across
the nation by 2030, and 6C by 2070, according to an Australian Greenhouse
Office report into global warming - triggering more natural disasters and
crippling water shortages.

The number of very hot summer days, with temperatures soaring above 35C,
could double in most capital cities.

The 240-page assessment, to be released today by Environment Minister David
Kemp at a UN summit on climate change in Italy, says Australia will need to
make major changes to adapt to the hotter weather that will be induced by
global warming due to the greenhouse effect.

The trend in Australian temperatures since 1950 is now matching climate
model simulations of how temperatures respond to increased greenhouse gases
in the atmosphere, the report says.

It is likely the 1990s was the warmest decade in the past 1000 years, at
least in the northern hemisphere.

To cope with climate change, the report warns that Australians must use less
water, change the types of crops grown by farmers, revise engineering
standards and rezone land to prevent flooding.

Farmers are at high risk of losing money due to the increased frequency of
bad years, especially droughts, in parts of Australia within the next 20 to
50 years.

And Queensland's tourism industry could suffer as warmer water bleaches the
corals in the World Heritage-listed Great Barrier Reef.

[etc, and of course that's a gummit report so we know we can ignore it]



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 10 06:46:17 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 22:46:17 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031209221508.032bd8f0@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <003b01c3bee9$50456b50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> There are a few contextual jokes on your name I could make 
> but I'm still recovering from the 23-part pun I posted to another
group yesterday.


We haven't had a pungasm on extropians for some time.  {8-]
Remember about 3 yrs ago before the war started, when we
used to just have fun?  Especially around Newtonmass and
April 1?

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 10 06:56:56 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 22:56:56 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <007501c3bee2$d6bb6ec0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <003c01c3beea$ccf0be60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> > Eugen, Eliezer and many others have specifically questioned
> > whether this list detracts from their serious interests elsewhere.
Harvey
> 
> I reckon that's a good question... Do you think the Exi chat list
actually
> works as a sort of drug that steals our creative juices or something?
> 
> Regards,
> Brett


Harvey, I see your point, but for some of us, the extrolist is
an idea bank, where both deposits and withdrawals are made.  I
know you are one who takes life very seriously, and we are lucky
to have such as these.  The chat list for me is more of a drug 
that *creates* creative juices.  I know I am not making any discoveries
in life extension; most of us are not.  But having fun is itself 
a life-extension device.  Thinking is a life extension device.
For my part I will root for the guys doing actual life extension, 
and attempt to maximize fun while doing so.  {8-]  spike 



From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec 10 06:57:25 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:57:25 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Chinese moon probe to blast off in 3 years
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBOEBICBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From SciScoop: Some new players are getting ready to break Earth orbit and
head out into deep space. China has released its plans for lunar exploration
over the coming decade, which include a two-ton lunar orbiter named
"Chang'e-I,'' an apparent reference to an ancient legend about the fairy
Chang'e who flies to the moon. The craft is currently under construction and
will lift off within three years for a 9 day voyage to the Moon followed by
a functional year in lunar orbit. Chang'e is to be followed by an unmanned
Chinese lunar sample return mission in 2010. In the second decade of the
21st Century, China plans to land one of its citizens on the Moon.
Meanwhile, White House spokespersons have debunked as inaccurate rumors
several reports that in coming weeks President Bush would issue a call for
an American return to the Moon or manned missions to Mars.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/8d679262/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec 10 06:58:31 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:58:31 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] IBM Claims Nanotech Breakthrough
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBCEBJCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From BizReport: Researchers at IBM Corp. claim they have made an important
breakthrough in the race to design circuitry at the molecular level: a
system that works with existing methods of electronics manufacturing. In a
paper being released Monday at an industry conference in Washington, D.C.,
IBM researchers Chuck Black and Kathyrn Guarini say they used a naturally
occurring pattern of molecules as a stencil to etch flash memory circuitry
into silicon.
Other researchers are experimenting with using self-assembling, or naturally
forming, patterns of molecules to build very tiny circuitry. Doing so is
believed to be necessary if the high-tech industry can continue to pack more
transistors into smaller spaces - the process that continually makes
computing faster and less expensive. But the IBM scientists believe they are
the first to use the molecular patterns not as circuits that have to be
connected to larger wires, but as stencils that light can be shone through
to create circuitry in silicon. That would make it more likely to work with
existing processes, potentially saving money in manufacturing.
IBM predicts prototype devices using the technique could emerge in three to
five years.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/62f69288/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec 10 06:59:45 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:59:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe: Human Spaceflight Without NASA?
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBGEBJCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Space.com, an interesting article on the future of space exploration:
Space visionary Freeman Dyson, the acclaimed emeritus professor of physics
at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, recently had a
conversation with Robert Zubrin, the world's biggest cheerleader for human
missions to Mars.
"Your scheme of Mars missions is excellent," Dyson said, "but it has one
fatal flaw, the fact that you are expecting NASA to do it." "Ah, but when we
give NASA a real challenge like this, it will be a different NASA," Zubrin
replied. "I think he is right," Dyson said last Thursday. I had asked Dyson
and other top scientists about the future of human spaceflight, on a day
when worldwide media reports (then denied) said President Bush might soon
announce a major new human space initiative, to the Moon and perhaps Mars.
Sir Martin Rees, a British cosmologist and author of popular books, figures
rich entrepreneurs like Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos should lead the way to
the Moon and Mars, with NASA playing a supportive role.
The article describes the views of Dyson, Zubrin, Rees and others on space
exploration, reporting that many well-known rich individuals are trying to
set up commercial space ventures. If humans venture back to the Moon, and
even beyond, they may carry commercial insignia rather than national flags.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/b5cb976e/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec 10 07:00:43 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:00:43 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Hawaii Moon Declaration
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBKEBJCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Space.com: A worldwide gathering of lunar experts has called for a
sequence of technological, exploratory and commercial missions culminating
in the establishment a human presence on the Moon.
The Moon is currently the focus of an international program of scientific
investigation. Current missions underway or planned will lead to the future
use of the Moon for science and commercial development, thereby multiplying
opportunities for humanity in space and on Earth. We need the Moon for many
reasons: to use its resources of materials and energy to provide for our
future needs in space and on Earth, to establish a second reservoir of human
culture in the event of a terrestrial catastrophe, and to study and
understand the universe. The next step in human exploration beyond low Earth
orbit logically is to the Moon, our closest celestial neighbor in the Solar
System...
... To encourage and stimulate the peaceful and progressive development of
the Moon, we recommend that the international community of national space
agencies, companies and individuals operate and maintain an exploratory
mission at a pole of the Moon to serve as a catalyst for future human
missions within a decade. Our vision is one of expanding humanity into space
on an endless journey. We believe a human return to the Moon is the next
step into the Solar System and the future of the human race.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/d2bb4a95/attachment.html>

From joe at barrera.org  Wed Dec 10 07:52:00 2003
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 23:52:00 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe: Human Spaceflight Without NASA?
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBGEBJCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBGEBJCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <3FD6D0A0.3080508@barrera.org>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

>  Re: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe:

I think you mean "future history"

>  popular books, figures rich entrepreneurs like Amazon.com founder
>  Jeff Bezos should lead the way to the Moon and Mars, with NASA

I think you mean "D. D. Harriman"

- RAH



From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 10 08:49:29 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:49:29 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
References: <20031209012001.689.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<00d601c3bdfb$c5718ce0$af994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <016501c3befa$861db0a0$4a7b6951@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 2:25 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas


> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:20 PM
> 
> > If the EU really wanted to stick it
> > to the church, they should have the guts to make Saturday the official
> > day of rest and have the work week start on Sunday....
> 
> Hey! What about us Wodan-worshippers?

Damn right!
We want Wednesday off! 

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 10 08:56:23 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:56:23 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Computing in 2004--and Beyond
References: <3FD4D70B.70305@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <017801c3befb$7ccc7a30$4a7b6951@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "BillK" <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:54 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Computing in 2004--and Beyond


> PC World magazine has a look into the future -
> <http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113444,00.asp>
> 
> How will the PC change during the coming year? The next five years? We
> consult the experts and come up with answers.
> 
> Highlights:
> 
> According to IDC, flat-panel display shipments will surpass those of
> tubes for the first time in 2004.
> 
> Rumors abound that Tejas, Intel's successor to Prescott, will debut near
> the end of 2004 with speeds from 5 to 7 GHz.
> 
> Moore's law--the concept that chip performance will double every 18
> months or so--is alive and well. Researchers are just beginning to build
> chips with circuits only 65nm wide, and IBM and AMD are among those
> working to develop a 45nm process. Intel envisions paring that to 22nm
> by the year 2011.
> 
> "The PCs we'll buy just three years from now will have features, user
> interfaces, and expansion options that are radically different from
> those in the systems we're using today," predicts Microprocessor
> Report's Glaskowsky.
 

Well, I already know the basic specs of my next system (about 3yrs away).
10GHz 64 bit CPU, 1TB of mass storage, 16GB RAM etc

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From scerir at libero.it  Wed Dec 10 11:19:36 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:19:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the true meaning of christmas
References: <20031209012001.689.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com><00d601c3bdfb$c5718ce0$af994a43@texas.net>
	<016501c3befa$861db0a0$4a7b6951@artemis>
Message-ID: <001001c3bf0f$7f54e2b0$82b01b97@administxl09yj>

No, Sunday or any other day, is definitely out of
question, there is nothing in the UE Constitution 
paper - last draft version. 
:-)




From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec 10 10:59:59 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:59:59 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <20031210105958.GF4452@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 04:20:15PM -0500, Robin Hanson wrote:

> I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if you think the
> situation was ever any different.  It seems to me that this is the way it
> has always been.

Science and technology is getting progressively complicated, people are less and less
willing to work hard, media give voice to everybody.

This is a comparatively new problem, and, yes, it's getting worse.
(This doesn't apply globally, new players are yet unaffected).

Did you ever try to hire somebody under 30 in SoCal? It's an interesting
experience.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/b59d77b2/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec 10 11:24:32 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:24:32 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org>
	<20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org>

On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:35:14AM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> > Posting doesn't get anything done, and I do have a life these days.
> > It's very possible that I'll be gone (virtually, for good?) in a few
> > months.
> 
> WHAT? What is up?

There are 24 h in a day. Minus 8 h sleep, minus commute, minus family.
Minus work, because email at work is a good way of not getting anything
done.

Sleeping less is not an option, neither not working, neither neglecting
the family.

The arithmetic is really quite simple.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/8f16fc45/attachment.bin>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Wed Dec 10 11:26:26 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:26:26 GMT
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe: Human Spaceflight Without NASA?
Message-ID: <E1AU2U6-0002XB-KN@fetch-bak.runbox.com>

No, D. D. Harriman is a fictional character. The article mantions some real people (Bezos, one of the founders of PayPal, plus others), who want to found and fund private space ventures. I loved Heinlein's novel with Harriman (forgot the name) but I think today is a bit naive to think that space can be developmed ONLY with private funds without government involvement. Synergy is the key.

> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:
> 
> >  Re: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe:
> 
> I think you mean "future history"
> 
> >  popular books, figures rich entrepreneurs like Amazon.com founder
> >  Jeff Bezos should lead the way to the Moon and Mars, with NASA
> 
> I think you mean "D. D. Harriman"
> 
> - RAH


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 10 11:42:17 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:42:17 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac><5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>
	<20031210105958.GF4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <045701c3bf12$aaabacc0$4a7b6951@artemis>

> I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if you think the
> situation was ever any different.  It seems to me that this is the way it
> has always been.

Science and technology is getting progressively complicated, people are less
and less
willing to work hard, media give voice to everybody.

This is a comparatively new problem, and, yes, it's getting worse.
(This doesn't apply globally, new players are yet unaffected).

Did you ever try to hire somebody under 30 in SoCal? It's an interesting
experience.
___

Part of the 'problem' is that science and technology is not only harder than
the pseudosciences but getting weirder as well.
It's a clash of religions.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From alito at organicrobot.com  Wed Dec 10 12:02:40 2003
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:02:40 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org>
References: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org>
	<20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <1071057760.6250.118.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 21:24, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:35:14AM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > > Posting doesn't get anything done, and I do have a life these days.
> > > It's very possible that I'll be gone (virtually, for good?) in a few
> > > months.
> > 
> > WHAT? What is up?
> 
> There are 24 h in a day. Minus 8 h sleep, minus commute, minus family.
> Minus work, because email at work is a good way of not getting anything
> done.
> 
> Sleeping less is not an option, neither not working, neither neglecting
> the family.
> 
> The arithmetic is really quite simple.
> 
There's no need for absolutist measures here though.  Ignore rabid
arguments, ignore what you deem as stupidity and arrogance, and your
wasted email time drops by >90%.

alejandro (trying to practice what i preach (especially about preaching
less, and obviously failing))





From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec 10 12:14:28 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:14:28 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <1071057760.6250.118.camel@alito.homeip.net>
References: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org>
	<20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org>
	<1071057760.6250.118.camel@alito.homeip.net>
Message-ID: <20031210121428.GQ4452@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:02:40PM +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:

> There's no need for absolutist measures here though.  Ignore rabid
> arguments, ignore what you deem as stupidity and arrogance, and your
> wasted email time drops by >90%.

I'm doing that; it's just I titrate the mail volume to saturation.
I'm going to start dropping several lists as soon as I'm through with
the backlog.
 
> alejandro (trying to practice what i preach (especially about preaching
> less, and obviously failing))

I wonder what Anders is doing right now.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/0e4b11f6/attachment.bin>

From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Dec 10 12:30:42 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:30:42 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>
	<20031210105958.GF4452@leitl.org>
	<045701c3bf12$aaabacc0$4a7b6951@artemis>
Message-ID: <013701c3bf19$6d56d280$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Dirk Bruere wrote:
 
> Part of the 'problem' is that science and technology is not only
> harder than the pseudosciences but getting weirder as well.
> It's a clash of religions.

Science (and technology) as religion. Surely not? 

Brett



From extropy at audry2.com  Wed Dec 10 14:28:39 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:28:39 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <003301c3bec9$b12b3a50$6501a8c0@SHELLY> (spike66@comcast.net)
References: <003301c3bec9$b12b3a50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <200312101428.hBAESds13994@igor.synonet.com>


> Of course.  I have a friend whose job it was to meet with
> African immigrant families to explain to them that it is
> illegal in this country to do female circumcision, not to
> mention cruel and ill-advised.  I have often inquired why
> she has no counterpart arguing the same for the male children.

Probably because while male circumcision may be cruel and ill-advised
it is nowhere near as cruel or ill-advised as the so-called female
circumcision (which is usually clitorectomy in practice).

Major

PS: I am old enough to have been circumcised at birth on medical
advice (apparently it didn't use to be ill-advised 8-).


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Dec 10 13:53:07 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:53:07 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
Message-ID: <3FD72543.7080001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Tue Dec 09, 2003 10:21 am Henrique Moraes Machado wrote:
> The transports need a revolution. When we had only horses, the trains 
> were revolutionary. Then the automobiles and finally airplanes.
> Nothing new since then. And there goes one hundred years.
>

Of course there has been much improvement in 100 years.
Automobiles are much improved from the Model T Ford.
Current research seems to be aiming towards driverless
(automatic-controlled) cars.

The 747 compares well with the Wright brothers craft and also flies on
auto-pilot for most of the time.

And existing technologies are finding more useful areas.

We have escalators to climb staircases.
We have travelators (moving pavements) at airports,
The Paris Metro has the worlds fastest beltway at 9 km/hour.
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3001182.stm>

Skyscrapers have incredibly fast lifts nowadays.

In UK and Europe, electric urban Light Rail systems are becoming popular
in cities. They are cheaper to build than underground rail systems and
can follow the existing road system. They have priority over road 
traffic, so are not delayed by traffic jams.
<http://www.bathtram.org/tfb/tP20.htm>

We have monorail suspended rail systems and maglev 'floating' rail systems.

Container ships and huge lorries have revolutionised freight transport.

And the Segway, of course!

For more ideas, see:
<http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/>


BillK





From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec 10 13:55:40 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:55:40 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] British Royal Society Workshop Commentary
In-Reply-To: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>
References: <200312081943.hB8JheA10797@finney.org>
Message-ID: <20031210135539.GY4452@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 11:43:40AM -0800, Hal Finney wrote:

> I'd suggest that what we need today are works that get criticized.
> Criticism is how science advances.  Avoiding criticism, such as by
> the tactic I discussed earlier of shifting the burden of proof, is a
> counter-productive strategy which must be abandoned.  Your critic is
> your best friend.

The most critical area of machine-phase system is mechanosynthesis.
(Not tribo- and piezochemistry & Co, something like
<http://pubs.acs.org/cen/topstory/7840/7840notw5.html> )

(An exhaustive search would require several queries. If anyone
would want to compile an exhaustive list on the state of the 
art in experimental manipulative proximal probe for chemical
bond breaking and formation I'd appreciate if you'd post the
list here).

Due to lack of control at the tip the state of the art
is necessarily crude, and will remain so until we can build
intricate nanostructures by whatever means. Then, suddenly,
you fall into the bootstrap loop, and generate lots of fancy
papers, eventually resulting in a full self-rep closure device,
after which everybody goes wild, and produces lots of completely
novel designs we yet have no idea of.

Because of this machine-phase chemistry/mechanosynthesis is
limited to computational chemistry, which is still not regarded
as a real science by the synthetic chemist (at times people
actually do publish bogus results, which are difficult to
falsify in absence of experimental validation).

In a nutshell, this is why you don't get a lot of comments
on Drexler/Merkle nanotechnology from experts outside of the
circle. This is why it appears so sterile/snake oily to the
established science.

Which is why we're most likely to see bootstrap initiated
from the biopolymer/synthetic people, which don't have such
handicap, and have large budgets, being prolific.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/a89fb9a9/attachment.bin>

From gregburch at gregburch.net  Wed Dec 10 14:53:57 2003
From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:53:57 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Gerrymandering and Geometry: A Tiling Problem?
In-Reply-To: <3FD72543.7080001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEJBCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>

This will be largely of interest to U.S. subscribers, since it is premised on a provision of the U.S. Constitution.

Listening to a piece on NPR this morning about the on-going battles over Congresssional redistricting in the wake of the 2000 census, I was struck by the idea that Congressional redistricting can be viewed as a classic tiling problem.  

Article I, Sec. 2 of the Constitution calls for the (partially) proportional division of seats in the House of Representatives according to population.  (The caveat arises from the fact that each state must have at least one seat, and some states don't have enough population to qualify for that according to a nation-wide even apportionment.)  This provision has been ammended and fine-tuned over the years, and has now resulted in both a complex mathematical problem, and a political problem.  A very good resource explaining the process can be found at:

http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/apportionment.html

Now, state legislatures are given the task of redrawing congressional district lines to apportion seats according to population within a state.  This becomes a partisan political opportunity that has come to have the name "gerrymandering" for historical reasons, in which the majority party in the state legislature draws the geographic boundaries of the congressional districts to try to maximize the number of national congressional seats their party can garner.

Here's my question: is it possible to devise an algorithm that would create an ideal tiling based on the restraint of having the same number of voters in each district, given an uneven geographic distribution of voters, but MINIMIZING the ratio of the surface area of each tile (congressional district) to its defining border and perhaps also minimizing the number or negative angles in the shape of the border?

Here's a chance to implement the idea discussed in Max More's recent essay about trying to employ reason to improve political processes.

Greg Burch
My blog: http://www.gregburch.net/burchismo.html


From rhanson at gmu.edu  Wed Dec 10 15:08:50 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:08:50 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Gerrymandering and Geometry: A Tiling Problem?
In-Reply-To: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEJBCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
References: <3FD72543.7080001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210100116.016c7168@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/10/2003, Greg Burch wrote:
>Here's my question: is it possible to devise an algorithm that would 
>create an ideal tiling based on the restraint of having the same number of 
>voters in each district, given an uneven geographic distribution of 
>voters, but MINIMIZING the ratio of the surface area of each tile 
>(congressional district) to its defining border and perhaps also 
>minimizing the number or negative angles in the shape of the border?

There is a large literature on this in political science.  See for example 
http://data.fas.harvard.edu/micah_altman/papers/complexv1_1.pdf
http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu/micah_altman/papers/com_sim2_1.pdf
(which are from Rutgers Computer and Technology Law Journal 23(1):81-142 
and Political Geography 17(8):989-1012.)

The answer is yes, it is quite possible.  Two criticisms are usually 
offered of this approach.
1) There are lots of different "objective" algorithms possible, and you'd 
move the political battle up a level to pick which one.
2) "Judgement" is always needed, so we can't just trust a machine.
I find these arguments unpersuasive.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Dec 10 15:50:31 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:50:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031210121428.GQ4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312100748510.13312-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> I wonder what Anders is doing right now.

>From his most recent email to me...
: Im at the EuroNanoForum in Trieste right now, so this is a bit brief. Back
: on Friday, after I have defended the societal and policy effects of
: nanomedicine.

R.




From scerir at libero.it  Wed Dec 10 16:00:37 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:00:37 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] MIT, nuclear vs green
References: <00ba01c3be6b$27f6a700$6400a8c0@brainiac><5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu><20031210105958.GF4452@leitl.org><045701c3bf12$aaabacc0$4a7b6951@artemis>
	<013701c3bf19$6d56d280$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <001201c3bf36$c112cd80$6eb51b97@administxl09yj>

an intoduction:
http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-56/iss-12/p34.html
the doc:
http://www.mit.edu/afs/athena/org/n/nuclearpower/



From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 10 16:12:09 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:12:09 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Anders?
References: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org><20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com><20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org><1071057760.6250.118.camel@alito.homeip.net>
	<20031210121428.GQ4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <00d001c3bf38$5f99e1e0$96994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eugen Leitl" <eugen at leitl.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 6:14 AM

>I wonder what Anders is doing right now.

He's in Trieste at a nano conference.

Damien Broderick



From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 10 16:24:12 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:24:12 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Anders the wonder boy
References: <20031209072732.GA4452@leitl.org><20031209193514.33762.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com><20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org><1071057760.6250.118.camel@alito.homeip.net><20031210121428.GQ4452@leitl.org>
	<00d001c3bf38$5f99e1e0$96994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <011101c3bf3a$0d8c1b00$96994a43@texas.net>

Robert and I both just reported that Anders is in Trieste at a nano
conference. Meanwhile, here's the latest contribution from our amazingly
multi-talented friend:

http://home.neo.rr.com/cosmosbooks/dimensions.jpg

The cover art  is by Anders; I think it's beautiful. (The book itself will
be out shortly, I'll say more then.)

Damien Broderick




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 16:27:21 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:27:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00e401c3bed8$6c2ae630$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031210162721.67296.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > Rafal is right, and the "2,500" scientists you said signed
> > onto the Climat Change report were most definitely NOT all 
> > climatologists, or even hard scientists. A lot of them were 
> > sociologists, psychologists, and other people completely 
> > unqualified to judge.
> 
> I never mentioned 2,500 scientists or the Climate Change report.  I
> don't
> believe that petitions and voting are a means to scientific truths.

Well, you did mention that "Most reputable scientists believe that the
earth is warming and that humans are accelerating this" and you did
agree with the writer of the article that did specify a 2,500 figure
and the Climate Change report.

Unfortunately, it does not seem that the truth is with you today. We
now have a smoking gun that proves the non-anthropic origins of global
warming:
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html

This study, showing that global warming is ALSO occuring on Mars, blows
all claims of anthropogenic global warming out of the water. What are
the odds, do you think, that two adjacent planets could BOTH be
undergoing global warming from entirely different causes? Pretty thin
odds, I would say, and I think that Occam agrees with me. 

Especially if there is a solar cause to this, then Earth would be
experiencing four times as much warming as Mars would. In any event, I
think that the looters backing the UN report are going to have to
figure out some rather extreme method of blaming Martian global warming
on human beings.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From max at maxmore.com  Wed Dec 10 16:35:33 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:35:33 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Gerrymandering and Geometry: A Tiling Problem?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210100116.016c7168@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEJBCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
	<3FD72543.7080001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031210103222.04b3bd28@mail.earthlink.net>

At 09:08 AM 12/10/2003, Robin wrote:

>The answer is yes, it is quite possible.  Two criticisms are usually 
>offered of this approach.
>1) There are lots of different "objective" algorithms possible, and you'd 
>move the political battle up a level to pick which one.
>2) "Judgement" is always needed, so we can't just trust a machine.
>I find these arguments unpersuasive.

Robin, why do you find the first criticism unpersuasive?  Is it because you 
see one algorithm as clearly the best? Or because all good contenders are 
*equally* good and so it doesn't matter which one you pick? Or some other 
reason?

I'm especially curious about this because, if this *is* an issue with a 
clear technical solution, we should publicize it.

Thanks,

Max


_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
_______________________________________________________




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 16:35:37 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:35:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <02eb01c3bee6$8e073b60$d8994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031210163537.51213.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 10:45 PM
> 
> > There is no doubt that the globe is actually warming.  If you want
> > to argue whether humans are causing it or whether it is a natural
> > cycle, that is a different argument.
> 
> In Oz:
> 
>
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8118124%255E27
> 02,00.html
> 
> Average yearly temperatures are projected to rise by as much as 2C
> across the nation by 2030, and 6C by 2070, according to an Australian
> Greenhouse Office report into global warming - triggering more
> natural disasters and crippling water shortages.

This claim exposes the lie. Since ALL of the claimed warming is
happening at the poles, this means that the temperature differential
between the equator and the poles will be reduced, not increased. Such
a reduced thermocline ALWAYS results in LESS severe storms, not more
severe storms. This is supported by a century of records of cyclonic
activity, showing that there were twice as many severe storms in the
first half of the 20th century vs the second half.

THe government lies to justify higher taxes for spending on
totalitarian "disaster preparedness" ministries.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 16:39:19 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:39:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031210112432.GH4452@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031210163919.69461.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 11:35:14AM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > > Posting doesn't get anything done, and I do have a life these
> days.
> > > It's very possible that I'll be gone (virtually, for good?) in a
> few
> > > months.
> > 
> > WHAT? What is up?
> 
> There are 24 h in a day. Minus 8 h sleep, minus commute, minus
> family.
> Minus work, because email at work is a good way of not getting
> anything done.
> 
> Sleeping less is not an option, neither not working, neither
> neglecting the family.
> 
> The arithmetic is really quite simple.

Oh, you seemed to be talking about something fatal....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 16:41:40 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:41:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe: Human Spaceflight Without NASA?
In-Reply-To: <E1AU2U6-0002XB-KN@fetch-bak.runbox.com>
Message-ID: <20031210164140.32055.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <gpmap at runbox.com> wrote:
> No, D. D. Harriman is a fictional character. The article mantions
> some real people (Bezos, one of the founders of PayPal, plus others),
> who want to found and fund private space ventures. I loved Heinlein's
> novel with Harriman (forgot the name) but I think today is a bit
> naive to think that space can be developmed ONLY with private funds
> without government involvement. Synergy is the key.

Well, there actually is a wealthy family named Harriman. DD's scheme of
advertising was where he raised the key money. For example, a well
known cola company offered him a huge amount to have their logo
emblazoned on the moon for everyone to see, but their competitor paid
him twice as much to NOT do it. THAT is salesmanship...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From rhanson at gmu.edu  Wed Dec 10 16:44:42 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:44:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Gerrymandering and Geometry: A Tiling Problem?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031210103222.04b3bd28@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210100116.016c7168@mail.gmu.edu>
	<PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEJBCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
	<3FD72543.7080001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210113840.02009480@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/10/2003, Max More wrote:
>>The answer is yes, it is quite possible.  Two criticisms are usually 
>>offered of this approach.
>>1) There are lots of different "objective" algorithms possible, and you'd 
>>move the political battle up a level to pick which one.
>>2) "Judgement" is always needed, so we can't just trust a machine.
>>I find these arguments unpersuasive.
>
>Robin, why do you find the first criticism unpersuasive?  Is it because 
>you see one algorithm as clearly the best? Or because all good contenders 
>are *equally* good and so it doesn't matter which one you pick? Or some 
>other reason?

Yes, pretty much any of them is better than the current system.  Once we 
pick a rule, we don't need to change it again for a long time, and we avoid 
the incumbency advantage that now exists.

>I'm especially curious about this because, if this *is* an issue with a 
>clear technical solution, we should publicize it.

Another related technical solution is approval voting.  This is where you 
can vote for as many or as few candidates as you want, and the person with 
the most votes wins.  This nicely lets you vote for people who have a low 
chance of winning, without having to worry about "throwing away your 
vote."  Since it would give third parties a better chance, it is opposed by 
the main two parties.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 17:01:31 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:01:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Gerrymandering and Geometry: A Tiling Problem?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210113840.02009480@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <20031210170131.81460.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Robin Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:
> 
> Yes, pretty much any of them is better than the current system. 
> Once we pick a rule, we don't need to change it again for a long
> time, and we avoid  the incumbency advantage that now exists.

Well, you only avoid it for the next election.

> Another related technical solution is approval voting.  This is where
> you can vote for as many or as few candidates as you want, and the
> person with the most votes wins.  This nicely lets you vote for
> people who have a low chance of winning, without having to worry
> about "throwing away your vote."  Since it would give third parties
> a better chance, it is opposed by the main two parties.

Well, we used this, the Condorcet's Method, in the FSP election, which
resulted in 95%+ of the members being happy with the results, so I must
say that this is a good method to use, at least in terms of allowing
most voters to feel like they had a real voice.

Another method that can be used is multi-seat districts. Here in NH,
these became far more widespread when the State Supreme Court
redistricted after the parties couldn't agree in 2002. If you live in a
four seat district, you get four votes. In many cases we've found that
the two parties can't seem to get enough people for all four slots (or
whaterver number there are in the district) on their ballots and this
allows third party candidates to get written in or petitioned into the
ballot as 'fusion' candidates. 59 candidates in the last State House
election got elected as fusion candidates.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From joe at barrera.org  Wed Dec 10 17:31:02 2003
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:31:02 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alternate Universe: Human Spaceflight Without NASA?
In-Reply-To: <E1AU2U6-0002XB-KN@fetch-bak.runbox.com>
References: <E1AU2U6-0002XB-KN@fetch-bak.runbox.com>
Message-ID: <3FD75856.2070901@barrera.org>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

>  No, D. D. Harriman is a fictional character.

I know :-)

>  The article mantions some real people (Bezos, one of the founders of
>  PayPal, plus others), who want to found and fund private space
>  ventures. I loved Heinlein's novel with Harriman (forgot the name)

The Man Who Sold The Moon

It's just fun sometimes seeing life imitating books I read as a kid,
at least if you squint a bit.

Chinese space program (and Prozac) => Vonnegut
Stealing organs => Niven
Your name (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) => Bester (or Schultz)

- Joe :-)



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 10 18:22:11 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:22:11 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <009501c3bea7$5304df70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE58JFFuNPage00008012@hotmail.com>

I don't remember where I read this, but maybe it was here:
There has been some recent speculation that the overall trend in global
warming is part of a variation in orbital cycles that seem to repeat every
22,000 years, and 100,000 years. This had to do with the total irridiation
of the planet at higher latitudes. With more irridiation, came less ice.
Less ice meant more CO2, and more warming in a positive feedback loop. The
reverse was also shown.
I am pulling this from the faintest sector of my memory, so I'm not sure how
correct this summation is. Does anyone else here remember posting such a
message?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 4:53 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About


> Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > I am sorry, Harvey, but global warming does not deserve to be
> > included in this.
>
> I disagree.  Most reputable scientists believe that the earth is warming
and
> that humans are accelerating this.  There are only a small percentage of
> scientists who dispute this, and they seem to be right-wing extremists or
> funded by big energy corporations.
>
> -- 
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec
Manager,
> NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 10 18:26:39 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:26:39 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <009601c3bea8$2277b700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE26ucZV6uafB000080bc@hotmail.com>

Is this because of increases in the costs of research, or a general apathy
towards politics and business on the part of research scientists?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 4:59 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About


> Robin Hanson wrote,
> > I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if
> > you think the situation was ever any different.  It seems to
> > me that this is the way it has always been.
>
> I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.  University
studies
> are supported by specific corporations now.  Discoveries are proprietary
and
> patented instead of peer-reviewed.  More money is spent on lawyers to
> prevent flaws from being exposed rather than confirmation studies being
> performed.  Corporate fraud has moved into the realms of computer science
> and biology more than ever before.  Areas of research that used to be
purely
> scientific are now overrun with corporate lawyers, politicians, ethics
> advisors, and a whole host of non-technical people trying to control
> technology that they don't understand.  Doctors used to make medical
> decisions, now non-medical professionals in HMOs do.  Scientists used to
> direct research, now corporate boards of directors do.  Researchers used
to
> choose research paths, now venture capitalists do.  The control and
> (mis)representation of technology has shifted from the scientists to the
> eco-political realm.  This shift is new and has completely changed the
> dynamic of how science is done.
>
> -- 
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec
Manager,
> NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From rhanson at gmu.edu  Wed Dec 10 18:28:53 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:28:53 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <009601c3bea8$2277b700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031209160927.020d5518@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210114538.01fe7b90@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/9/2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

>People ... act like they are experts and they have no real concept
>of how science or the underlying technology really work.  ...
>there are more faux experts than real experts in the public
>spotlight today. ... The world of science is being diluted with
>pseudoscience, and it is very difficult for the laypeople to tell
>the difference. ...

I responded:
>I agree this is a huge problem, but you say "diluted" as if you think the
>situation was ever any different.  It seems to me that this is the way it
>has always been.

On 12/9/2003 Harvey Newstrom responded:
>I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.

Yes of course things are different than they used to be in many specific
ways.  The question is whether there is an overall trend.

>University studies
>are supported by specific corporations now.  Discoveries are proprietary and
>patented instead of peer-reviewed.  More money is spent on lawyers to
>prevent flaws from being exposed rather than confirmation studies being
>performed.

These are not about fake versus real experts.

>Corporate fraud has moved into the realms of computer science
>and biology more than ever before.

There didn't used to be any computer science, so of course there wasn't fraud
there.

>Areas of research that used to be purely
>scientific are now overrun with corporate lawyers, politicians, ethics
>advisors, and a whole host of non-technical people trying to control
>technology that they don't understand.

And areas that used to be overrun are now left more alone.  Which areas are of
wider interest changes over time.

>Doctors used to make medical
>decisions, now non-medical professionals in HMOs do.

But this isn't a matter of fake experts.  The HMO people are typically expert
enough for the decisions they make.

And so on.

Really, aren't you familiar with the "back in my day things were better, now
the world is going to hell in a hand basket" stereotype?  Such claims are
usually backed up by a list of specific complaints about the world today.
But what is missing is whether a similar list of complaints could have been
made in the past.  Not the exact same complaints of course, but similarly
negative ones.  Without evidence on this, you don't have relevant evidence.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 10 18:37:17 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:37:17 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Global Warming (was: Doubt and About)
References: <00e501c3bed8$7a042050$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<02eb01c3bee6$8e073b60$d8994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE56oWwr2UAaT00008230@hotmail.com>

Regarding the trend in global warming, I was wondering how MNT can be used
to control climate and weather. Would it be in the form of a self-assembling
heat-sink that could change into a giant magnifying glass? Or something else
entirely? I'm completely ata loss here, but surely it could be done. Maybe
if things start heating up and there is a ready possible solution in MNT,
more funding would be available.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 12:26 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 10:45 PM
>
> > There is no doubt that the globe is actually warming.  If you want to
> > argue whether humans are causing it or whether it is a natural cycle,
that
> > is a different argument.
>
> In Oz:
>
>
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8118124%255E27
> 02,00.html
>
> Average yearly temperatures are projected to rise by as much as 2C across
> the nation by 2030, and 6C by 2070, according to an Australian Greenhouse
> Office report into global warming - triggering more natural disasters and
> crippling water shortages.
>
> The number of very hot summer days, with temperatures soaring above 35C,
> could double in most capital cities.
>
> The 240-page assessment, to be released today by Environment Minister
David
> Kemp at a UN summit on climate change in Italy, says Australia will need
to
> make major changes to adapt to the hotter weather that will be induced by
> global warming due to the greenhouse effect.
>
> The trend in Australian temperatures since 1950 is now matching climate
> model simulations of how temperatures respond to increased greenhouse
gases
> in the atmosphere, the report says.
>
> It is likely the 1990s was the warmest decade in the past 1000 years, at
> least in the northern hemisphere.
>
> To cope with climate change, the report warns that Australians must use
less
> water, change the types of crops grown by farmers, revise engineering
> standards and rezone land to prevent flooding.
>
> Farmers are at high risk of losing money due to the increased frequency of
> bad years, especially droughts, in parts of Australia within the next 20
to
> 50 years.
>
> And Queensland's tourism industry could suffer as warmer water bleaches
the
> corals in the World Heritage-listed Great Barrier Reef.
>
> [etc, and of course that's a gummit report so we know we can ignore it]
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Wed Dec 10 21:49:16 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:49:16 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of Exilist in sight?
In-Reply-To: <3FD75856.2070901@barrera.org>
Message-ID: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLOEJHCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>

Recently the TCS described antispam legislation (CANSPAM, due to be signed
by the president soon) which would impose a 1000 $ fine for every
unsolicited email received.

Does it imply that just a few disgruntled Exi list users could destroy
financially the ExI, if they were able to prove that posts forwarded by ExI
were received against their wishes? Does the ExI have a sufficiently
reliable procedure to establish and terminate a relationship with a member
to prevent such legal attacks?

Things like CANSPAM could really make you wonder... "What do they really
want to achieve with this legislation?".

Rafal



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 10 18:48:36 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:48:36 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation
References: <3FD72543.7080001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE18RZTwRcISV00008142@hotmail.com>

One roadblock I see is the fact that people love their cars. Until something
comes along that people prefer over cars, I don't see much happening there.
As far as air transportation goes, I would like to know if there are any
statistics on the last 50 years for the maximum number of people that can be
flown from one destinatin to the next in  one day. Or the percentage of the
world's population that has ready access to worldwide travel.
It's just a hunch, but I bet we would see the improvements there.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "BillK" <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Communication vs transportation


> On Tue Dec 09, 2003 10:21 am Henrique Moraes Machado wrote:
> > The transports need a revolution. When we had only horses, the trains
> > were revolutionary. Then the automobiles and finally airplanes.
> > Nothing new since then. And there goes one hundred years.
> >
>
> Of course there has been much improvement in 100 years.
> Automobiles are much improved from the Model T Ford.
> Current research seems to be aiming towards driverless
> (automatic-controlled) cars.
>
> The 747 compares well with the Wright brothers craft and also flies on
> auto-pilot for most of the time.
>
> And existing technologies are finding more useful areas.
>
> We have escalators to climb staircases.
> We have travelators (moving pavements) at airports,
> The Paris Metro has the worlds fastest beltway at 9 km/hour.
> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3001182.stm>
>
> Skyscrapers have incredibly fast lifts nowadays.
>
> In UK and Europe, electric urban Light Rail systems are becoming popular
> in cities. They are cheaper to build than underground rail systems and
> can follow the existing road system. They have priority over road
> traffic, so are not delayed by traffic jams.
> <http://www.bathtram.org/tfb/tP20.htm>
>
> We have monorail suspended rail systems and maglev 'floating' rail
systems.
>
> Container ships and huge lorries have revolutionised freight transport.
>
> And the Segway, of course!
>
> For more ideas, see:
> <http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/>
>
>
> BillK
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From twodeel at jornada.org  Wed Dec 10 18:59:42 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:59:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Global Warming (was: Doubt and About)
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE56oWwr2UAaT00008230@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312101058580.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:

> Regarding the trend in global warming, I was wondering how MNT can be
> used to control climate and weather. Would it be in the form of a
> self-assembling heat-sink that could change into a giant magnifying
> glass? Or something else entirely? I'm completely ata loss here, but
> surely it could be done. Maybe if things start heating up and there is a
> ready possible solution in MNT, more funding would be available.

How about a self-configuring orbiting mirror, perhaps, that reconfigures
itself to reflect sunlight away from or towards the earth, depending on
our needs?  Or maybe one that directs additional sunlight to the poles to
specifically warm them and average out the global temperatures, which, as
Mike said, should calm down the weather.  Unless for some reason we WANT 
big storms.



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 19:11:27 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:11:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <007501c3bee2$d6bb6ec0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <00a701c3bf51$6c93d630$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Brett Paatsch wrote,
> I don't so much disagree with you as think you are re-voicing
> fuzzy generalisations as a result of frustration. I thought 
> if you homed in 
> a bit you might get better purchase and less frustration. 

That's cool.  I totally missed your point.  I thought when you were asking
me to focus my point and provide more evidence that you thought I was
totally unfounded.  I agree that my worries are a fuzzy overview of a lot of
issues thrown together.  They certainly could use some more review to figure
out exactly what and why we aren't as effective and popular as I think we
should be.

> Ok. But as extropes together or as individuals that just happen
> to frequent the Exi list?  The reason I ask is that I think 
> one of the 
> biggest questions is whether transhumanists should form a 
> political force. I do see merit in that proposition. I can 
> see good arguments for and against it. I thought that the WTA 
> might become a political organisation yet Exi might stay out 
> of politics and that might give the best of both worlds. 

This is one of the big questions.  We often see ourselves as if we were
think tanks, political activists, publicity organization, technological
researchers, educational organizations, or something like that.  But I
haven't seen anybody actually produce a project plan with specific goals for
any of these.  Even all our organizations seem slightly ill-defined.  Having
a website and a mailing list does not make an organization effective.  (And
I am talking about a dozen organizations, not any particular one.)

I think we haven't really defined our goals, and hence haven't been
effective toward anything specifically.
 
> I reckon that's a good question I think but its always a personal
> one. Each of us should perhaps ask ourselves it but I doubt we 
> can answer for otheres. Do you think the Exi chat list 
> actually works as a sort of drug that steals our creative 
> juices or something?

Actually, yes.  Since time is the limiting factor for most people, anything
that eats up a lot of time and produces little result is suspect.  I sure
wish we could get working groups going, like what node-net was going to be
in the beginning.

I would love to see working groups formed codify current methods into FAQs,
how-to documents, and support infrastructures for:
- life-extension diets
- long-term investing
- IT security
- political activism
- starting your own business
- brainstorming solutions
- developing AI
- developing nanotech

Where organizations already exist doing these things, we should have an
representative from each to report what they are doing and how extropians
can get involved an help.

I guess what I really want to see is actual projects working on stuff
instead of just talking about them.  Our "projects" are just organizations
with websites and mailing lists.  We need project plans with requirements,
goals, milestones, dates, and actual tasks being worked on and completed.  I
don't see that happening anywhere.

If we only claimed to be a fan-club of technology, I would be happy.  We are
doing exactly what a fan-club should do.  We discuss it and love it.  But
most of our websites claim that we are creating stuff, leading stuff, or
developing future solutions.  It is when we claim to be something we are not
that I get frustrated.  If we want to do all this stuff, then let's do it.
If we don't want to do all this stuff, then let's stop pretending that we
are doing it.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 19:11:42 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:11:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <20031210162721.67296.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00a801c3bf51$75943810$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> Unfortunately, it does not seem that the truth is with you
> today. We now have a smoking gun that proves the 
> non-anthropic origins of global
> warming: 
> http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html

I agree with you 100%.  I am beginning to suspect that solar changes are
causing solar-system-wide warming.  You seem intent on proving that humans
aren't to blame, while I am intent on proving that global warming is
occurring.  Both of us can be right without contradiction.

I will gladly agree that global warming will occur whether humans are to
blame or not.  Do you now agree that global warming is actually occurring
and that we have to deal with the consequences of it?  Can we now accept
this fact and start figuring out what to do as the ice slowly melts, oceans
slowly rise, agricultural zones slowly shift, and coastlines slowly cover
our coastal cities?

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 19:11:53 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:11:53 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <003c01c3beea$ccf0be60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <00a901c3bf51$7ba34660$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> Harvey, I see your point, but for some of us, the extrolist is an idea 
> bank, where both deposits and withdrawals are made.  I know you are 
> one who takes life very seriously, and we are lucky to have such as 
> these.  The chat list for me is more of a drug
> that *creates* creative juices.  I know I am not making any 
> discoveries in life extension; most of us are not.  But 
> having fun is itself 
> a life-extension device.  Thinking is a life extension 
> device. For my part I will root for the guys doing actual 
> life extension, 
> and attempt to maximize fun while doing so.  {8-]  spike 

Let me clarify my point.  I am not arguing for more science and less fun.  I
am arguing for more science and less pseudoscience.  There is nothing wrong
with having fun instead of doing science.  What I am against is doing
pseudoscience and calling it science because it is fun.  

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 19:12:05 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:12:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210114538.01fe7b90@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <00aa01c3bf51$83504d40$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> On 12/9/2003 Harvey Newstrom responded:
> >I disagree.  Things are different than they used to be.
> 
> Yes of course things are different than they used to be in many 
> specific ways.  The question is whether there is an overall trend.

Of course.  That is what we are discussing.  I think it is a general trend.
You apparently do not.

> >University studies
> >are supported by specific corporations now.  Discoveries are 
> >proprietary and patented instead of peer-reviewed.  More
> money is spent
> >on lawyers to prevent flaws from being exposed rather than
> confirmation
> >studies being performed.
> 
> These are not about fake versus real experts.

Real experts can take peer review and criticism to refine real theories.
Only fake experts need to avoid peer review and use lawyers to stop people
from pointing out their flaws.

> >Corporate fraud has moved into the realms of computer science and 
> >biology more than ever before.
> 
> There didn't used to be any computer science, so of course there 
> wasn't fraud there.

This is silly.  Of course I wasn't referring to a lack of computer fraud
before there were computers.  But in the early days of computer research, we
didn't have the problem with vaporware, bogus claims, fraudulent products,
and legal maneuvers to suppress the disclosure of flaws that we see today.
These problems are currently getting worse instead of better.

> >Areas of research that used to be purely
> >scientific are now overrun with corporate lawyers,
> politicians, ethics
> >advisors, and a whole host of non-technical people trying to control 
> >technology that they don't understand.
> 
> And areas that used to be overrun are now left more alone. Which areas 
> are of wider interest changes over time.

Can you name an area that used to have this problem and now does not?  I do
not know of any politically charged area or area of pseudoscience that has
been abandoned by the politicians and quacks.

> >Doctors used to make medical
> >decisions, now non-medical professionals in HMOs do.
> 
> But this isn't a matter of fake experts.  The HMO people are typically 
> expert enough for the decisions they make.

I disagree.  HMO accountants are NOT more qualified than my doctor to treat
me!

> And so on.
> 
> Really, aren't you familiar with the "back in my day things were 
> better, now the world is going to hell in a hand basket" stereotype?

Yes.  Is that how you judge my arguments, on the basis of stereotypes?  I am
also familiar with the "things are getting better all the time so we don't
have to worry" stereotype.  There are stereotypes on all sides of every
argument, and I don't find them useful in determining the truth.

> Such claims are usually backed up by a list of
> specific complaints about the world today. But what is
> missing is whether a similar list of complaints could have 
> been made in the past.  Not the exact same complaints of 
> course, but similarly negative ones.  Without evidence on 
> this, you don't have relevant evidence.

That's why I am giving examples from my fields of expertise.  In biological
research, computer science, and corporate auditing, it is clear that
exaggeration of results is getting worse.  You keep referencing stereotypes
and how my claims are "usually" presented.  You don't seem to be addressing
the specifics of my statements as much as a general attitude that you seem
to have lumped me into.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 19:12:16 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:12:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Gerrymandering and Geometry: A Tiling Problem?
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210100116.016c7168@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <00ab01c3bf51$88b734b0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> 2) "Judgement" is always needed, so we can't just trust a
> machine. I find these arguments unpersuasive.

Actually, machines can't think yet.  They only do what someone programs them
to do.  We can't trust voting machines, because we can't trust anonymous
programmers behind them.  However, trust is not necessary.  Having open
source which is review able by all will demonstrate what algorithm is being
used and whether we trust it or not.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec 10 19:21:48 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:21:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of Exilist in sight?
In-Reply-To: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLOEJHCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>
Message-ID: <20031210192148.15860.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal at smigrodzki.org> wrote:
> Recently the TCS described antispam legislation
> (CANSPAM, due to be signed
> by the president soon) which would impose a 1000 $
> fine for every
> unsolicited email received.
> 
> Does it imply that just a few disgruntled Exi list
> users could destroy
> financially the ExI, if they were able to prove that
> posts forwarded by ExI
> were received against their wishes? Does the ExI
> have a sufficiently
> reliable procedure to establish and terminate a
> relationship with a member
> to prevent such legal attacks?

It's a well-established facet of email lists that, if
you don't want to be on the list, there are clear and
trustworthy ways of unsubscribing.  (The lack of
trustworthy methods - specifically, even if they
offer "unsubscription" services, they smell of traps
to confirm your email so as to resell it at higher
value as a known live address - is one of the
distinguishing facets of spammers.  Part of the
smell is the exclusively commercial aspect of their
messages...and this list's messages are not
exclusively commercial.)


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 10 19:27:24 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:27:24 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Anders the wonder boy
Message-ID: <87890-2200312310192724878@M2W048.mail2web.com>


From: Damien Broderick 

http://home.neo.rr.com/cosmosbooks/dimensions.jpg

The cover art  is by Anders; I think it's beautiful. (The book itself will
be out shortly, I'll say more then.)

I just received an email from Anders this afternoon!  He says he is
"getting a lot of fun ideas" at the EuroNanoForum 2003 conference.  

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 19:47:36 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:47:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE58JFFuNPage00008012@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031210194736.36870.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

I've posted this several times. They are called Malenkovich Cycles, and
there are 22k, 60k and 100k cycles involved, plus you have short term
11, 22, and 60 year solar cycles that impact as well. In addition, you
have a very long cycle related to our solar systems migration from
galactic arm to galactic arm, which varies cosmic radiation hitting us
significantly.

--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I don't remember where I read this, but maybe it was here:
> There has been some recent speculation that the overall trend in
> global
> warming is part of a variation in orbital cycles that seem to repeat
> every
> 22,000 years, and 100,000 years. This had to do with the total
> irridiation
> of the planet at higher latitudes. With more irridiation, came less
> ice.
> Less ice meant more CO2, and more warming in a positive feedback
> loop. The
> reverse was also shown.
> I am pulling this from the faintest sector of my memory, so I'm not
> sure how
> correct this summation is. Does anyone else here remember posting
> such a
> message?
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
> To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 4:53 PM
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
> 
> 
> > Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > > I am sorry, Harvey, but global warming does not deserve to be
> > > included in this.
> >
> > I disagree.  Most reputable scientists believe that the earth is
> warming
> and
> > that humans are accelerating this.  There are only a small
> percentage of
> > scientists who dispute this, and they seem to be right-wing
> extremists or
> > funded by big energy corporations.
> >
> > -- 
> > Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> > Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec
> Manager,
> > NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified
> GIAC
> > <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From aperick at centurytel.net  Wed Dec 10 19:57:10 2003
From: aperick at centurytel.net (aperick at centurytel.net)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:57:10 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <200312101131.hBABViH01106@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <10530506.1071086257233.JavaMail.teamon@b112.teamon.com>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> I would like Extropians to ... , practice radical
> life-extension techniques, sign up for cryonics, ...

About cryonics: surely their must be a rather small window of time after
death in which it is possible to determine how each cell process and synapse
was functioning prior to death. Just how much of the random chemistry of
death is required to relegate the former ego to the abyss?

Radical life-extension techniques: I would like to see a web page devoted to
sharing each person's favored techniques, with some explanation for each
choice. Perhaps Harvey could start by sharing with us now his personal
favorites list of "radical life-extension techniques."

My apologies in advance for taxing your patience.



From joe at barrera.org  Wed Dec 10 20:18:23 2003
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:18:23 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <20031210194736.36870.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031210194736.36870.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FD77F8F.1040704@barrera.org>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>I've posted this several times. They are called Malenkovich Cycles, and
>there are 22k, 60k and 100k cycles involved, plus you have short term
>11, 22, and 60 year solar cycles that impact as well. In addition, you
>have a very long cycle related to our solar systems migration from
>galactic arm to galactic arm, which varies cosmic radiation hitting us
>significantly.
>  
>

And don't forget Nemesis, which orbits every 26 million years. :-)

- Joe



From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Thu Dec 11 00:12:59 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:12:59 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00e501c3bed8$7a042050$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLIEJLCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>

Harvey wrote:
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
>
>
> Rafal wrote,
>> ### Are you sure about this? Most reputable climate
>> scientists profess to have insufficient knowledge about the
>> degree of warming, if any, or the degree of human complicity,
>> if any, to make any firm policy recommendations (except
>> "Spend more on research").
>
> Yes.  There is no doubt that the globe is actually warming.  If you
> want to argue whether humans are causing it or whether it is a
> natural cycle, that is a different argument.

### Then this is OK, I agree with you. Most scientists, as far as I know,
will indeed say it's quite likely or maybe even proven that warming does
occur.

The only problem is when their limited and careful statements are being
misused by non-scientists with an agenda, but admittedly it's a somewhat
separate issue.

Rafal



From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Thu Dec 11 00:19:23 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:19:23 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00a801c3bf51$75943810$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLOEJLCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>

Harvey wrote:
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
>
>
> Mike Lorrey wrote,
>> Unfortunately, it does not seem that the truth is with you
>> today. We now have a smoking gun that proves the
>> non-anthropic origins of global
>> warming:
>> http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html
>
> I agree with you 100%.  I am beginning to suspect that solar changes
> are causing solar-system-wide warming.  You seem intent on proving
> that humans aren't to blame, while I am intent on proving that global
> warming is occurring.  Both of us can be right without contradiction.
>
> I will gladly agree that global warming will occur whether humans are
> to blame or not.  Do you now agree that global warming is actually
> occurring and that we have to deal with the consequences of it?  Can
> we now accept this fact and start figuring out what to do as the ice
> slowly melts, oceans slowly rise, agricultural zones slowly shift,
> and coastlines slowly cover our coastal cities?

### But here we are, as far as I know, again leaving the area of scientific
consensus. There is no agreement as to the likely scope of changes due to
warming, and analyses of what would need to be done to prevent such putative
outcomes are hypotheticals built on hypotheses. Indeed, in view of the
positive agricultural effects of increased carbon dioxide, described in
recent articles in Science and other journals, the best course of action
might be not doing anything about warming in general, but rather dealing
with the possibly quite limited, local deleterious side effects, if any.

Rafal





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 10 21:25:51 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:25:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00a801c3bf51$75943810$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031210212551.44124.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > Unfortunately, it does not seem that the truth is with you
> > today. We now have a smoking gun that proves the 
> > non-anthropic origins of global
> > warming: 
> > http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mars_ice-age_031208.html
> 
> I agree with you 100%.  I am beginning to suspect that solar changes
> are causing solar-system-wide warming.  You seem intent on proving
> that humans aren't to blame, while I am intent on proving that
> global warming is occurring.  Both of us can be right without
> contradiction.
> 
> I will gladly agree that global warming will occur whether humans are
> to blame or not.  Do you now agree that global warming is actually
> occurring and that we have to deal with the consequences of it?
>  Can we now accept this fact and start figuring out what to do as the
> ice slowly melts, oceans slowly rise, agricultural zones slowly
> shift, and coastlines slowly cover our coastal cities?

I have not denied that there is some global warming occuring. I have
repeatedly stated that evidence shows that humans are not in any way a
significant culprit. The fact that those on the left insist on
continuing to ignore the evidence and insist humans are to blame, and
that this dovetails nicely with their socialist political agenday,
implicates the intellectual honesty of their position.

I also have to look at the trends in climate simulation. It seems like
every new generation of climate simulation software results in ever
smaller degrees of warming being predicted for the future. Where the
alarms about ice cap collapse in 30 years were the norm among the
chicken littles a decade ago, today the best predictions are saying 6
degrees C increase in the next century, when my cousins work in
Antarctica proved that the last time the continent was free of ice,
global temps were 15 degrees higher, and THAT was when the continent
still had a land bridge to south america and there was no circumpolar
wind or water currents causing thermal isolation.

Given the time scales the best predictions are showing today, and the
trend in them, I am not too concerned about doing anything about
nonanthropic global warming for at least another decade. There seem to
be some natural corrections occuring, namely the rising amount of
precipitation in the Caspian Sea basin raising water levels there, as
well as a thermal hole that opens up in the central pacific with
regularity.

It remains to be seen whether we really have anything to worry about.
There is no sea level rise outside of the Caspian Basin that is
occuring outside of tectonic subsidence lowering of land masses.

By the time we really know what is going on, we will have the
technology and the money to really do something about it.




=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec 10 21:32:21 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:32:21 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of Exilist in sight?
In-Reply-To: <20031210192148.15860.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <OJEHKDIANIFPAJPDBDGLOEJHCMAA.rafal@smigrodzki.org>
	<20031210192148.15860.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031210213221.GI13099@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:21:48AM -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> It's a well-established facet of email lists that, if
> you don't want to be on the list, there are clear and
> trustworthy ways of unsubscribing.  (The lack of

It's a well-established fact that there are always quite
a few idiots who submit mailservers to RBLs. And,
guess what, some even do it on purpose.

> trustworthy methods - specifically, even if they
> offer "unsubscription" services, they smell of traps
> to confirm your email so as to resell it at higher
> value as a known live address - is one of the
> distinguishing facets of spammers.  Part of the
> smell is the exclusively commercial aspect of their
> messages...and this list's messages are not
> exclusively commercial.)

It doesn't matter. Spam is a complex problem, there
are no single simple solutions to it which work
every time.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/94584a08/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Dec 10 21:41:52 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:41:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <10530506.1071086257233.JavaMail.teamon@b112.teamon.com>
References: <200312101131.hBABViH01106@tick.javien.com>
	<10530506.1071086257233.JavaMail.teamon@b112.teamon.com>
Message-ID: <20031210214152.GK13099@leitl.org>

On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 11:57:10AM -0800, aperick at centurytel.net wrote:

> About cryonics: surely their must be a rather small window of time after
> death in which it is possible to determine how each cell process and synapse
> was functioning prior to death. Just how much of the random chemistry of
> death is required to relegate the former ego to the abyss?

Absolutely. An uncooled, unmedicated person in good shape dropping
dead in his track at normal conditions has a somewhat variable,
but very short window of viability. There's a threshold at which
you can't load the tissue with adequate cryoprotectant concentration,
thus resulting in a straightish freeze. Of course, this assumes
that the suspension is conducted without major oopslas, which is 
not the norm.

A best-case suspension is a euthanized person is good enough shape.
These are currently very illegal, and very much not the norm.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031210/cc01e1e5/attachment.bin>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Wed Dec 10 21:52:46 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:52:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00aa01c3bf51$83504d40$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210114538.01fe7b90@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210164210.02022058@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/10/2003 Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> >>University studies
> >>are supported by specific corporations now.  Discoveries are
> >>proprietary and patented instead of peer-reviewed.  More
> >>money is spent on lawyers to prevent flaws from being exposed
> >>rather than confirmation studies being performed.
> >
> > These are not about fake versus real experts.
>
>Real experts can take peer review and criticism to refine real theories.
>Only fake experts need to avoid peer review and use lawyers to stop people
>from pointing out their flaws.

Just because someone patents an idea, or keeps it secret, doesn't mean
that they don't know anything!!  And lots of people who know things try to
discourage criticism.  You can know things and dislike peer review.

>in the early days of computer research, we didn't have the problem with
>vaporware, bogus claims, fraudulent products,...

I thought in the early years IBM was known to have announced product dates
they knew they could not deliver on, to discourage people from going to
competitors.

> > And areas that used to be overrun are now left more alone. Which areas
> > are of wider interest changes over time.
>
>Can you name an area that used to have this problem and now does not?  I do
>not know of any politically charged area or area of pseudoscience that has
>been abandoned by the politicians and quacks.

Few people defend the Soviet socialist model these days; it used to be
politically charged, but now people have given up.

> > >Doctors used to make medical
> > >decisions, now non-medical professionals in HMOs do.
> >
> > But this isn't a matter of fake experts.  The HMO people are typically
> > expert enough for the decisions they make.
>
>I disagree.  HMO accountants are NOT more qualified than my doctor to treat
>me!

But HMO accountants do not treat you.  They decide what the insurance
company will pay for.  And they are usually qualified to make those decisions.


Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 10 23:44:01 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:44:01 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210164210.02022058@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <011701c3bf77$807f84c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote,
> Just because someone patents an idea, or keeps it secret,
> doesn't mean that they don't know anything!!  And lots of 
> people who know things try to discourage criticism.  You can 
> know things and dislike peer review.

This is very dubious.  Peer review is required by the scientific method.
People who want to claim scientific discoveries without using the scientific
method or undergoing scientific scrutiny should be viewed with extreme
skepticism.  Basically, they want the world to trust them without providing
evidence for their claims.  This is unacceptable practice.  At best, these
patents must be considered "unsubstantiated" in the scientific community.

> >Can you name an area that used to have this problem and now
> does not?
> >I do not know of any politically charged area or area of
> pseudoscience
> >that has been abandoned by the politicians and quacks.
> 
> Few people defend the Soviet socialist model these days; it
> used to be politically charged, but now people have given up.

This is not an example of science or pseudoscience.  Political "science" is
not the kind of science we are discussing.

> >I disagree.  HMO accountants are NOT more qualified than my
> doctor to treat me!
> 
> But HMO accountants do not treat you.  They decide what the
> insurance company will pay for.  And they are usually 
> qualified to make those decisions.

I am not objecting to accountants making payment decisions.  I am objecting
to accountants making treatment decisions.

My points are about science versus pseudoscience.  Your responses seem to be
in the realm of politics, economics and accounting.  You have not discussed
the same topic that I discussed.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From duggerj1 at charter.net  Thu Dec 11 01:57:55 2003
From: duggerj1 at charter.net (JAY DUGGER)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:57:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Anders the wonder boy
In-Reply-To: <011101c3bf3a$0d8c1b00$96994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <web-7233443@rems05.cluster1.charter.net>

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:24:12 -0600
  "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
>Robert and I both just reported that Anders is in Trieste 
>at a nano
>conference. Meanwhile, here's the latest contribution 
>from our amazingly
>multi-talented friend:

So that's where he went.

>
>http://home.neo.rr.com/cosmosbooks/dimensions.jpg
>
>The cover art  is by Anders; I think it's beautiful. (The 
>book itself will
>be out shortly, I'll say more then.)

Congratulations on the cover plug from George Zebrowski! 
For those who don't know, he's another fine SF author, who 
also deals with transhumanist themes. Try his Macrolife, 
Cave of Stars, and collected shorts volumes Swift 
Thoughts,  and "In the Distance, and Ahead in Time".

>
>Damien Broderick
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

Jay Dugger     :     Til Eulenspiegel
http://www.owlmirror.net/~duggerj
Sometimes delete serves best.


From Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu  Thu Dec 11 02:15:10 2003
From: Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu (Johnius)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:15:10 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryoplanning
Message-ID: <3FD7D32E.7ADE5CE1@Genius.UCSD.edu>

Hi all,
  I was on an earlier version of this list in the 90's.
I imagine a great deal has changed/transpired since then...

  I recently caught the PBS show with Suze Orman, and 
ended up getting her Portfolio Protection System, which 
seems potentially quite useful.  I couldn't help but 
notice, of course, that a primary emphasis of hers is
what to do legally/financially upon one's "death". She
said everyone should have a Will, many should have a 
Living Revocable Trust, and all should have Durable
Powers of Attorney for Healthcare and Finances.

  That's all well and good, but what about those who 
are seriously planning on getting cryopreserved upon
"death"?  This line of thinking lead me again to consider
signing up with some cryonics organization and to finally
get a solid legal and (affordable) financial plan in place.
And that, among other things, led me back here.

  I have several questions that I'm hoping you can
help me resolve:

1. Which cryonics organization should I go with?  Is 
there available a comparison of their various features,
costs, plans, options, etc.?  When I was here last, Alcor
seemed to be the popular choice, but I'd like to fully
consider all my options ... other organizations may now
exist giving Alcor serious competition.

2. What do I need to do legally to make my plan happen?
I've read there are potential problems legally with honoring
cryopreservation, and I want to make sure my plan happens 
as intended.

3. How shall I fund it?  I'm vested in my university's 
pension plan ... can I simply set things up to have that
cover the cost of at least cryo-preserving my head?  I'd
also want to set up my Will, Trust, Powers of Attorney,
etc. to support my plan ... to have my estate/net-worth
held for me to finance my continued cryo-preservation 
and to be there for me upon re-animation (assuming that
money will still mean something then).  I think I can scrape
together enough $ to cover the costs without having to sign
up for life insurance, but I'm not sure about that.

  There are other questions/issues, but this is a good
start I think ... and I suspect these have been answered
already somewhere, in which case I'd be thankful for a 
pointer to the relevant documents.

Best, John McPherson


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Dec 11 02:48:33 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:48:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
References: <003301c3bec9$b12b3a50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
	<200312101428.hBAESds13994@igor.synonet.com>
Message-ID: <3FD7DB01.C9B4D3C9@mindspring.com>

Major wrote:
> 
> > Of course.  I have a friend whose job it was to meet with
> > African immigrant families to explain to them that it is
> > illegal in this country to do female circumcision, not to
> > mention cruel and ill-advised.  I have often inquired why
> > she has no counterpart arguing the same for the male children.
> 
> Probably because while male circumcision may be cruel and ill-advised
> it is nowhere near as cruel or ill-advised as the so-called female
> circumcision (which is usually clitorectomy in practice).
> 
> Major
> 
> PS: I am old enough to have been circumcised at birth on medical
> advice (apparently it didn't use to be ill-advised 8-).

Agreed female circumcision is a control mechanism in several cultures.

Terry

P.S.: As an American over 50 I too have been circumcised for the usual
reasons.  My "family" doctor visited our home to do the circumcision.
My mother says he was a bit drunk, so I have a partial circumcision.

My wife is Thai-Chinese and asked me to question my mother whether or not
I was circumcised.  She didn't quite understand the foreskin removal process.
[;>))]


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Dec 11 02:51:57 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:51:57 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (PvT) Re: Chart of Clipperton
Message-ID: <3FD7DBCD.72A719EC@mindspring.com>

Hi,
I'd suggest that you send email to The Clipperton DX Club, at
< cdxc at free.fr >.  They're French, and have an interest in the island, as
is obvious.  Someone there might help.

73, doug


   Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:54:28 -0700
   From: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com>

   Hello Doug,

   I'm not sure what Mike Lorrey needs beyond the hydrographic data.

   Here is his latest explanation of his needs:

   "Scale 1:500,000 
   Producer Military Topographic Directorate of the General Staff 
   Vintage 1980-1981 
   Projection Gauss-Kruger 
   Language Russian 
   Size 3x2 degrees 
   Contours 50 meters 
   Status Available Immediately in raster or paper format 
   Sheet Count 1 
   Base price (Paper) $79.00  per sheet  

   This is a low resolution contour map that does not provide any
   hydrometric topography. Saw it already, doesn't suit my needs.

   > 
   > Some links:  http://www.connectedglobe.com/millennium/ip.html

   Found that page a while back. Thanks.

   An ENC database is a file containing both geographic and hydrographic
   topological data, depth soundings, and other GIS data that conforms to
   the International Geophysical S-57 standard. The US has been creating
   such charts for all of its territorial waters and posessions, even
   uninhabited Navassa Island has been digitally charted. Other major
   nations are supposed to be doing the same thing with their own
   posessions and waters, which I why I want someone literate in French to
   find such a chart on French government servers that is available to the
   public.

   Mike Lorrey"

   AP-preciate your help.

   Terry


   To: Forteana /Alternate Orphan/ <forteana at yahoogroups.com>,
       "skeptic at listproc.hcf.jhu.edu" <skeptic at listproc.hcf.jhu.edu>,
       "TLC [UNofficial]" <tlc-brotherhood at nexus.net>


   *****
   Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 wrote:
   > 
   > Hi Terry,
   > Must it be an electronic chart?  I think I've got one around here from
   > my trip there a few years ago.  And I know others who may, also.
   > 
   > 73, doug
   > 
   > To: MARHST-L at post.queensu.ca
   > Date:    Mon, 8 Dec 2003 22:20:25 -0800
   > From:    Scott Peterson
   > Subject: Looking for a chart of Clipperton island.
   > 
   > This came from someone on another list I'm on.  Would anyone here know
   > where he could find the chart he's looking for?
   > 
   > You can respond to "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com>
   > 
   > >I am trying to get a good navigational chart of Clipperton Island (a
   > >French posession) in the eastern Pacific and would like to find an ENC
   > >database (Electronic Navigational Chart) that conforms to the
   > >international S-57 standard. As it seems that each nation takes care of
   > >its own navigational chart distribution, I was hoping someone who is
   > >French, or French literate, could locate such a chart database for me
   > >somewhere on the French government internet sites. Finding such a file
   > >without knowing the lingo is a bit tough.... so much for my three years
   > >of French in high school...
   > 
   > Thanks for your help.
   > 
   >                                         Scott Peterson


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec 11 03:05:56 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:05:56 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] EUGEN: What happened to Genes screeds?
In-Reply-To: <20031210163919.69461.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00a101c3bf93$b1ed1bf0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> --- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> > > > It's very possible that I'll be gone (virtually, for good?) in a
> > few months.
> > > 
> > > WHAT? What is up?
> > 
> > There are 24 h in a day. Minus 8 h sleep, minus commute, minus
> > family...

Oh ok, whew, thanks.

> Oh, you seemed to be talking about something fatal... Mike Lorrey

Ja, you scared me too Eugen.  Please dont do that to us pal. {8-]
I worried you were about to tell us you had cancer or something.
I was afraid to ask.  You are one of our MVPs (most valuable 
posters).

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec 11 03:17:55 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:17:55 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE58JFFuNPage00008012@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <00a201c3bf95$5ecf44a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>



> I don't remember where I read this, but maybe it was here:
> There has been some recent speculation that the overall trend 
> in global warming is part of a variation in orbital cycles that seem
to 
> repeat every 22,000 years, and 100,000 years...

Most natural systems have multiple cycles.  The sun
"rings" with localized areas oscillating at a frequency
of a few hours.  It has the well-known ~22 years
magnetic pole cycle, usually expressed as the 11 year
cycle of F10.7 (10.7 cm radiation).  Is is so surprising
that the sun has a cycle that lasts perhaps a few thousand 
years?  We know that most stars have an observable brightness
variation, even if we do not always know the period.  We have 
only a few hundred years of observations, and good accurate 
global temperature measurements for only a few decades.

Granted, if we discovered we are on the cooling part of
the cycle, I might get a bit panicky, but being on the
warming side is apparent good news, eh?

spike





From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec 11 03:23:36 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:23:36 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00a901c3bf51$7ba34660$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <00a301c3bf96$29c371e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

>>I will root for the guys doing actual 
> > life extension, 
> > and attempt to maximize fun while doing so.  {8-]  spike 
> 
> Let me clarify my point.  I am not arguing for more science 
> and less fun.  I am arguing for more science and less pseudoscience.
There is 
> nothing wrong with having fun instead of doing science.  What I am
against is doing
> pseudoscience and calling it science because it is fun.


Oh OK, Im cool with that.  Great post on Mikes
global warming comments too.  {8-]  Im eager to start
thinking of ways to deal with a rising sea level.
Lets start by building some dams and canals.

spike



From rhanson at gmu.edu  Thu Dec 11 03:27:57 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:27:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <011701c3bf77$807f84c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210164210.02022058@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210221249.0211b400@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/10/2003 Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> > ... Just because someone patents an idea, or keeps it secret,
> > doesn't mean that they don't know anything!!  ...
>
>This is very dubious.  Peer review is required by the scientific method.
>People who want to claim scientific discoveries without using the scientific
>method or undergoing scientific scrutiny should be viewed with extreme
>skepticism.  Basically, they want the world to trust them without providing
>evidence for their claims.  This is unacceptable practice.  At best, these
>patents must be considered "unsubstantiated" in the scientific community.
>
> > ... Few people defend the Soviet socialist model these days; it
> > used to be politically charged, but now people have given up.
>
>This is not an example of science or pseudoscience.  Political "science" is
>not the kind of science we are discussing.
>
>I am not objecting to accountants making payment decisions.  I am objecting
>to accountants making treatment decisions.
>
>My points are about science versus pseudoscience.  Your responses seem to be
>in the realm of politics, economics and accounting.  You have not discussed
>the same topic that I discussed.

Your original claim was that "there are more faux experts than real experts
in the public spotlight today," and that this was worse than it used to be.
So I thought we were talking about expertize, i.e, the fact that some people
know a lot more about certain topics than other people.  I didn't realize
that you only meant to refer to a certain type of expert, the "scientist"
who uses the "scientific method", which apparently includes "peer review,"
and cannot include experts in politics or accounting.

I know too little about what you mean by "scientist" to have much of an
opinion about whether there are more or less of them listened to today.
Many years of study, including a Masters in the history and philosophy of
science, convinced me that "science" isn't a very useful concept.






Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 11 04:14:49 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:14:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <00a301c3bf96$29c371e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031211041449.94259.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >>I will root for the guys doing actual 
> > > life extension, 
> > > and attempt to maximize fun while doing so.  {8-]  spike 
> > 
> > Let me clarify my point.  I am not arguing for more science 
> > and less fun.  I am arguing for more science and less
> pseudoscience.
> There is 
> > nothing wrong with having fun instead of doing science.  What I am
> against is doing
> > pseudoscience and calling it science because it is fun.
> 
> 
> Oh OK, Im cool with that.  Great post on Mikes
> global warming comments too.  {8-]  Im eager to start
> thinking of ways to deal with a rising sea level.
> Lets start by building some dams and canals.

Yes, I think a dam or two in the passes betwen the Caspian and Black
Sea basins would help significantly there. The more fresh water we can
hold onto there, the less likely it will wind up as glaciers next time
around.

I also wonder why there isn't more talk about learning to live
underwater. The island dwelling nations are all yapping, as if global
warming is an assault on their sovereignty or something. I say, if the
ocean level actually does rise, then it is an opportunity for them to
forge ahead into a new age of pioneering exploration.

And what is so wrong about the poles melting anyways? All of that very
potentially fecund land that is just lying there frozen and ice
covered. I say melt em away and start shipping people there.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Dec 11 04:26:26 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:26:26 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210221249.0211b400@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <000401c3bf9e$f4106900$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robin Hanson wrote:
> Your original claim was that "there are more faux experts
> than real experts in the public spotlight today," and that 
> this was worse than it used to be. So I thought we were 
> talking about expertize, i.e, the fact that some people know 
> a lot more about certain topics than other people.  I didn't 
> realize that you only meant to refer to a certain type of 
> expert, the "scientist" who uses the "scientific method", 

WRONG.  You have deliberately quoted me out of context.
My full claim was clearly about science:
> At first, skepticism was a scientific tool used to critically analyze 
> assumptions and verify facts.  Now we have copycats who are acting 
> like skeptics to give their unfounded beliefs an air of scientific 
> authority.  As the article notes, people who are "skeptical" about 
> evolution or global warming are merely pretending to be skeptics 
> without the underlying science.  This is the same as Christian 
> "Scientists" or Creation "Science" trying to pretend that their 
> religious beliefs are as rigorous as real science.  It is too easy to 
> fall into this trap.  People easily fall into a mode where they act 
> like they are experts and they have no real concept of how science or 
> the underlying technology really work.  I am afraid that there are 
> more faux experts than real experts in the public
> spotlight today.    It is easier to be a consumer, commentator,
> political activists, strategy consultant, public educator, or whatever 
> in a field of "expertise" without really going through all the trouble 
> of really learning the field.  This is the biggest threat to science 
> and by extension to transhumanism facing us today.  The world of 
> science is being diluted with pseudoscience, and it is very difficult 
> for the laypeople to tell the difference.

I find it hard to believe that you can read the above paragraph and then
claim that you didn't know I was talking about science.  Worse, I don't see
how you could extract that single sentence from the middle of it without
noticing all the references to science around it.  I am increasingly finding
it hard to hold a rational discussion with you.

> I know too little about what you mean by "scientist" to have
> much of an opinion about whether there are more or less of 
> them listened to today. Many years of study, including a 
> Masters in the history and philosophy of science, convinced 
> me that "science" isn't a very useful concept.

OK, I don't think further discussion will be useful in this case.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 11 05:42:27 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:42:27 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEBLCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Kuro5hin: Umberto Eco, the widely celebrated academic and novelist,
recently delivered a lecture, Vegetal and Mineral Memory: The Future of
Books, at the Bibliotheca Alexandrina in Egypt, which has been published in
its entirety by Al-Ahram Weekly.
Eco's lecture concerns an array of questions surrounding the future of books
in the age of hypertext and digital media: Will hypertext and the internet
eventually replace the traditional book? Do the literary possibilities
introduced by hypertext spell the end of books and authors as we currently
know them?
Eco concedes that, at least in the case of books which are designed to be
consulted rather than read -- dictionaries, encyclopaedias, reference
manuals, and the like -- books are likely to disappear over time, as digital
media offers numerous and compelling advantages.
In the case of books designed to be read rather than consulted--novels,
poems, essays, and the like -- Eco is rather more skeptical about the
eventual obsolescence of books as we know them; believing them to "belong to
those kinds of instruments that, once invented, have not been further
improved because they are already alright, such as the hammer, the knife,
spoon or scissors."
Though Eco is one of my favorite authors, I definitely do not agree with him
on this point. It is true that today's e-books are not very convenient to
use compared to paper books, but this will change soon with better
technology. Today's scissors cut much better than last century's scissors. A
book remains a book regardless of the technology used to produce and use it.
See also this post of mine at Always On.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031211/e32495b4/attachment.html>

From extropy at unreasonable.com  Thu Dec 11 06:06:45 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 01:06:45 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <003b01c3bee9$50456b50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031209221508.032bd8f0@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211005754.08440ee0@mail.comcast.net>

I said:

 > There are a few contextual jokes on your name I could make
 > but I'm still recovering from the 23-part pun I posted to another
 > group yesterday.

then Spike wrote:

>We haven't had a pungasm on extropians for some time.  {8-]
>Remember about 3 yrs ago before the war started, when we
>used to just have fun?  Especially around Newtonmass and
>April 1?

Well, Newtonmas is approaching.  Silly on, dude!


-- David.




From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Thu Dec 11 06:39:44 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 00:39:44 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryoplanning
In-Reply-To: <3FD7D32E.7ADE5CE1@Genius.UCSD.edu>
References: <3FD7D32E.7ADE5CE1@Genius.UCSD.edu>
Message-ID: <834gtv0ci9ib2nqtq2t978j17f2nkl4120@4ax.com>

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:15:10 -0800, you wrote

>Hi all,
>  I was on an earlier version of this list in the 90's.
>I imagine a great deal has changed/transpired since then...
>

Hmm...no...pretty much the same....


>  I recently caught the PBS show with Suze Orman, and 
>ended up getting her Portfolio Protection System, which 
>seems potentially quite useful.  I couldn't help but 
>notice, of course, that a primary emphasis of hers is
>what to do legally/financially upon one's "death". She
>said everyone should have a Will, many should have a 
>Living Revocable Trust, and all should have Durable
>Powers of Attorney for Healthcare and Finances.
>
>  That's all well and good, but what about those who 
>are seriously planning on getting cryopreserved upon
>"death"?  This line of thinking lead me again to consider
>signing up with some cryonics organization and to finally
>get a solid legal and (affordable) financial plan in place.
>And that, among other things, led me back here.
>
>  I have several questions that I'm hoping you can
>help me resolve:
>
>1. Which cryonics organization should I go with?  Is 
>there available a comparison of their various features,
>costs, plans, options, etc.?  When I was here last, Alcor
>seemed to be the popular choice, but I'd like to fully
>consider all my options ... other organizations may now
>exist giving Alcor serious competition.

Ah, actually, I believe that Alcor may be the only company taking in
new members.  AFAIK,  the state of Michigan has forbade Cryonics
Institute to take new members.


>
>2. What do I need to do legally to make my plan happen?
>I've read there are potential problems legally with honoring
>cryopreservation, and I want to make sure my plan happens 
>as intended.

Complete your paperwork.  Tell your family members of your plans.
Alcor has a web page devoted to this matter.


>  There are other questions/issues, but this is a good
>start I think ... and I suspect these have been answered
>already somewhere, in which case I'd be thankful for a 
>pointer to the relevant documents.

www.alcor.org




-------------



From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 11 07:04:45 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:04:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryoplanning
In-Reply-To: <3FD7D32E.7ADE5CE1@Genius.UCSD.edu>
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEBLCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

1. Which cryonics organization should I go with?  Is
there available a comparison of their various features,
costs, plans, options, etc.?  When I was here last, Alcor
seemed to be the popular choice, but I'd like to fully
consider all my options ... other organizations may now
exist giving Alcor serious competition.

Consider the Cryonics Institute (www.cryonics.org), it is much cheaper than
Alcor and perhaps equally good.



From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 11 07:07:13 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:07:13 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Digital divide summit
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEBLCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From the New Scientist: At the moment, key decisions about internet
standards, technology and regulation are made by an array of US private
sector organisations. The most visible of these is the ICANN, which has
operated the global domain name system since 1988, under an agreement with
the US government. But some nations have called for control of the internet
to be handed to an international body such as the UN's International
Telecommunications Union (ITU). They feel this would give them greater say
in such matters. However, in talks held at the weekend, member states agreed
only to create a working group of industry, government and public sector
experts to discuss the issue and make recommendations at the next WSIS
(WORLD SUMMIT ON THE INFORMATION SOCIETY) meeting in 2005. This "decision
not to decide" was expected by those familiar with UN affairs.
As world leaders were considering the future of the internet, the man who
took it out of the lab and into the mainstream took centre-stage (BBC News).
At an event to mark the opening of the UN technology summit in Geneva, Tim
Berners-Lee was reunited with the machine he used to invent the web. With UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan at his side, he used the world's first web
server to send an e-mail to more than 80 schools worldwide. "I hope we can
all use the web to realise that other people are just like ourselves even if
they speak different languages or have different abilities," said the
message. In an event heavy with symbolism, the man responsible for an
information revolution used a piece of the internet's history to send an
inspirational message to schoolchildren across the world. "This event
reminds us how young and full of promise the web is," said Mr Annan as he
stood at Mr Berners-Lee's side. "It should serve as a challenge to us and to
encourage all of us to stay connected."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031211/7552d6c1/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 11 07:08:17 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:08:17 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Thrall of China
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEBMCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Always On: China is an impressive market, and many investors believe
that much of the exciting activity in technology and venture capital for the
next several decades will be in Asia. China is no longer just a cheap
production site, but a place with a large market to both source and sell
finished goods - even higher-cost technology products. And the country is
becoming a source of innovative products that is no longer exclusively
focused on reverse engineering or contract manufacturing.
To get an accurate picture, we spoke with Paul Waide, editor in chief of
Pacific Epoch, a China-based publication covering technology finance,
tech-related economic liberalization, and other activity around China?s
rapidly growing technology community. The article is a good summary of the
current situation of technology development in China, and the Pacific Epoch
website seems a good news source.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031211/567e5e78/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Thu Dec 11 07:10:34 2003
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 01:10:34 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <20031210212551.44124.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <00a801c3bf51$75943810$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211010136.019159c0@mail.earthlink.net>

Any comments on Ron Bailey's recent piece on global warming?

How Hot Is It?
Global warming creeps along
November 19, 2003
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb111903.shtml

and:

Hot Air Conference
Urgent action on a non-problem
December 9, 2003
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb120903.shtml


Ron has another piece, this month, also highly relevant to the discussion 
about the perversion of science:

The Agony of Ecstasy Research
Science gets recruited in the Drug War
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb120303.shtml



_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
_______________________________________________________




From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Dec 11 07:10:32 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:10:32 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Stealing organs finally a crime...
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211005754.08440ee0@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <000001c3bfb5$ddd119c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> >We haven't had a pungasm on extropians for some time.  {8-]
> 
> Well, Newtonmas is approaching.  Silly on, dude! -- David.


OK.  These are not ones I wrote, altho I did modify a few
of them.  People send me this kinda stuff because they
know my brain has a humor co-processor, that actually
is a higher performer than my main CPU.  spike


 Those who jump off a bridge in Paris are in Seine. --

 A backward poet writes inverse. --

 A professional poet charges perverse.

 A man's home is his castle, in a manor of speaking. --

 Dijon vu - the feeling you have had this same mustard before. --

 Practice safe eating - always use condiments. --

 Shotgun wedding: A case of wife or death. --

 My neighbor took up with a mistress, just to break the monogamy. --

 A hangover is the wrath of grapes. --

 Dancing cheek-to-cheek is really a form of floor play. --

 Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? --

 Reading while sunbathing makes you well red. --

 When two egotists meet, it's an I for an I. --

 A bicycle can't stand on its own because it is two tired.

 What's the definition of a will? (It's a dead giveaway.) --

 What does a cryonicist put in his will?  Frozen assets.

 Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana. --

 In democracy your vote counts. In feudalism your count votes. --

 She was engaged to a boyfriend with a wooden leg but broke it off. --

 A chicken crossing the road is poultry in motion. --

 I didn't pay my exorcist.  I got repossessed. --

 With her marriage, she got a new name and a dress. --

 When a clock is hungry, it goes back four seconds. --

 I fell into an upholstery machine.  Now Im fully recovered. --

 You feel stuck with your debt if you can't budge it. --

 Local Area Network in Australia: the LAN down under. --

 He often broke into song because he couldn't find the key. --

 A lot of money is tainted - It taint yours and it taint mine. --

 A boiled egg in the morning is hard to beat. --

 I have a photographic memory but it was never developed. 
	(Those younger than 10 yrs today won't get that one)--

 A plateau is a high form of flattery. --

 A midget fortune-teller who escapes from prison is a small medium at
large. --

 Those who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end. --

 Once you've seen one shopping center, you've seen a mall. --

 Bakers trade bread recipes on a knead-to-know basis. --

 Santa's helpers are subordinate clauses. --

 Acupuncture is a jab well done.

 I bought a box of those penile enlargement patches, stuck them
on my scalp.  It was a mind expanding experience.



From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 11 07:40:22 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:40:22 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Electronic voting vendors create an Election
	Technology Council
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEBMCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Computerworld: Six vendors of election systems have formed a trade
group to address lingering questions about security and ethics in the
electronic voting industry. The six vendors, teaming with the Information
Technology Association of America (ITAA), announced yesterday that they have
formed the Election Technology Council (ETC), which will attempt to write a
code of ethics and review security best practices in the industry, members
said.
"The ballot box is sacred to our American democracy," said David Hart,
chairman of both the ETC and Hart InterCivic Inc. "We're now talking about
sweeping changes to devices people use to vote. ... It's not surprising
questions have arisen about the ability of this technology to support so
heavy a responsibility. We welcome these questions, and we assert our rights
as reputable, hard-working elections technology companies, to answer those
questions in an honest and forthright manner."
I think we will have to wait some time for operational electronic voting,
but when the time of this technology comes it is going to make a big impact.
For example it will be possible to formally (and informally) consult
citizens much more frequently at a given cost.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031211/fe982824/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Dec 11 09:43:40 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:43:40 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryoplanning
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEBLCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
References: <3FD7D32E.7ADE5CE1@Genius.UCSD.edu>
	<IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBIEBLCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <20031211094340.GL13099@leitl.org>

On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 08:04:45AM +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> Consider the Cryonics Institute (www.cryonics.org), it is much cheaper than
> Alcor and perhaps equally good.

Perhaps not. If you feel you should subsidize somebody, go with Alcor.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031211/f7976382/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Dec 11 13:11:55 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:11:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <1070867376.6256.13.camel@alito.homeip.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312071041330.31945-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<1070867376.6256.13.camel@alito.homeip.net>
Message-ID: <20031211131155.GY13099@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 05:09:36PM +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 05:38, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> > SYNTHETIC CHEMISTRY: it isn't sophisticated enough yet and the computational
> > capacity isn't up to the job.  The largest synthetic molecules that have
> > been made are things like Vitamin B-12, vancomycin and maitotoxin.  They
> > have atomic sizes ranging from ~200-500 atoms.  Even for the fine motion

Counting atoms is a useless metric. You can't make strained caged compounds
of this complexity. The yield is not only close to zero, the yield is
precisely zero.

The fine motion controller http://jmol.sourceforge.net/demo/nanotech/
is unattainable by classical synthetic chemistry.

> > controller which is 2600 atoms in size but probably only 1/500th to 1/1000th
> > of an 4,000,000 atom assembler arm design (not counting the motors and
> > computer interface you might need to control it).

The control logic can be macroscale, if this is bootstrap.
 
> Current synthetic molecules can be a bit bigger than the ones you
> pointed out:
> http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/9293/Apr05_93/11.htm shows synthesis of a
> pure hydrocarbon sphere of 1134 carbon atoms (2.2k atoms overall).

Counting atoms is useless. "Synthesized from 94 units of a carbon-based
building block called phenylacetylene, the molecule branches off in an
unusual repeating, fractal pattern linked by strong triple bonds."

Noticed something?
 
> http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=24856 shows
> total chemical synthesis of a 238 amino-acid chain.  (This last one is
> from 1998, don't know if this has been bettered).

Stiff, strained cages with a nonrepetitive shape are very different
from linear biopolymers.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031211/3a2443d6/attachment.bin>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Thu Dec 11 13:46:02 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:46:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <000401c3bf9e$f4106900$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031210221249.0211b400@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031211084238.0211b400@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/10/2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> > Your original claim was that "there are more faux experts
> > than real experts in the public spotlight today," ... I didn't
> > realize that you only meant to refer to a certain type of
> > expert, the "scientist" who uses the "scientific method", ...
>
>WRONG.  You have deliberately quoted me out of context.
>My full claim was clearly about science:
> > At first, skepticism was a scientific tool used to critically analyze
> > assumptions and verify facts.  ...
>I find it hard to believe that you can read the above paragraph and then
>claim that you didn't know I was talking about science.  Worse, I don't see
>how you could extract that single sentence from the middle of it without
>noticing all the references to science around it.  I am increasingly finding
>it hard to hold a rational discussion with you.

I saw the reference to science; I just didn't know that by that word you
meant SCIENCE (TM), with a whole array of connotations I don't share.


Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From gregburch at gregburch.net  Thu Dec 11 13:51:25 2003
From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 07:51:25 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENVIRO: Crichton on Nature and Man
In-Reply-To: <20031211131155.GY13099@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDMEJLCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>

Normally I don't have much time for Michael Crichton: For a long time he' written screenplays, not novels, and he tends to do so by reading an article in SciAm and then putting the text into the mouths of two-dimensional cardboard cut-outs.  But Arts and Letters Daily this morning has a link to a speech he gave in September about environmentalism.   It's superb.  Here's a couple of excerpts:

 - - - -

"We must daily decide whether the threats we face are real, whether the solutions we are offered will do any good, whether the problems we're told exist are in fact real problems, or non-problems. Every one of us has a sense of the world, and we all know that this sense is in part given to us by what other people and society tell us; in part generated by our emotional state, which we project outward; and in part by our genuine perceptions of reality. In short, our struggle to determine what is true is the struggle to decide which of our perceptions are genuine, and which are false because they are handed down, or sold to us, or generated by our own hopes and fears. 

"As an example of this challenge, I want to talk today about environmentalism. And in order not to be misunderstood, I want it perfectly clear that I believe it is incumbent on us to conduct our lives in a way that takes into account all the consequences of our actions, including the consequences to other people, and the consequences to the environment. I believe it is important to act in ways that are sympathetic to the environment, and I believe this will always be a need, carrying into the future. I believe the world has genuine problems and I believe it can and should be improved. But I also think that deciding what constitutes responsible action is immensely difficult, and the consequences of our actions are often difficult to know in advance. I think our past record of environmental action is discouraging, to put it mildly, because even our best intended efforts often go awry. But I think we do not recognize our past failures, and face them squarely. And I think I know why. 

 ...

Today, one of the most powerful religions in the Western World is environmentalism. Environmentalism seems to be the religion of choice for urban atheists. Why do I say it's a religion? Well, just look at the beliefs. If you look carefully, you see that environmentalism is in fact a perfect 21st century remapping of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs and myths. 

There's an initial Eden, a paradise, a state of grace and unity with nature, there's a fall from grace into a state of pollution as a result of eating from the tree of knowledge, and as a result of our actions there is a judgment day coming for us all. We are all energy sinners, doomed to die, unless we seek salvation, which is now called sustainability. Sustainability is salvation in the church of the environment. Just as organic food is its communion, that pesticide-free wafer that the right people with the right beliefs, imbibe. 

Eden, the fall of man, the loss of grace, the coming doomsday---these are deeply held mythic structures. They are profoundly conservative beliefs. They may even be hard-wired in the brain, for all I know. I certainly don't want to talk anybody out of them, as I don't want to talk anybody out of a belief that Jesus Christ is the son of God who rose from the dead. But the reason I don't want to talk anybody out of these beliefs is that I know that I can't talk anybody out of them. These are not facts that can be argued. These are issues of faith. 

And so it is, sadly, with environmentalism. Increasingly it seems facts aren't necessary, because the tenets of environmentalism are all about belief. It's about whether you are going to be a sinner, or saved. Whether you are going to be one of the people on the side of salvation, or on the side of doom. Whether you are going to be one of us, or one of them. 

Am I exaggerating to make a point? I am afraid not. Because we know a lot more about the world than we did forty or fifty years ago. And what we know now is not so supportive of certain core environmental myths, yet the myths do not die. Let's examine some of those beliefs. 

There is no Eden. There never was. What was that Eden of the wonderful mythic past? Is it the time when infant mortality was 80%, when four children in five died of disease before the age of five? When one woman in six died in childbirth? When the average lifespan was 40, as it was in America a century ago. When plagues swept across the planet, killing millions in a stroke. Was it when millions starved to death? Is that when it was Eden?"

 - - - -

The rest is just as good.

  http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html

I highly recommend this.

Greg Burch

My blog:  http://www.gregburch.net/burchismo.html


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Thu Dec 11 14:15:35 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 06:15:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031211131155.GY13099@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312110610070.6887-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> Counting atoms is a useless metric. You can't make strained caged compounds
> of this complexity. The yield is not only close to zero, the yield is
> precisely zero.

Hmmmm....  If that were true then one should not be able to make
buckyballs or buckytubes (as I believe they have strained bonds).
Cubane is perhaps the ultimate example and it is produced using
chemical synthesis.

I did not say that one would have a high yield -- since some
parts of nanotech development may be a bootstrapping process
you may only need one copy of something.

A related question -- do you know of a program/utility that
can show the degree of bond strain?

Robert




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Thu Dec 11 15:35:44 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 10:35:44 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENVIRO: Crichton on Nature and Man
Message-ID: <63340-2200312411153544371@M2W065.mail2web.com>


From: Greg Burch 

"We must daily decide whether the threats we face are real, whether the
solutions we are offered will do any good, whether the problems we're told
exist are in fact real problems, or non-problems. Every one of us has a
sense of the world, and we all know that this sense is in part given to us
by what other people and society tell us; in part generated by our
emotional state, which we project outward; and in part by our genuine
perceptions of reality. In short, our struggle to determine what is true is
the struggle to decide which of our perceptions are genuine, and which are
false because they are handed down, or sold to us, or generated by our own
hopes and fears...."

Inspirational.  Thank you.

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From namacdon at ole.augie.edu  Thu Dec 11 15:42:28 2003
From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:42:28 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
Message-ID: <1071157348.9c0ada80namacdon@ole.augie.edu>


"It is true that today's e-books are not very convenient to
use compared to paper books, but this will change soon with better
technology. Today's scissors cut much better than last century's scissors. A
book remains a book regardless of the technology used to produce and use it.
See also this post of mine at Always On."

Convenience isn't the whole reason, though.  Sure, it makes sense to replace a collection of flimsy paperbacks with an e-book reader, but for those of us who like to pick up a nice, hefty, leatherbound tome from time to time, the book isn't going away.  There's something about holding a book in your hands, feeling the paper, and reading the printed word that even a good e-book reader can't quite make up for.  It's like the difference between having fast food and going to a five-star restaurant... sure, the former is *sufficient* nourishment, but if it's an experience you want, you're going to choose the latter.

Not only that, e-book readers and formats are going to have to advance considerably before they can reach the utility of a hardbound book.  For instance, I'm a so-called "pen and paper" roleplaying gamer.  While I have many game manuals in PDF format, and I use a laptop to run my games and write my notes, I'd much rather use a hardbound book than a PDF when preparing for the game, precisely because I can flip through the book to the pages I need and access the data much more quickly, ironically enough, than my computer can.  I'm sure that many engineers and technicians would say the same of their manuals- paper is still a convenience.  It's likely that this will change in time, but the first attempts at creating "paperless" offices and plants have largely been failures.

-Nicq MacDonald





From extropy at unreasonable.com  Thu Dec 11 16:00:21 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:00:21 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Newtonmas silly-sallying
In-Reply-To: <000001c3bfb5$ddd119c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211005754.08440ee0@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211104324.030d6e90@mail.comcast.net>

At 11:10 PM 12/10/2003 -0800, Spike wrote:
> > >We haven't had a pungasm on extropians for some time.  {8-]
> >
> > Well, Newtonmas is approaching.  Silly on, dude! -- David.
>
>OK.  These are not ones I wrote, altho I did modify a few
>of them.  People send me this kinda stuff because they
>know my brain has a humor co-processor, that actually
>is a higher performer than my main CPU.  spike

If it's like mine, the operating system allows the co-processor to 
pre-emptively usurp output devices from the main CPU.

Since no one asked, here is the 23-fold punning I posted to that other 
list.  I treated it akin to a game of Boggle -- how many puns could I pull 
out of a phrase?  Some are a little feeble.  For greatest effect, imagine 
them coming rapid-fire from Groucho Marx, Robin Williams, or Spider Robinson.

Figuring out where the pun is for each one might be an interesting test of 
neural connectivity.  I'm not sure if measured ingestion of alcohol would 
increase your score.  Perhaps that experiment should be performed.

  >>  Have you stopped beating your wife?

Wendy wrote:
 >  I'm a domestic partner not a wife.  =p

A domestic partner:

(a) is a wife
(b) is a partner who's been domesticated
(c) is a shopping companion for Bed, Bath, and Beyond
(d) is bald-headed
(e) as opposed to a submissive (see leather)
(f) slides down poles at work
(g) as opposed to a foreign affair
(h) is opposed to a foreign affair
(i) chews her husband's food
(j) worries about her derriere
(k) needs to clean out her purse
(l) collects parasites
(m) won't go out for recess
(n) doesn't range widely
(o) twitches during Catholic services
(p) measures the galley
(q) rides side-saddle
(r) helps her husband lose weight
(s) times the venison
(t) helps clean up the bakery
(u) plays with Satchmo

Everyone knows it's Wendy. Stop me before I pun again.


-- David.





From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 11 17:11:08 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 17:11:08 GMT
Subject: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
Message-ID: <E1AUULE-0003Iu-Eq@fetch-bak.runbox.com>

There's something about holding a sleek tablet PC in your hands, feeling the plastic, and reading the softcopy word that even a good paper book can't quite make up for. Really, my sentence is as valid as yours. I agree that e-book technology still has to progress, but progress it will: very long battery life, flexible paper-like screens, at same points e-book will have all the advantages of books with none of the disadvantages, and there will be little to choose.
When I was a kid I liked to smell books, there was something in the smell of some types of paper that made me think the book was good. Someone may miss that, but if many do then some will put parfume generators in tablet PCs.

---
There's something about holding a book in your hands, feeling the paper, and reading the printed word that even a good e-book reader can't quite make up for.  It's like the difference between having fast food and going to a five-star restaurant... sure, the former is *sufficient* nourishment, but if it's an experience you want, you're going to choose the latter.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 11 17:36:33 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:36:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211010136.019159c0@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20031211173633.23585.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> Any comments on Ron Bailey's recent piece on global warming?
> 
> How Hot Is It?
> Global warming creeps along
> November 19, 2003
> http://www.reason.com/rb/rb111903.shtml

Yeah, from the article:
"So assuming that Wentz' team has gotten it right, and the lower
troposphere is warming at a rate of 0.15 degrees per decade, that would
mean that the earth would be 1.5 degrees centigrade warmer in 2100 than
it is today. If Christy is right, he believes, "We might see a degree
of warming over the next century. Neither one of those temperature
increases is going to cause much of a catastrophe." "

The error in this prediction is that it assumes that temperature
increases linearly with carbon dioxide levels. This is false. Temp
follows a diminishing returns curve with respect to linear increases in
CO2, such that an increase in CO2 in the 20th century that caused a 1.5
degree increase would only cause a .75 degree increase in the 21st as
it piled on the previous levels of the 20th.

"In 2001, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) cited various climate models that predicted the world's climate
could warm between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees centigrade (2.5 to 10.4 degrees
Fahrenheit) by 2100. Of course, the higher catastrophic increase was
the one featured in headlines and cited by activists. Now, according to
the Wentz and Christy data, it looks like the smaller increase of the
IPCC's predicted range of temperatures is more likely to occur. (And if
you think that the IPCC's climate models are a bit questionable, you
really ought to look at how bad its economic models are, according to
The Economist)."

Despite this better data, the UN and the leftie chicken littles
continue to quote only the most extreme predictions (and continue to
ignore the diminishing impact curve). To quote The Economist: "Their
criticisms of the IPCC were wide-ranging, but focused on the panel's
forecasts of greenhouse-gas emissions. The method employed, the critics
argued, had given an upward bias to the projections."

So, rather than give a proper DOWNWARD bias to the projections as they
should to follow the known diminishing returns curve of CO2, they are
instead inventing an accelerating returns curve out of thin air as a
statistical artifact.

What is so insane about the IPCC's method is that instead of using
known science, they instead used an econometric model that assumed that
undeveloped and developing nations would grow into a western pattern of
emissions as they developed (and would not rely at all on more
efficient and low emissive technologies). Moreover, The Economist goes
on to say, the 15 members of the IPCC panel demonstrate a significant
lack of economic expertise to make such projections based on economic
data. As Harvey was talking about non-experts mixing it in earlier, it
appears that the IPCC itself is promulgating pseudoscience produced by
unqualified personnel, as The Economist itself accuses: 

"Can so many experts get it wrong? The experts themselves may doubt it,
but the answer is yes. The problem is that this horde of authorities is
drawn from a narrow professional milieu. Economic and statistical
expertise is not among their strengths. Making matters worse, the
panel's approach lays great emphasis on peer review of submissions.
When the peers in question are drawn from a restricted professional
domain?whereas the issues under consideration make demands upon a wide
range of professional skills?peer review is not a way to assure the
highest standards of work by exposing research to scepticism. It is
just the opposite: a kind of intellectual restrictive practice, which
allows flawed or downright shoddy work to acquire a standing it does
not deserve." 

Baily concludes, agreeing with myself more than others: "The New York
Times correctly notes that satellite data trends now more closely match
the predictions of climate models. The article fails to note that that
is largely because refined models are predicting lower temperature
trends. It seems that the planet is telling us that the climate models
most sensitive to changes in carbon dioxide have gotten it wrong and
need to be revised. So OK, global warming is not a "hoax," but the
danger it poses to humanity and to nature is being exaggerated by
activists."

Given that even the so called experts are ignoring the diminishing
returns curve of CO2, it is become more than a hoax, it is to be
concluded that there is massive negligence if not intentional fraud
going on.

> and:
> 
> Hot Air Conference
> Urgent action on a non-problem
> December 9, 2003
> http://www.reason.com/rb/rb120903.shtml

This article helps expose what I've been saying for a long time and
some on this list have been denigrating me and ignoring me for:

"The runup to the COP9 meeting has seen the publication of numerous
ritual warnings that the global warming is worse than expected and that
something must be done about it now. For example, the German Advisory
Council on Global Change issued a report that warned that likely
increases in global temperatures due to manmade causes over the next
century would be "intolerable." "

Now, isn't it interesting, as I have pointed out on occasion, that
Germany, one of the most socialized nations on the planet, with
extremely high taxes on fossil fuels that are used to finance their
welfare state system, is among the chief chicken littles, claiming that
things are worse than expected (despite data to the contrary) and
hyperdramatizing it with claims that anthropogenic warming will be
'intolerable'. 

Intolerable for what? For their welfare state system, is what. As
anthropic warming is increasingly determined to be a non-issue for the
true market economies, at least for the foreseable future, market
economies will continue to outperform non-market or semi-market
economies, draining currency badly needed to fund the retirements of
the post-war generation.

What is interesting is that the Germans admit that the global economy
can handle a 2 degree increase without problem, which means, according
to more accurate data, that we are good for at least the next two
centuries. But by then, it will be too late for the German nanny state.


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From megao at sasktel.net  Thu Dec 11 18:34:53 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:34:53 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cherry picking the carcass of a Pun
Message-ID: <3FD8B8CD.46763894@sasktel.net>

Take the pharase:

Get thou to a Punnery.



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec 11 22:16:42 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:16:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cherry picking the carcass of a Pun
In-Reply-To: <3FD8B8CD.46763894@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <20031211221642.88392.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc."
<megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> Take the pharase:
> 
> Get thou to a Punnery.

...and thou must do punnance.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec 11 22:38:22 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:38:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] E-book aesthetics
In-Reply-To: <E1AUULE-0003Iu-Eq@fetch-bak.runbox.com>
Message-ID: <20031211223822.96055.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <gpmap at runbox.com> wrote:
> There's something about holding a sleek tablet PC in
> your hands, feeling the plastic, and reading the
> softcopy word that even a good paper book can't
> quite make up for.

Taking that thought a step further...can people think
of some of the non-technological advantages e-books
have over their paper ancestors?  I.e., search
functionality and downloading are nice, but I'm
talking about the ability of the "paper" to adjust
its contrast - even glow, in low light - to improve
readability, or (for large texts, like an entire
encyclopedia set) the lower weight and bulk of an
e-book plus reader versus thick paper tomes.  Or how
about permanence?  Acid-free paper is one thing, but
for data you truly care about (and thus, which is
likely to be backed up and updated to newer data
formats as they come out), it can be as immortal as
you might be some day.

> ---
> There's something about holding a book in your
> hands, feeling the paper, and reading the printed
> word that even a good e-book reader can't quite make
> up for.  It's like the difference between having
> fast food and going to a five-star restaurant...
> sure, the former is *sufficient* nourishment, but if
> it's an experience you want, you're going to choose
> the latter.

There's a restaurant near where I work (Tung Kee
Noodle House, for anyone near Mountain View) which
many of my co-workers patronize for the experience.
Speed of food delivery is usually on par with or
better than most fast food restaurants, and the
efficiency of the place shows in everything they do.
(It's even better if you already know what you want
before you walk in the door - as most of their repeat
customers apparently do.)  Given as we're usually in a
business "let's get our tasks done quickly" mood at
that time of the day, it is an experience we can and
do enjoy, time and again.

And maybe I'm wierd in this aspect, but when I'm going
out to eat and I want an experience, my experience
comes from the people I eat with far more than from
the restaurant we happen to choose.  (In fact, often
times my choice of restaurant in these situations is
based on intuitive nutritional needs.  I.e., my body
tells me if it can handle rich Italian food, if it
just wants a salad from the soup & salad joint, if
it's craving meat and lots of it, et cetera.  Of
course, being intuition, it's not always correct, but
it's better for that than something completely
unrelated.)


From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Thu Dec 11 23:29:45 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:59:45 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868D3@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>


> "It is true that today's e-books are not very convenient to
> use compared to paper books, but this will change soon with better
> technology. Today's scissors cut much better than last 
> century's scissors. A
> book remains a book regardless of the technology used to 
> produce and use it.
> See also this post of mine at Always On."
> 
> Convenience isn't the whole reason, though.  Sure, it makes 
> sense to replace a collection of flimsy paperbacks with an 
> e-book reader, but for those of us who like to pick up a 
> nice, hefty, leatherbound tome from time to time, the book 
> isn't going away.  There's something about holding a book in 
> your hands, feeling the paper, and reading the printed word 
> that even a good e-book reader can't quite make up for.  It's 
> like the difference between having fast food and going to a 
> five-star restaurant... sure, the former is *sufficient* 
> nourishment, but if it's an experience you want, you're going 
> to choose the latter.
> 
> Not only that, e-book readers and formats are going to have 
> to advance considerably before they can reach the utility of 
> a hardbound book.  For instance, I'm a so-called "pen and 
> paper" roleplaying gamer.  While I have many game manuals in 
> PDF format, and I use a laptop to run my games and write my 
> notes, I'd much rather use a hardbound book than a PDF when 
> preparing for the game, precisely because I can flip through 
> the book to the pages I need and access the data much more 
> quickly, ironically enough, than my computer can.  I'm sure 
> that many engineers and technicians would say the same of 
> their manuals- paper is still a convenience.  It's likely 
> that this will change in time, but the first attempts at 
> creating "paperless" offices and plants have largely been failures.
> 
> -Nicq MacDonald

I don't think we'll ever go paperless, but I think paper will change. Here's
why:

We love paper. It's dumb, it's unsearchable, it's static (unless you use
pencil and eraser), it's not hyper-linkable. But it's excellent, it
absolutely kicks butt all over computer screens. Why is that?

Well, it's thin and light and easy to read. You can spit a printed document
out of a printer in short order, and go read it down at the cafe, or in your
lounge room, or in the tub. You can make notes on it, you can highlight it.
You can stick little tags on pages you want to bookmark, or you can fold the
corner over, or whatever. And you can have lots and lots of it. You can
spread a document out on the floor around you if you like, and see it all at
once.

Computer screens, on the other hand, are quite crappy as a substitute.
Mostly they are bulky, embedded in a device that is giant and cumbersome
(compared to paper!), and *there is only one of them*. Yes, for any given
device it is more than likely that there is only one screen, of limited
area, for you to read from. Compared to that, a handful of letter or A4
sized paper sheets is luxury!

Hang on a minute Emlyn, you say. Aren't you a big technophile, supporting
uploading and nanotech and all the good stuff? What's all this press for
dead trees?

Well, the problem is that the things they do well, they do very very well.
Paper is simply stupendously superiour to an electronic display, for all the
reasons I've given above.

But paper is a broad term I think. Maybe better to say lightweight, cheap,
ultrathin, self contained display, something like that?

I think we need better paper. We need to retain all the current qualities,
as I've said above, but we need more. We need it to also act at least a bit
like a computer display. Particularly, we need to fix the one real
limitation of paper, which is its lack of integration with our information
systems. So, it needs at a minimum to be reconfigurable (so you can download
a page into it from a machine). It would also be *really good* to be able to
scrawl on it, and be able to load that back into the machine. Not having
this second quality would compromise one of paper's important features.

I envisage a *successful* e-book reader as looking like a book. It'd have a
hard cover, modifiable, a wireless NIC, and a bunch of pages inside, like a
book. It'd be like an mp3 player, but for books, so you pick the book you
want from an interactive display (maybe inside the front cover) from a list
of books stored in the device, and the cover and pages would update
themselves appropriately. Also, you probably want a list of downloadable
titles, and maybe a full web browser for maximum flexibility in finding new
books. As to redrawing, there is some squirm room here; it could take 5
minutes for the pages to redraw themselves if necessary, as long as they
were fixed afterwards. Then, you'd have a book! Just read away. Hopefully
you can make notes on the pages (with some kind of special pen), and add
bookmarks (which probably end up listed on the inside cover; you'd select
one and the page edge would change colour to show you where to turn to).
What else could you put inside the front cover? A search facility! Surely.
It might just give you a list of pages to turn to for your search item, and
when you go there, the words are highlighted.

If the book didn't have enough pages, that'd be ok; it probably needs a few,
but not necessarily hundreds. It would be a big advantage if the whole
document was displayed at once, especially if redraw was slow, but it's not
strictly necessary. If there aren't enough pages, you just need to be able
to load a subset of the book at any one time, and switch subsets easily.

A device like that would have me ready to ditch paper books for good.

Single sheet smart paper would be awesome too. Instead of needing a printer,
you'd just plug it into some device that could download/upload content, and
modify it. You could distribute hardcopy documents that way if you wanted
to, and the recipient would be able to, with the right equipment, have
access to the full electronic version. Maybe the paper itself would even be
really interactive, so you could touch a special menu spot, and you'd get
all these options for interacting with the document. Cool!

If it was cheap and dynamic enough, it'd replace displays altogether. I
think coding on really dynamic sheets of paper would be awesome. You could
lay different bits of it out around you, and scribble out changes by hand.

Anyway, enough blathering. Electronic books will eventually kill of static
books, but we'll need smart paper before that happens. And then, no one will
miss the old books, because we wont be replacing them with something shitty,
we'll be replacing them with something just like they were, but better.

Personally, I'd love to get a smart display "tatoo", possibly all over,
hopefully with touch-screen type functionality.

Emlyn



From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 12 00:05:13 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:05:13 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] man takes first leak in outer space
References: <20031211173633.23585.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <014c01c3c043$a08f6600$c6994a43@texas.net>

http://www.sfcovers.net/Magazines/AUT/AUT_0046.jpg



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 12 00:33:32 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:33:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
In-Reply-To: <1071157348.9c0ada80namacdon@ole.augie.edu>
Message-ID: <20031212003332.28298.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Nicholas Anthony MacDonald
<namacdon at ole.augie.edu> wrote:
>  It's likely that this will change in time, but the
> first attempts at creating "paperless" offices and
> plants have largely been failures.

Partly, this requires knowing how to use it.  I may
be self-promoting here, but I raise my own hand to
signal an example of a success story.

One of the keys is organizing the online data in such
a way as to take advantage of its electronic form.
Portable viewers help, as do having things in
quick-to-load (even if they're large) documents (for
example, hypertext lets you go from document to
document with a single click, which takes about as
much time and effort as turning a page, while Word or
PDF files typically require you to go through the
relatively cumbersome - many seconds! - procedure of
finding and opening a new document).  If you know the
text you're looking for but not the section, don't
bother scrolling, just let the computer seek it out
(usually via Control-F).

Taking a note from Eco, there's also the fact that
most office - and *specifically* office - documents
are more for consultation than for reading.  User
manuals might be read through once or twice, but most
uses will be after that, when some specific fact needs
to be looked up.  In addition, if you're at a computer
(which, with portable viewers - especially
context-sensitive ones, such as augmented reality
goggles for mechanics that recognize what is being
worked on - can almost always be the case) and a
problem comes up, which is easier to get information
from: a help window that, at most, you can access with
a quarter minute's mouse activity, or a book on a
bookshelf you have to stand up, walk over to, look up,
remove, then find the right page in?  Most office
documentation reflects this use, and a growing number
of products now offer electronic documentation in
addition to or instead of paper.

For examples of portable viewers - for instance, on
any system that usually has power anyway, you could
add an almost standalone IR port and button, to beam
standard format documentation to any handheld device
in range with an IR port (like, say, almost every Palm
and most other PDAs being manufactured today), though
a battery backup would be a good idea (say, if you
have to diagnose problems with the power socket).  Or,
if the documentation is simple enough and the device
large enough, "print" the docs in the device's surface
(unpowered devices tend to be ones you're close enough
to read while using anyway).  And there's been many a
meeting where I've tapped out notes on my PDA and
shared them with a select few co-attendees without
interrupting the main speaker (usually, the speaker
was on the other end of a conference call, and the
topic of the moment only concerned a minority of those
physically present at my end).

There's also apparently a bit of a social factor.
Many people complain about trouble reading long
stretches of text on a computer screen, but I can do
so just fine, and I know several people who likewise
do not suffer from this disability.  (One of the
mailing lists I'm subscribed to is about online
fiction, and several of the stories posted to the list
would easily qualify for "novel" status, as opposed to
"novella" or "short story", based on their length.  Of
course, they're posted in chapters, partly for ease of
bookmarking and partly since the list is intended to
review and improve the works before they get too far
off track.)  Although, I have to wonder if part of the
difficulty is in knowing how to read text on a
screen...and it's difficult to quantify that without
knowing what people find difficult.  (Examples of
difficulties I've heard of include contrast and font
size, both of which should be far more controllable in
an electronic display than for paper - but, of course,
one must know how to control these to take advantage
of that.)


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Fri Dec 12 00:55:18 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:55:18 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cherry picking the carcass of a Pun
In-Reply-To: <20031211221642.88392.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <3FD8B8CD.46763894@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211194756.02d61cb8@mail.comcast.net>

At 02:16 PM 12/11/2003 -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> > Get thou to a Punnery.
>
>...and thou must do punnance.

consisting of pundering your punishment, as you listen to 
puntificating.  This retreat is, of course, located in Punnsylvania.

If this is too much for you, you may want to consider punting on the whole 
idea, and directly asking the Puntiff for a special dispunsation.

Sorry.  I'm getting a little punchy....


-- David Lubkin.




From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 12 00:53:41 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:53:41 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Aboriginal avatar
References: <20031212003332.28298.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <017c01c3c04a$64f693a0$c6994a43@texas.net>

Interesting cultural adaptation:


http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,8081461%5E15302%5E%5Enbv%5E,
00.html

Avatar helps heal outback
Nicholas Rothwell
DECEMBER 09, 2003

AN animated software tool developed in Alice Springs is poised to
revolutionise the delivery of health information to remote Aboriginal
communities in central Australia.

The program, created by a young co-ordinator from the Northern Territory
Department of Health, working with a team from Melbourne software house
Inchain, features Uncle - the world's first three-dimensional Aboriginal
avatar, or computer character, complete with guitar.
Medical managers have great hopes that this system will ease the difficult
task of providing crucial knowledge about diseases and treatments to remote
communities, where language is often a barrier to effective health
education.
 [etc]







From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 12 01:16:48 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 17:16:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cherry picking the carcass of a Pun
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211194756.02d61cb8@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <20031212011648.44342.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>

--- David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com> wrote:
> At 02:16 PM 12/11/2003 -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > > Get thou to a Punnery.
> >
> >...and thou must do punnance.
> 
> consisting of pundering your punishment, as you
> listen to 
> puntificating.  This retreat is, of course, located
> in Punnsylvania.
> 
> If this is too much for you, you may want to
> consider punting on the whole 
> idea, and directly asking the Puntiff for a special
> dispunsation.
> 
> Sorry.  I'm getting a little punchy....

Just do what I do: loot & punder.


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Fri Dec 12 02:00:18 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 21:00:18 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENVIRO: Crichton on Nature and Man
In-Reply-To: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDMEJLCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
References: <20031211131155.GY13099@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211204326.03576ec8@mail.comcast.net>

At 07:51 AM 12/11/2003 -0600, Greg Burch wrote:

>The rest is just as good.
>
>   http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html
>
>I highly recommend this.

I was similarly impressed when it was referenced on another list.  I wrote --

>Thanks for posting this; I hadn't seen it.  No ideas or facts I wasn't
>familiar with but I didn't realize he felt this way.  Do you know if he's
>always been this sort of rational skeptic?  It's great to see someone as
>well-known and popular as Crichton saying these things.

but then it was pointed out that he wrote a loony autobiographical book, 
Travels --

>I don't know about Crichton's skepticism or rationality with respect
>to the environment--he has traveled pretty widely and seen a lot of
>stuff--but the words "rational skeptic" are quite possibly the last
>words in the entire lexicon I'd ever consider applying to him.
>
>If you'd read his book "Travels" which documents his real-life
>experiences, you'd see how unbelievably gullible and addle-headed he is
>about so-called "psychic" phenomena.  He believes he can bend spoons
>with his mind.  He says that he thinks almost anyone can do it.
>         :
>What an idiot.  There are several more ridiculous chapters in which
>he talks about how he channels spirits, sees auras, being protected by
>some "bat-like" creature, and how he willingly gets taken in by every
>two-bit psychic and cold reader.  I'd quote some of this but it's so
>idiotic as to be painful.  It seems there is no single bit of flummery
>he won't fall for with alacrity.
>
>The whole book makes you feel sorry for him, really.  The entire
>postscript of his bug is a diatribe against scientists, who he thinks
>are just prejudiced because they can't confirm any of this claptrap.

So I generously allowed that since the book was written in 1987, maybe he'd 
grown since then.  Which led to a pointer to a recent interview, 
http://www.montgomerybell.com/atschool/activities/BellRinger/Issue3.pdf , 
which not only affirms his continued belief in nonsense but shows other 
unpleasant sides.  As I wrote,

>I'm a little confused by the seeming disparity between the rational skeptic
>who gave the speech and the spoon-bender.
>
>I had noticed earlier that while his books often have a veneer of science,
>they often either take on a tinge of There Are Things Man Was Not Meant To
>Know <bwa-ha-ha!> or delve into the supernatural.
>
>Was he was devoted to Christopher Lee movies as a child?
>
>I note in the Bell Ringer interview he admits that he began his writing
>career by plagiarizing George Orwell at Harvard.  Perhaps the unusual tenor
>of the speech is because he cribbed it?
>
>He's clearly able to bamboozle high school kids who don't read widely or
>know how to google.
>
>The interviewer described the ideas expressed in Crichton's sf as "ahead of
>their time, so much so that some people have even called him a
>visionary."  (People who haven't read sf?  His press agent?  But wait --
>this might be accurate.  Did he say anything in Travels about seeing
>visions, perhaps chemically induced?)
>
>Crichton said, "We were talking last night and somebody said something
>about one book where I had specified a motion control camera, and he said
>you know we're just developing that tech now."  This will come as a
>surprise to the fellows at Lucasfilm and Industrial Light & Magic, who
>thought they'd developed it a quarter-century ago.
>
>It's asserted that his software company, FilmTrack, was the first to use
>digitized images in a movie.  I have not researched this claim but it seems
>unlikely, from what I know about the history of computer graphics and image
>processing.
>
>He's credited with being a programmer, again an unlikely achievement.  I
>can easily see how a high-schooler could be confused and think someone who
>owns a software company is necessarily a programmer, but Crichton does not
>correct him.
>
>Bottom-line seems to be that he's been so successful in Hollywood because
>he's a shameless BS artist who believes his own press and takes credit for
>other people's work.  (Which lets him fit right in.)


-- David Lubkin.




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 12 02:28:11 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 18:28:11 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENVIRO: Crichton on Nature and Man
In-Reply-To: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDMEJLCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
Message-ID: <003101c3c057$965fe2e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Normally I don't have much time for Michael Crichton...

I don't either!  He fatally stabbed the sweet and kind
Lucy Knight, gave good-guy Green a brain tumor, very 
nearly killed Luka four times (a mugger, a car accident, 
African revolutionaries and by malaria), nearly killed 
good-guy Carter twice (African revolutionaries and by
the stabbing that slew Knight), almost let Sally Field
perish of a sleeping pill overdose, nearly let Hathaway
die in childbirth, nearly let a drug-crazed addict shoot
Abby (all the while never endangering the reprehensible
Weaver or Corday), and now the cruel bastard drops a 
freaking HELICOPTER on my favorite bad guy Ramano!

I have given this yahoo an hour a week for the last several
years, which is *all* the regular TV that I view since Ally
McBeal finished, but I have HAD it with this Crichton, I 
really have.

}8-[

spike



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Fri Dec 12 02:46:19 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 21:46:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Newtonmas gathering
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031211213517.02e99e20@mail.comcast.net>

On exi-east, we're orchestrating a Boston-area gathering for later in the 
month, similar to the ones at Sasha we all remember fondly.

Probably at a home (I've offered mine, in Southern NH, but it might be 
closer to Cambridge), to facilitate all the activities unavailable or 
frowned on in restaurants.

Honing in on a date now.  We're thinking of something like 12/25, 26, or 
27, to accommodate a proto-extropian from out-of-town.

If you think you might be in the vicinity and would like to come, email me 
or post to exi-east -- especially if you'd like us to take your schedule 
into account.  And crash space is available.

If you can't come but will be in the area another time, let exi-east 
know.  There have been many impromptu gatherings, as when Anders was in town.


-- David Lubkin.




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 12 03:17:39 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:17:39 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <20031211173633.23585.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <004001c3c05e$7f7ca5c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> --- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> > Any comments on Ron Bailey's recent piece on global warming?
> > 
> > How Hot Is It?
> > Global warming creeps along
> > November 19, 2003
> > http://www.reason.com/rb/rb111903.shtml
> 
> Yeah, from the article:
> ...Neither one of those temperature
> increases is going to cause much of a catastrophe." "
> 
> The error in this prediction is that it assumes that temperature
> increases linearly with carbon dioxide levels. This is false...
> Given that even the so called experts are ignoring the diminishing
> returns curve of CO2, it is become more than a hoax, it is to be
> concluded that there is massive negligence if not intentional fraud
> going on...Mike

That's what it looks like to me too, but I have an idea.  As
Harvey pointed out, we should be looking at ways of dealing
with rising sea levels (if they rise).  I suggest doing projects
that will help a bunch of people even if the promised global
warming doesn't happen.  Such as: build huge dams along the
Nile, and send water into an enormous east-west canal that
spans the entire Sahara Desert cutting across Sudan, Chad,
Niger and perhaps ending somewhere in Mali.  It seems to me 
absurd that any of the fresh water in the Nile should be
wastefully dumped into the sea!  Use it to supply that
vast thirsty continent of North Africa.  Then once it becomes
a decent place to live, import a whole bunch of development-
minded people from all over the world, to set up businesses
and factories and such.  We should terraform the Sahara.

The greens talk about how bad it is to waste water, then fail 
to support the building dams to save that water.  If it evaporates 
and then later falls as rain somewhere else in the desert,
that is recycling!  Not only that, but building a mega-
project like that would supply jobs to jillions of
hungry people, and put farms where there is now nothing
but empty desert wasteland.  We should propose diverting most 
of the water in Africa inland, perhaps transporting it
via pipeline, the way we send water from Mono Lake down
to Los Angeles today.

Same with the Murray and the Snowy Rivers of Australia:
divert that valuable fresh water inland to the arid
interior, don't pour it into the sea.

If sea levels rise, we could make enormous inland fresh
water lakes in the Sahara, the Australian interior, the
central valley of Taxifornia, places where there is nooooothing
today.  I would think we could even lower the sea a couple tenths of
a meter from where it is now, to give the Venicians and Dutch
a break.  Why not?

spike




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 12 03:58:10 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:58:10 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDMEJLCBAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
Message-ID: <005101c3c064$28d6bc50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Check this.  Even *I* will admit this launcher built by
the other guys is wicked cool.  Now lets see if she flies.  spike

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0312/10delta4heavy/01.html



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Fri Dec 12 04:09:06 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 21:09:06 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [UASR] Are falling ice balls a product of global
	warming?
Message-ID: <3FD93F62.B842C2C9@mindspring.com>

Are falling ice balls a product of global warming?

< http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03344/249503.stm >

Wednesday, December 10, 2003
By Michael Woods, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

BARCELONA, Spain -- A Spanish-American scientific team will be scanning 
the United States this winter for what might be one of the weirdest 
byproducts of global warming: great balls of ice that fall from the sky.

The baffling phenomenon was first detected in Spain three years ago and 
has since been reported in a number of other countries, including the 
United States. So scientists now plan to monitor in a systematic way what 
they call "megacryometeors" -- or great balls of ice that fall from the 
sky.

"I'm not worried that a block of ice may fall on your head," said Dr. 
Jesus Martinez-Frias of the Center for Astrobiology in Madrid. "I'm 
worried that great blocks of ice are forming where they shouldn't exist."

Ice balls, which generally weigh 25 to 35 pounds but can be much bigger, 
have punched holes in the roofs of houses, smashed through car 
windshields, and whizzed right past people's heads.

Incidents like those may be just the beginning, according to Dr. David 
Travis, who chairs the department of geography and geology at the 
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater.

"If megacryometeor formation is linked to global warming, as we suspect, 
then it is fair to assume that these events may increase in the future," 
Travis said.

Martinez-Frias pioneered research on megacryometeors in January 2000, 
after ice chunks weighing up to 6.6 pounds rained on Spain for 10 days.

At first, scientists thought the phenomenon was unique to Spain. During 
the past three years, however, they've accumulated strong evidence that 
megacryometeors are falling all around the globe.

More than 50 falls have been confirmed, and researchers believe that's a 
small fraction of the actual number, since others may hit unoccupied areas 
or melt before discovery.

Travis said most megacrymeteor falls occur in January, February and March.

Researchers were able to analyze ice samples from the 2000 incidents, 
thanks to witnesses who kept the material cold. Martinez's team quickly 
ruled out obvious explanations.

The ice balls, for instance, were not frozen water from toilets flushed on 
jetliners. The ice contained no human waste and none of the blue 
disinfectant used in airplane toilets. Air traffic control records showed 
that no planes flew over the areas near the ice falls, so the ice had not 
been shed from aircraft wings.

Chunks of debris from a comet? Again, lab tests showed that ice in 
megacryometeors had the distinctive chemical signature of ice in ordinary 
terrestrial hailstones.

Hail forms in the updrafts and downdrafts of thunderstorms. The updrafts 
carry droplets of super-cooled water, which freeze. More droplets hit the 
frozen particles as winds toss them around. The water freezes instantly 
and the hailstone grows, layer by layer.

Most hailstones weigh a fraction of an ounce, with 27 ounces the U. S. 
record.

Megacryometeors show the telltale onionskin layering seen in hailstones. 
They also contain dust particles and air pockets found in hail. But they 
are formed in cloudless skies, a notion that defies research on hail 
formation.

"Scientists are naturally reluctant to say something never can happen," 
said Charles Knight, a hail expert at the University Corporation for 
Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. "But oh, dear. I would be tempted 
to say 'never' on this."

Knight has reviewed scientific papers on megacryometeors, and thinks the 
explanation that cites unusual atmospheric conditions possibly linked to 
global warming, is probably wrong, although he doesn't have a better one.

Global warming involves higher temperatures on Earth's surface, but 
creates colder conditions in the stratosphere, the uppermost layer of the 
atmosphere, according to Travis.

He has linked megacryometeor events to unusual conditions in the 
"tropopause," the boundary between the troposphere (the lower atmosphere) 
and the stratosphere. Located 5 to 9 miles above the surface, the 
tropopause marks the limit of clouds and is important in the development 
of storms.

Global warming may be making the tropopause colder, moister and more 
turbulent, Travis said, creating conditions in which ice crystals grow 
like ordinary hailstones in thunderclouds.

(Michael Woods can be reached at mwoods at nationalpress.com or 
1-202-662-7072.)
Back

Copyright ?1997-2002 PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved.


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 04:30:42 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 20:30:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <004001c3c05e$7f7ca5c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031212043042.26455.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, from the article:
> > ...Neither one of those temperature
> > increases is going to cause much of a catastrophe." "
> > 
> > The error in this prediction is that it assumes that temperature
> > increases linearly with carbon dioxide levels. This is false...
> > Given that even the so called experts are ignoring the diminishing
> > returns curve of CO2, it is become more than a hoax, it is to be
> > concluded that there is massive negligence if not intentional fraud
> > going on...Mike
> 
> That's what it looks like to me too, but I have an idea.  As
> Harvey pointed out, we should be looking at ways of dealing
> with rising sea levels (if they rise).  I suggest doing projects
> that will help a bunch of people even if the promised global
> warming doesn't happen.  

Well, this is always good. It would take, however, a significant
dedication of resources to PR just to get this going. We need to change
the terms of political discourse to make this happen. 

For example, rather than embrace the 'sustainability' religion of the
luddites and the social malthusians, we need to say, "Okay, if warming
is happening, we need to do things about it that build GDP, not
restrict it." Really plug the fact that since Mars also has global
warming, that it can't be blamed on humans or human activities, so,
since it is nature that is at fault, we need to decide if we want to
alter nature and how, or if it is even needed.

The deforestation of north africa is probably the biggest environmental
problem in the world, but is it really a contributor to global warming?
In one sense, it keeps all of north africa clear of clouds, allowing
lots of thermal energy to radiate to space. Clouds, you see, are the
real greenhouse gas, not CO2. The CO2 just helps produce more clouds.
While they do reflect a lot of energy to space, they also trap the
energy that gets through them better than no-clouds. This is why Venus,
despite having a much higher albedo than Earth thanks to its total
cloud cover, manages to remain 800 F in the shade.

A thermal hole similar to North Africa appears with regularity over the
Central Pacific, a hole that the more extreme climate predictions do
not take into account.

Nor do they take into account the thermal isolation of Antarctica. The
circumpolar wind and water currents create a wall against thermal
leakage into Antarctica, and the Katabatic winds, which drive outward
from the center of the continent, are supplied by the stratosphere,
where the air cools itself to space before dropping to the pole and
driving outward to maintain the frozen continents isolation.

This isolation has become ever stronger since it first appeared with
any strength 14 million or so years ago as the seas opened up between
the Tierra Del Fuego and the Antarctic penninsula.

The big problem has been warming in the arctic from increasing cloud
cover. There are natural systems at work that respond to this. THe
thermal conveyor in the north Atlantic has slowed and in some cases
shut down as the thermal differential eased. As this happens, and ocean
currents slow, the pole will cool again and renew the cycle.

Things we can do to help cool the pole would be things that decrease
cloud cover through precipitation. Some say that the decreases in soot
and other particulates in the air as coal and wood heat use is reduced
and other fossil fuel sources develop clean-burn technologies is what
is causing this.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 12 05:48:13 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 21:48:13 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] christmas music
In-Reply-To: <20031211221642.88392.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005901c3c073$8896ebb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


I do not have an extropic answer to this problem:
around christmas, all you hear is christmas music,
for a two solid months, from just before Halloween
until just after New Years, and it drives me CRAZY.
The real problem is that there aren't enough different
songs, so they play the saaaammme ooooonnnnes 
over and over and over and over and every yahoo has a 
slightly different version of the same old thing.  But 
the real problem is that in the shopping malls, they
have instrumental versions, and you can't help
thinking the words!  Just try: you can't do it.  
Try to not think of the words to Jingle Bells next 
time you hear it, and good luck.

The next biggest problem is that the words are
absurd, the ones you cannot help thinking of, since
we are all hypnotized and thought-controlled to think
of those words whenever we hear the tunes, and buy stuff.

Consider the words to the little drummer boy for instance.
OK now, first of all, drums do not go rumpapum pum, they
go rattatat tat.  Secondly, what of the ox and lamb?  What
exactly is included in "keeping time?"  Were the ox and
lamb gently swaying to the beat?  Friends, that kinda thing
creeps me out.  I form a mental image like something
outta Hitchcock.  So it is a bit unclear at best, but in
any case, keeping time is not something I want to see a
bunch of goddam livestock doing anywhere near a newborn.
He would have nightmares until well past adolescence.

And that bit about making a snowman and pretending he
Parson Brown.  They are holding a running conversation with 
a pile of SNOW, fer cryin out loud.  Someone has put 
angel dust in their stockings you can be sure.

spike






From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec 12 07:12:21 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:12:21 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
In-Reply-To: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868D3@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGOEIOCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

I agree, and I am sure smart paper will be available soon (say three to five years to complete tech development, plus a few years for the adaptation of the market). Here is a sign that things are happening:

>From a recent (Dec. 10, 2003) Gyricon press release: Gyricon LLC has announced release of its first commercial application of SmartPaper technology: SyncroSign Message Board. The product launch took place at the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), a subsidiary of Xerox Corporation, where SmartPaper technology was developed.
SyncroSign Message Board is a battery-powered Wi-Fi network sign incorporating SmartPaper technology, a reusable display medium. A key feature of the sign is that it requires no power to display an image. Power is required only when the sign content changes, enabling the sign's long battery life. Messages and sign content can be updated wirelessly to the SyncroSign Message Board using Gyricon's SignSync software. The software enables remote message scheduling, the management of sign content, and is scalable from the deployment of an individual sign to a large enterprise installation.
"SyncroSign Message Board is truly next generation wireless signage," said Gyricon's President and CEO Bryan Lubel. "This is a simple, yet powerful application of SmartPaper. It is a great example of how a new technology can be used to dramatically change the way we approach a common market application. Through our market research and field testing, we have identified a huge potential market across many industries." While working at the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), inventor Nick Sheridon developed the Gyricon technology. The basis of Gyricon's products is a paper-like alternative to liquid-crystal display screens and cathode-ray tubes. SmartPaper is a thin, flexible medium that weighs only a few ounces. Made of millions of tiny bi-chromal wax beads encased in a flexible sheet of elastomer, Gyricon's SmartPaper is easy to read, uses less power and is more portable than conventional displays.
SmartPaper is reusable display material that has many of the properties of traditional paper: stores an image - viewed in reflective light - has a wide viewing angle - flexible - relatively inexpensive - Unlike regular paper, however, it is electrically writeable and erasable and is the main media component of our eSignage solutions. Produced in a roll, like conventional paper, SmartPaper is actually two sheets of thin plastic with millions of tiny bichromal beads embedded in between. Each bead is smaller than a grain of sand and has a different color on each half or "side". The hemispheres are also charged differently (i.e. positive or negative). SmartPaper beads reside in their own cavities within the flexible sheet of material, so that under the influence of a voltage applied to the surface, they rotate to present one side or the other to the viewer. This image stays in place until a new voltage pattern is applied, which erases the previous image and generates a new one.
http://www.gyricon.com/pr_031210.asp

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Emlyn
O'regan
Sent: viernes, 12 de diciembre de 2003 0:30
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Umberto Eco: In Defense of Vegetal Memory
Anyway, enough blathering. Electronic books will eventually kill of static
books, but we'll need smart paper before that happens. And then, no one will
miss the old books, because we wont be replacing them with something shitty,
we'll be replacing them with something just like they were, but better.



From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec 12 07:21:26 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:21:26 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Thinking Beyond Tomorrow
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGEEIPCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From The Scientist: Research scientists, venture capitalists, patent
attorneys, even a biomedical professor-turned-mystery author offered their
opinions on what will be the hottest new technologies five years hence.
Their responses varied considerably. Some say bioterrorism is an imminent
threat, and some say it's an improbable one. Some say proteomics will
finally bear fruit, while others say it won't. Neural cartographers,
structural biologists, and nanotechnologists will witness advances, they
say.
Just as the Human Genome Project reinvented the way scientists view and
practice biology, systems biology and cellomics will become the dominant
research area, as we try to understand how all this information fits
together. Funding agencies evidently agree. In November, the NSF announced
it would spend $4 million in FY 2004 for "Quantitative Systems
Biotechnology." And last year, the National Institutes of Health launched an
initiative to create Centers of Excellence in Complex Biomedical Systems
Research. Indeed, because complex biological circuits control everything
from organ development to cancer, systems biology research could have a
profound impact on the future of human health and medicine[Giu1i0 Pri5c0] .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031212/90cb0ce4/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Fri Dec 12 09:08:59 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:08:59 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] christmas music ("Vilt" thing)
Message-ID: <p05100300bbff34c8684f@[150.146.134.133]>

Spike:

>I do not have an extropic answer to this problem:
>around christmas, all you hear is christmas music,
>for a two solid months, from just before Halloween
>until just after New Years, and it drives me CRAZY.

[...]
>Someone has put  angel dust in their stockings you
>can be sure.


*** 21 Days until Comet Wild 2 ***

http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/

Perhaps this song will help. Sing along ...


Amara

From: Mark Gingrich <grinch at rahul.net>
Subject: Re: STARDUST Successfully Launched
Date: 1999/02/08


Ron Baalke reported:

>       Stardust is on a flight path that will deliver it to Comet
>  Wild-2 (pronounced "Vilt-2") on January 2, 2004.  The spacecraft
>  will gather particles flying off the nucleus of the comet.  ...


In celebration of today's successful launch of the Stardust probe,
and to help spread the word as to the correct pronunciation of Comet
Wild ("Vilt," as Ron Baalke reminds us above), we invite all of you
to sing the following to the 1960s tune _Wild Thing_, by The Troggs.

     "Vilt" thing,
     We'll make your dust cling.
     You make this aerogel filthy.
     I said "Vilt" thing.

     "Vilt" thing, we think you're dusty.
     But we wanna know for sure.
     Are your particulates Brownlee?
     Oooh, you're dusty.

     "Vilt" thing,
     We'll make your dust cling.
     You make this aerogel filthy.
     I said "Vilt" thing.

     "Vilt" thing, we think you're icy.
     But we wanna know for sure.
     Does your dust hold volatiles?
     Brrrr, you're icy.

-- 


-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"My, this game does teach new words!" --Hobbes


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 13:00:37 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 05:00:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120447380.32179-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Some of you may have noticed the posting of the chimpanzee genome
and the results of some chimp-human gene comparisons.  The short
summary is that it looks like humans have been on an evolutionary
fast track over the last 100,000 years.

NY Times summary:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/12/science/12GENO.html?pagewanted=print

Brief mention in Science (for those with subscriptions...):
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/302/5652/1876a

Article:
Inferring Nonneutral Evolution from Human-Chimp-Mouse Orthologous Gene Trios
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/302/5652/1960

Given the similarities between the genomes its going to make
being a creationist just a little bit harder...  :-)

Robert





From amara at amara.com  Fri Dec 12 12:34:32 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:34:32 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
Message-ID: <p05100300bbff65cff283@[150.146.134.133]>

Spike:
>Most natural systems have multiple cycles.  The sun
>"rings" with localized areas oscillating at a frequency
>of a few hours.

Maybe you mean five minutes? That is the strongest mode.

http://physics.usc.edu/solar/project.html

Details of the physics here:

http://soi.stanford.edu/results/heliowhat.html

-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"The best presents don't come in boxes." --Hobbes


From amara at amara.com  Fri Dec 12 12:42:53 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:42:53 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
Message-ID: <p05100301bbff679e5f7c@[150.146.134.133]>

Harvey:
>I would love to see working groups formed codify current methods into FAQs,
>how-to documents, and support infrastructures for:
>- life-extension diets
>- long-term investing
>- IT security
>- political activism
>- starting your own business
>- brainstorming solutions
>- developing AI
>- developing nanotech


What is your suggested funding source? Many people here have families and
need to work for a living. (For me, at least three jobs).

Amara

-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." --Anais Nin



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 13:50:26 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 05:50:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <3FD43AC1.1010501@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120548570.892-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Max M wrote:

> How can you not win, if you can clearly show that it is scary for the kids.
[snip]

I'm not sure this is the right place to add to the discussion,
but I thought it would be useful for the archives to have a
pointer to the NY Times commentary...

December 9, 2003
Yes, They Can! No, They Can't: Charges Fly in Nanobot Debate
By KENNETH CHANG
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/09/science/09FEUD.html?pagewanted=print

R.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 12 14:19:32 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 06:19:32 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120447380.32179-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <001001c3c0ba$f6beb810$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
> 
> Some of you may have noticed the posting of the chimpanzee genome
> and the results of some chimp-human gene comparisons.  The short
> summary is that it looks like humans have been on an evolutionary
> fast track over the last 100,000 years.
> 
> NY Times summary:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/12/science/12GENO.html?pagewanted=print
> 


AHA!  Just what I thought: humans might evolve faster than
other beasts because the mechanism of mate selection is
particularly effective when the beasts in question sit
around and share ideas about which potential mates are the 
most desireable ones.  This explains why humans have gone
open loop while the other beasts are evidently in 
equilibrium: gene expression is an extension 
of meme expression.

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 12 14:28:43 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 06:28:43 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] christmas music ("Vilt" thing)
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bbff34c8684f@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <001101c3c0bc$3ec41b90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Spike:
> [...]
> >Someone has put  angel dust in their stockings you
> >can be sure.
> 
> 
> Perhaps this song will help. Sing along ...
> 
> 
> Amara
...
> 
>      "Vilt" thing,
>      We'll make your dust cling.
>      You make this aerogel filthy.
>      I said "Vilt" thing.
> 
Amara that's it!  Great idea: we substitute the most egregious 
verses with ones more acceptable and extropic.

Consider this guy, who is coming to town:

...Sees you when you're sleeping,
He knows when you're awake...


Well, how creepy is that?  Does he see you in
the shower?  If he has already penetrated the
bedroom, what's stopping him?

So how about:

He sees you when you're sleeping
He knows when you're awake
The elves call him Tom Peeping
Wont give David Brin a break...

spike



From alex at ramonsky.com  Fri Dec 12 14:55:55 2003
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:55:55 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
References: <p05100301bbff679e5f7c@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <3FD9D6FB.2020706@ramonsky.com>

Hey, if you folks could learn to play a couple of instruments, we could 
be the first working group supporting a working group...give em some of 
that good old rock & roll musical activism??
-Bags I playing the piano...Groovy baby, yeah...   :  )
AR

Amara Graps wrote:

> Harvey:
>
>> I would love to see working groups formed codify current methods into 
>> FAQs,
>> how-to documents, and support infrastructures for:
>> - life-extension diets
>> - long-term investing
>> - IT security
>> - political activism
>> - starting your own business
>> - brainstorming solutions
>> - developing AI
>> - developing nanotech
>
>
>
> What is your suggested funding source? Many people here have families and
> need to work for a living. (For me, at least three jobs).
>
> Amara
>





From extropy at unreasonable.com  Fri Dec 12 15:02:44 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 10:02:44 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] christmas music
In-Reply-To: <005901c3c073$8896ebb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <20031211221642.88392.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031212092320.02f47eb8@mail.comcast.net>

At 09:48 PM 12/11/2003 -0800, Spike wrote:

>I do not have an extropic answer to this problem:
>around christmas, all you hear is christmas music,
>for a two solid months, from just before Halloween
>until just after New Years, and it drives me CRAZY.

There are two facets to your problem.  The first is that we need our own 
set of Newtonmas songs as a counter-offense to drive THEM crazy.  We do, 
after a fashion.

The primary liturgy is that of the not-late, great Tom Lehrer.  His psalms 
were taught to my parents as young postulants in the Gomorrah of Cambridge, 
who taught them to me, as I then taught them to my daughter -- an unbroken 
chain of meme propagation to carry them to the Singularity.

Immerse yourself in the simple grace of the parable of The Masochism Tango 
and of the credo "Don't write naughty words on walls if you can't spell."

In Lehrer's wake, we have the lesser profits of Monty and the Pythons and 
more-recent candidates for canonization (in full support of Second 
Amendment rights).

>The real problem is that there aren't enough different
>songs, so they play the saaaammme ooooonnnnes
>over and over and over and over and every yahoo has a
>slightly different version of the same old thing.  But
>the real problem is that in the shopping malls, they
>have instrumental versions, and you can't help
>thinking the words!  Just try: you can't do it.
>Try to not think of the words to Jingle Bells next
>time you hear it, and good luck.

This is the second facet.  Young Jedi, you must learn the power of the filk 
if you are to shield yourself from the Empire's death rays:

Deck us all with Boston Charlie
Walla Walla Wash and Kalamazoo
Nora's freezing on the trolley
Swaller dollar cauliflower allergaroo
Don we now archaic barrels,
Hula Boola Pensa Cola, Louisville Lou
Molly Prolly don't love Harold
Walla Walla Wash and Kalamazoo


-- David Lubkin.




From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Dec 12 14:36:57 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:36:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312110610070.6887-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <20031211131155.GY13099@leitl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312110610070.6887-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031212143656.GS13099@leitl.org>

On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 06:15:35AM -0800, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> Hmmmm....  If that were true then one should not be able to make
> buckyballs or buckytubes (as I believe they have strained bonds).

Small strained (even highly so) cages are no problem (prismane, cubane,
dodecahedrane). If you look at the principles in their synthesis:

	http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/local/projects/b_muir/Cubane/Cubanepro/Synthesis.html

you'll see everything occurs on a local scale. This doesn't
apply for the fine-motion controller. (I've just have taken a
look at it again): you can easily make the subsystems, albeit
not in a great yield. It's doable to get annelated rings to
self-assemble in a pi-complex, and you can get a nanotube
into the lumen, and fixate the ends (not with diamondoid
plates, though, and you can't get SWNT monofragmented by
a given size). There's not at all much strain present in the
structure, but all of it prevents ligation into final shape,
so it won't happen in a stochastic synthesis.

I can go into more detail, but it's not required, as no
one assumes organic synthesis will be used for bootstrap
for components of this complexity. Engineered enzymes
reach much further, but we can't de novo design enzymes
for specific tasks yet. 

> Cubane is perhaps the ultimate example and it is produced using
> chemical synthesis.

I'm wasn't talking about merely strained molecules.
 
> I did not say that one would have a high yield -- since some
> parts of nanotech development may be a bootstrapping process
> you may only need one copy of something.
> 
> A related question -- do you know of a program/utility that
> can show the degree of bond strain?

Not something you just can plug a random structure into,
and expect meaningful values. It is possible to estimate
strain for a fine motion controller, but it's not the absolute
values which make the synthesis prohibitive.

If this still interests you, there are problems and references
aplenty at

	http://chemistry.gsu.edu/glactone/modeling/Magid/strain/strain.html

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031212/d0f0294b/attachment.bin>

From naddy at mips.inka.de  Fri Dec 12 14:55:12 2003
From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:55:12 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
References: <20031209143327.GY4452@leitl.org>
	<000801c3be83$2c2bff60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <brcksg$1lvm$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>

Harvey Newstrom <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> This is a big problem with Extropians and Transhumanists in general.  All we
> seem to have is a discussion group with armchair quarterbacks and amateurs
> arguing over star-trek science.  Where are all the real experts in our
> favorite fields?  I feel like I am beating a dead horse, but it has to be
> said.

It's a straightforward case of self-selection.  As Eugen has pointed
out, extended participation in online fora is usually incompatible
with getting things done.  Those people actually working on >H goals
are, well, busy working.  Those that remain here (and likely most
that were attracted in the first place) are those that don't offer
anything but talk.

I'm still as much a transhumanist as I was when I first heard about
it, but over the last few years I have become severely disillusioned
about the extropian and transhumanist _movement_.  It's a fanboy
club that exerts no influence whatsoever on actual technological
or social development and that will probably be overrun in the
medium term by the progress happening in the real world.

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy at mips.inka.de


From naddy at mips.inka.de  Fri Dec 12 15:05:42 2003
From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:05:42 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Digital divide summit
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEBLCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <brclg6$1lvm$2@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> But some nations have called for control of the internet to be
> handed to an international body such as the UN's International
> Telecommunications Union (ITU).

Oh, the irony.  Does anybody remember the times when ISO and ITU
dismissed this whole Internet toy thing out of hand because it
wasn't based on "proper" international standards and besides it
wasn't them who had come up with it?  Nowadays they want to be in
charge of the Internet and make standards for it.

Sorry, just the reminiscences of an old man.

(Don't take the above as a statement that I'm opposed to putting
the ITU in charge.  It's just a hilarious perversion of their
original attitude.)

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy at mips.inka.de


From naddy at mips.inka.de  Fri Dec 12 15:19:11 2003
From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:19:11 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: christmas music
References: <20031211221642.88392.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>
	<005901c3c073$8896ebb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <brcm9f$1mi3$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>

Spike <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> I do not have an extropic answer to this problem:
> around christmas, all you hear is christmas music,
> for a two solid months, from just before Halloween
> until just after New Years, and it drives me CRAZY.

Right now, I'm tuned in to Metal Express Radio, Norway, via a
Shoutcast.com stream, and it doesn't sound much like Christmas.
More like Iron Maiden in their usual mood, actually.

When I got my ADSL line my consumption of broadcast radio collapsed
to little more than nothing.  There's a lot of free Internet radio
out there, with all kinds of music, and few or no commercials, idiot
DJs, or inane call-in games that plague broadcast radio.

> Consider the words to the little drummer boy for instance.

There's a version by Joan Jett and the Blackhearts.  Never listened
to the lyrics, I'm afraid.

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy at mips.inka.de


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 12 16:14:26 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:14:26 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ARTS:  Comic Book 
Message-ID: <48270-2200312512161426501@M2W042.mail2web.com>

Wow!  Nice, very nice.

I'd like to see Ross's work exhibited next to Anders's designs at the
upcoming Museum of Transhumanist Arts 2004 Exhibition. 

"(CNN) -- If you know a comic book fan, your gift shopping is done. Simply
put a bow on "Mythology: The DC Comics Art of Alex Ross" and you will earn
squeals of delight and undying appreciation." 

http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/books/12/11/review.mythology/index.html

Natasha

http://www.transhumanist.biz/exhibit2004.htm





--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 16:21:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:21:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [UASR] Are falling ice balls a product of
	global warming?
In-Reply-To: <3FD93F62.B842C2C9@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031212162114.95467.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Are falling ice balls a product of global warming?
> 
> < http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/03344/249503.stm >
> 
> Wednesday, December 10, 2003
> By Michael Woods, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
> 
> BARCELONA, Spain -- A Spanish-American scientific team will be
> scanning 
> the United States this winter for what might be one of the weirdest 
> byproducts of global warming: great balls of ice that fall from the
> sky.

And nobody thought to check for passing airliners....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 16:28:56 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:28:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <005101c3c064$28d6bc50$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031212162856.24582.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Check this.  Even *I* will admit this launcher built by
> the other guys is wicked cool.  Now lets see if she flies.  spike
> 
> http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0312/10delta4heavy/01.html

"The Delta IV Heavy is the newest and largest expendable launch vehicle
in the United States and is the largest of the Boeing Delta family of
launch vehicles. It is configured with three common booster cores
(CBCs) joined together and can lift up to 13,130 kg (28,950 pounds) to
geosynchronous transfer orbit. When fully stacked with a payload on
board, the vehicle will measure 71.7 meters (235 feet) in height. A
five-meter upper stage sits on top of the core CBC, and has the
capability of carrying either single or multiple payloads."

This is a sweet rocket. I'll notice that the center booster is common
construction to the two side boosters. Are these all solid rockets? If
so, what does this say for the future of liquid propulsion??? I've
thought for a long time that the logic of hydrogen/oxygen or other
liquid fuels was a bit screwy, that they mandated rather huge vehicles
that resulted in insane mass ratios.

This booster competes directly with the space shuttle. That cargo size
is for GEOSYNCH!!!!




=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 16:37:59 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:37:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120548570.892-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031212163759.29603.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Max M wrote:
> 
> > How can you not win, if you can clearly show that it is scary for
> the kids.
> [snip]
> 
> I'm not sure this is the right place to add to the discussion,
> but I thought it would be useful for the archives to have a
> pointer to the NY Times commentary...
> 
> December 9, 2003
> Yes, They Can! No, They Can't: Charges Fly in Nanobot Debate
> By KENNETH CHANG
>
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/09/science/09FEUD.html?pagewanted=print


Yes, after all, Smalley is doing it for the kids, he has good
intentions, so anybody who disagrees is a meany and a threat to
national security.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 16:43:27 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Being productive [was: Encryption revolution]
In-Reply-To: <brcksg$1lvm$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120827290.4474-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Christian Weisgerber wrote:

> It's a fanboy
> club that exerts no influence whatsoever on actual technological
> or social development and that will probably be overrun in the
> medium term by the progress happening in the real world.

I think that is a little harsh.  Have you read the Spike?
Do you know Ray Kurzweil is writing a book about the onset
of the Singularity (which is drawing on some Extropic discussions).
Mez is writing a book as well.  Brett is very active in the
whole cloning area.  People such as Natasha, Anders and myself are
writing papers and speaking at (or attempting to speak at)
various conferences.  Have you taken a look at the discussion
at NanoAtHome.org?  [Its moving slowly but it *is* moving.]
I was at the WTA conference this year and found the discussions
quite stimulating -- my impression was that many of the people
there found it quite educational.  People like Mike Lorry are
experimenting with alternative political architectures.  Robin
tried to produce a grand experiment involving idea futures only
to suffer setbacks.  etc.

Most of the "real world" -- perhaps close to 6 billion people
are focused on day-to-day survival.  There are only a few
thousand transhumanists/extropians who understand to some
extent where things may be going and take the opportunity
to discuss how to steer it productively.  One might look at
it like a sled racing down a snowy slope just barely
under ones control.

Robert




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 16:49:50 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:49:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [UASR] Are falling ice balls a product of
	global warming?
In-Reply-To: <3FD93F62.B842C2C9@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031212164950.33750.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Are falling ice balls a product of global warming?
> 
> The ice balls, for instance, were not frozen water from toilets
> flushed on 
> jetliners. The ice contained no human waste and none of the blue 
> disinfectant used in airplane toilets. Air traffic control records
> showed 
> that no planes flew over the areas near the ice falls, so the ice had
> not been shed from aircraft wings.
> 
> Chunks of debris from a comet? Again, lab tests showed that ice in 
> megacryometeors had the distinctive chemical signature of ice in
> ordinary terrestrial hailstones.

The size of these ice balls is not unusual. Any perusal of a Guiness
Book of World Records will show that large hailstones have been
reported on a regular basis for many years dating back to the 19th
century and earlier. Forte also reported similar events.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 16:51:03 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:51:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <20031212162856.24582.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120845120.4474-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> ... joined together and can lift up to 13,130 kg (28,950 pounds) to
> geosynchronous transfer orbit. [snip]
...
> This booster competes directly with the space shuttle. That cargo size
> is for GEOSYNCH!!!!

This is probably a question for Mike or Spike -- I'm curious does one
gain anything by sacrificing time-to-geosync?  We have the example
now of the Europeans taking the slow boat to the moon with Smart-1
using ion propulsion -- does one gain anything by using ion propulsion
to get sats from GTO into GSO even though it might take months instead
of hours?  (Xenon is certainly heavier than other solid or liquid fuels...)
Are ion engines inherently lighter or heavier than traditional rocket engines?

Robert




From joe at barrera.org  Fri Dec 12 16:52:12 2003
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:52:12 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [UASR] Are falling ice balls a product of
	global warming?
In-Reply-To: <20031212162114.95467.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031212162114.95467.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FD9F23C.802@barrera.org>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>And nobody thought to check for passing airliners....
>  
>
Read more of the article.

>  The ice balls, for instance, were not frozen water from toilets
>  flushed on jetliners. The ice contained no human waste and none of
>  the blue disinfectant used in airplane toilets. Air traffic control
>  records showed that no planes flew over the areas near the ice falls,
>  so the ice had not been shed from aircraft wings.

- Joe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031212/bdf0964d/attachment.html>

From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 17:01:08 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:01:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031212143656.GS13099@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120851500.4474-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> There's not at all much strain present in the
> structure, but all of it prevents ligation into final shape,
> so it won't happen in a stochastic synthesis.

I'm aware of that.  But I can think of two different
approaches.  (a) attach the rotating wheels to the arms
which are then attached to the head, then ligate the
wheels together so its a fixed structure, then see
if one can get either random or directed activity
to fit the shaft through the wheels, then break the
ligation between the wheels; (b) leave the wheels
free but produce an antibody derived molecule that
holds the wheels in proper alignment to allow the
shaft to be threaded through them.

A third approach might be to synthesize the wheels
attached to the shaft and then to break those links.

I didn't say it would be easy or the yield would be
high -- but an electron micrograph of the FMC would
go a long way towards forcing Smalley to eat crow.

It would also force chemists to wake up and realize
that they just *might* have the tools that would
allow them to design and build a complete assembler
arm.  It will not be easy -- but the payoff would be
so sweet!

Robert




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 17:04:12 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:04:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] christmas music ("Vilt" thing)
In-Reply-To: <001101c3c0bc$3ec41b90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031212170412.38676.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Consider this guy, who is coming to town:
> 
> ...Sees you when you're sleeping,
> He knows when you're awake...
> 
> 
> Well, how creepy is that?  Does he see you in
> the shower?  If he has already penetrated the
> bedroom, what's stopping him?
> 
> So how about:
> 
> He sees you when you're sleeping
> He knows when you're awake
> The elves call him Tom Peeping
> Wont give David Brin a break...

You better not shoot,
you better not crime,
you better not doubt,
I'm tellin' you why,
Brit Big Brother's watching your town...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 17:11:43 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 09:11:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120845120.4474-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031212171143.26299.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > ... joined together and can lift up to 13,130 kg (28,950 pounds) to
> > geosynchronous transfer orbit. [snip]
> ...
> > This booster competes directly with the space shuttle. That cargo
> size
> > is for GEOSYNCH!!!!
> 
> This is probably a question for Mike or Spike -- I'm curious does one
> gain anything by sacrificing time-to-geosync?  We have the example
> now of the Europeans taking the slow boat to the moon with Smart-1
> using ion propulsion -- does one gain anything by using ion
> propulsion
> to get sats from GTO into GSO even though it might take months
> instead
> of hours?  (Xenon is certainly heavier than other solid or liquid
> fuels...)
> Are ion engines inherently lighter or heavier than traditional rocket
> engines?

They are lighter, but the real advantage is that you don't need as much
fuel. The electricity from your solar panels or other power sources
accellerates less fuel to a higher velocity, so your isp is several
times higher, at a minimum, than chemical rockets. So long as you don't
have any people on board with limited supplies, you can save lots of
fuel mass by taking your time with an ion engine.

 Time is the trade off only because ion and plasma engine thrust levels
are extremely low, from thousandths of pounds up to fractions of pounds
with ion engines, to several pounds of thrust with the biggest plasma
thrusters. Plasma engines have higher thrust but lower isp than ion
engines.

By saving fuel, you can obviously either carry more science on board,
or you can use a smaller booster to get into space. Either way gets you
more science for the buck.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Fri Dec 12 18:12:37 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:12:37 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Being productive [was: Encryption revolution]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120827290.4474-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <022301c3c0db$8d1832d0$757b6951@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 4:43 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Being productive [was: Encryption revolution]


>
>
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>
> > It's a fanboy
> > club that exerts no influence whatsoever on actual technological
> > or social development and that will probably be overrun in the
> > medium term by the progress happening in the real world.
>
> I think that is a little harsh.  Have you read the Spike?
> Do you know Ray Kurzweil is writing a book about the onset
> of the Singularity (which is drawing on some Extropic discussions).
> Mez is writing a book as well.  Brett is very active in the
> whole cloning area.  People such as Natasha, Anders and myself are
> writing papers and speaking at (or attempting to speak at)
> various conferences.  Have you taken a look at the discussion
> at NanoAtHome.org?  [Its moving slowly but it *is* moving.]
...

Not to mention the Consensus which will be fielding its first few candidates
in Britain's local elections next year.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 18:24:09 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:24:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120447380.32179-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <004f01c3c0dd$26c891d0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Here is a perfect example of non-exponential progress that I was arguing a
few weeks ago.  Advancing science does not always advance our goals.

In this case, the predicted dates for understanding the differences between
chimps and humans will have to be pushed back due to all the added
complexity we have just discovered.  Even when applying Moore's law to
scientific progress (which is dubious), exponential growth in science does
not translate into exponential acceleration of future predictions.
Sometimes the list of things we don't know grows faster than the list of
things we do know.

Specifically, there are a lot more genes different between chimps and humans
than we thought.  Furthermore, many of the old genes that we thought were
the same have apparently taken on new functions in humans.  Also, the tests
were used in this research turned out to only work about 25% of the time.
Even the greatly expanded estimates of complexity may be greatly under
measured.  The genetic differences between chimps and humans are a magnitude
more complex and a magnitude less understood than we thought before this
research.  Those complexities may expand another magnitude before we are
finished.

Instead of being a major step toward completing our understanding, this
research opens up a whole array of unsuspected areas of new research that
will have to be undertaken.

From
<http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/12/science/12GENO.html?pagewanted=print>:
> Biologists have long supposed that if they could identify the genes that
> changed in the evolutionary lineage leading from the joint ancestor to
> people, they would understand the genetic basis of how people differ from
> chimps and, hence, the essence of what makes humans human.
>
> Because the sequence of DNA units in the two genomes is 98.8 percent
> identical, it seemed that just a handful of genes might define the essence
> of humanity.
[....]
> But the process of transforming the joint human-chimp ancestor, who was
> probably a very chimpanzeelike creature, into a human seems much more
> complicated in light of the new analysis.
[....]
> the differences at the genetic level need to be checked in terms
> of biology. Only in rare cases like that of FOXP2 is the link between
> the accelerated genes and actual biology more than a guess at present. 

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 12 19:00:56 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:00:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <004f01c3c0dd$26c891d0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031212190056.11911.qmail@web80403.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> Advancing science does not always
> advance our goals.
> 
> In this case, the predicted dates for understanding
> the differences between
> chimps and humans will have to be pushed back due to
> all the added
> complexity we have just discovered.

Be careful how you phrase that.  Some people
(hopefully
few who grok Extropian ideals, but perhaps some who
wish to do so but don't quite understand yet) might
misunderstand, and think that you're saying this type
of research actively goes against our goals, in the
same sense that, say, stem cell research undermines
certain religious memes.  Perhaps a better way to put
it would be, "Advancing science sometimes shows us
that
we are not as close to our goals as we thought we
were."

It's usually a good idea to always be careful to say
what you mean, and to mean what you say.


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 19:47:26 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 14:47:26 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <brcksg$1lvm$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
Message-ID: <009001c3c0e8$c8310fb0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Christian Weisgerber wrote,
> It's a straightforward case of self-selection.  As Eugen has 
> pointed out, extended participation in online fora is usually 
> incompatible with getting things done.  Those people actually 
> working on >H goals are, well, busy working.  Those that 
> remain here (and likely most that were attracted in the first 
> place) are those that don't offer anything but talk.

This is a historical problem.  People who actually get busy doing real work
tend to drop off the list.  People who don't have anything better to do tend
to appear here.  Many people on the edge, tend to pop in and out over the
years.  Many of the movers and shakers from the original movements have gone
off to pursue their own agendas elsewhere.  Somehow, none of these agendas
ever actually get implemented here.

> I'm still as much a transhumanist as I was when I first heard 
> about it, but over the last few years I have become severely 
> disillusioned about the extropian and transhumanist 
> _movement_.  It's a fanboy club that exerts no influence 
> whatsoever on actual technological or social development and 
> that will probably be overrun in the medium term by the 
> progress happening in the real world.

This is 100% true.  I know people will deny it, because it's no fun
admitting it.  But most of the examples of people doing things involve
"fanboy" activities.  Creating websites about this stuff, writing books
about this stuff, holding chats about this stuff, holding conferences about
this stuff, etc.  All of it is just talk.  It used to be that nobody was
talking about this stuff except us.  But in this millennium, everybody is
talking about it.  Sadly, our books aren't best sellers.  Our websites
aren't insanely popular.  Our leaders aren't on the cutting edge of any
technologies.  We aren't inventing new things.  We are just creatively
imagining what might be.  While the companies actually working in these
fields and the governments actually guiding these advancements are paying
little if any attention to us.

We are not only on the fringe of humanity, but we are on the fringe of
transhumanity.  We are not centrally involved in real nanotech, AI,
robotics, cloning, and immortality.  All of our organizations are fans of
these technologies, but not developers of these technologies.  Even our
organizations that claim to be developers of technologies are little more
than clearinghouses for other people's news releases about other people's
advances.

The future is not being invented here!  And we will never fix this problem
until enough of us recognize the truth.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 19:59:55 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:59:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <004f01c3c0dd$26c891d0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121144230.7853-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> The genetic differences between chimps and humans are a magnitude
> more complex and a magnitude less understood than we thought before this
> research.  Those complexities may expand another magnitude before we are
> finished.

Harvey, I'm not understanding this assertion.  There was already a very
large debate in the literature with respect to human-chimp similarity.
The NY Times article says 98.8% and I think that is *HIGHLY* questionable.
The number I've more commonly seen is 98% and even that has been open to
some debate.

Don't believe everything in the NY Times as a hand-me-down from god.
They may make mistakes and/or bias their opinions.  (So long as they
have a source -- they may not choose to evaluate how *good* the source
is in reality.)

As the article points out -- there are differences.  Now we can cite
what many of the differences are.  However it is going to take a lot
of additional work to determine what the functional aspects of those
differences are.  Just because you change an amino acid in a protein
doesn't mean the general function of that protein will change.  That
requires careful biochemical studies to determine.  Any biochemist
or molecular biologist knows that.  You need to know the K_m, K_cat,
folding time, temperature stability, etc. to know the precise
behavior of a protein -- all of those could impact a difference
between chimpanzees and humans.  So any serious scientists have
not underestimated the studies which will be required to tease
out the significant differences.  At the same time our ability
to conduct these studies -- particularly the structural studies --
is increasing significantly.  So we will get the answers faster
than we would have a few years ago.

If you are commenting on the fact that 2D comparisons are insufficient
then I agree with you (as would most serious scientists).

Robert




From dirk at neopax.com  Fri Dec 12 20:07:22 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 20:07:22 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
References: <009001c3c0e8$c8310fb0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <028401c3c0eb$8f2e0030$757b6951@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 7:47 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution


> Christian Weisgerber wrote,
> > It's a straightforward case of self-selection.  As Eugen has
> > pointed out, extended participation in online fora is usually
> > incompatible with getting things done.  Those people actually
> > working on >H goals are, well, busy working.  Those that
> > remain here (and likely most that were attracted in the first
> > place) are those that don't offer anything but talk.
>
> This is a historical problem.  People who actually get busy doing real
work
> tend to drop off the list.  People who don't have anything better to do
tend
> to appear here.  Many people on the edge, tend to pop in and out over the
> years.  Many of the movers and shakers from the original movements have
gone
> off to pursue their own agendas elsewhere.  Somehow, none of these agendas
> ever actually get implemented here.
>
> > I'm still as much a transhumanist as I was when I first heard
> > about it, but over the last few years I have become severely
> > disillusioned about the extropian and transhumanist
> > _movement_.  It's a fanboy club that exerts no influence
> > whatsoever on actual technological or social development and
> > that will probably be overrun in the medium term by the
> > progress happening in the real world.
>
> This is 100% true.  I know people will deny it, because it's no fun
> admitting it.  But most of the examples of people doing things involve
> "fanboy" activities.  Creating websites about this stuff, writing books
> about this stuff, holding chats about this stuff, holding conferences
about
> this stuff, etc.  All of it is just talk.  It used to be that nobody was
> talking about this stuff except us.  But in this millennium, everybody is
> talking about it.  Sadly, our books aren't best sellers.  Our websites
> aren't insanely popular.  Our leaders aren't on the cutting edge of any
> technologies.  We aren't inventing new things.  We are just creatively
> imagining what might be.  While the companies actually working in these
> fields and the governments actually guiding these advancements are paying
> little if any attention to us.
>
> We are not only on the fringe of humanity, but we are on the fringe of
> transhumanity.  We are not centrally involved in real nanotech, AI,
> robotics, cloning, and immortality.  All of our organizations are fans of
> these technologies, but not developers of these technologies.  Even our
> organizations that claim to be developers of technologies are little more
> than clearinghouses for other people's news releases about other people's
> advances.
>
> The future is not being invented here!  And we will never fix this problem
> until enough of us recognize the truth.

That may be the situation now, but it is going to change rapidly, and soon.
Transhumanism is about to enter the global political arena in a big way, and
it is politics that will determine the course of events more than science.
And politics is nothing but talk.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 12 20:22:56 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 12:22:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <009001c3c0e8$c8310fb0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121202150.7853-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> All of it is just talk.

That is generally where it has to start.  The question becomes how
to turn talk into action.

> But in this millennium, everybody is talking about it.

> Sadly, our books aren't best sellers.

I'm not so sure that is true about Ray's books.  From a technical
commentary standpoint I think the sell reasonably well.  And Damien
is slowly expanding his readership.

> Our leaders aren't on the cutting edge of any technologies.

Cough.  Am I not trying to do that with Nano at Home and Robiobotics?

> While the companies actually working in these fields and the governments
> actually guiding these advancements are paying little if any attention to us.

Hmmm... If I had a good reason for doing so I do not doubt that I
could get Jim von Ehr on the phone.  I've spent some amount of time
each day of the last week on the phone to Washington DC trying to
determine precisely *who* turned the nanotech study wording in
HR 766 into the nanotech study wording in S 189 (which was much
less useful) this year.  I just spent an hour on the phone with
Prof. Pollack at Brandeis (the man behind the DEMO project)
explaining some concepts of nanotech, retrosynthesis, the Zyvex
Rotapod, etc. to him.

Has not Aubrey defined and promoted not only the Methuselah Mouse
project as well as the proposed IBG institute?

And I will not bother to rehash the history of Aeiveos Sciences Group
and what it tried to do (perhaps prematurely and with insufficient
funding).

> We are not only on the fringe of humanity, but we are on the fringe of
> transhumanity.  We are not centrally involved in real nanotech, AI,
> robotics, cloning, and immortality.

I would beg to differ Harvey.  I would like to see you assert that
claim to me, Eugen, Anders, Eliezer, Brett, the various people
supporting longevity web sites and a host of others trying to
define how they may participate.

The invention of fire had to be accepted.  People had to view
it as useful and want to actually use it (with its associated
risks).  So there is a balance between the person who actually
assembles a fine motion controller and the person who promotes
the use of the fine motion controller.  I'm going after its
assembly.  I will generally leave to others the promotion
of the idea that once we have one we should darn well use it.

Robert




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 20:40:20 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 12:40:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] christmas music
In-Reply-To: <005901c3c073$8896ebb0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031212204020.68174.qmail@web60506.mail.yahoo.com>

I have to agree with you on this one Spike. To recognize the brainwash for what it is is to be incensed by it. It seems to start earlier every year. I swear it started the day after Thanksgiving this year. Hey anybody know where I can buy leaping lords? I need ten of them. 

Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
I do not have an extropic answer to this problem:
around christmas, all you hear is christmas music,
for a two solid months, from just before Halloween
until just after New Years, and it drives me CRAZY.
The real problem is that there aren't enough different
songs, so they play the saaaammme ooooonnnnes 
over and over and over and over and every yahoo has a 
slightly different version of the same old thing. But 
the real problem is that in the shopping malls, they
have instrumental versions, and you can't help
thinking the words! Just try: you can't do it. 
Try to not think of the words to Jingle Bells next 
time you hear it, and good luck.

The next biggest problem is that the words are
absurd, the ones you cannot help thinking of, since
we are all hypnotized and thought-controlled to think
of those words whenever we hear the tunes, and buy stuff.

Consider the words to the little drummer boy for instance.
OK now, first of all, drums do not go rumpapum pum, they
go rattatat tat. Secondly, what of the ox and lamb? What
exactly is included in "keeping time?" Were the ox and
lamb gently swaying to the beat? Friends, that kinda thing
creeps me out. I form a mental image like something
outta Hitchcock. So it is a bit unclear at best, but in
any case, keeping time is not something I want to see a
bunch of goddam livestock doing anywhere near a newborn.
He would have nightmares until well past adolescence.

And that bit about making a snowman and pretending he
Parson Brown. They are holding a running conversation with 
a pile of SNOW, fer cryin out loud. Someone has put 
angel dust in their stockings you can be sure.

spike




_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031212/8961058c/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 20:46:54 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 12:46:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121202150.7853-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031212204654.97841.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> 
> > All of it is just talk.
> 
> That is generally where it has to start.  The question becomes how
> to turn talk into action.

Yes, and a big component about that that seems to be lacking in these
parts is a realization that you need to find a demand that needs
serving. Developing cool technologies is not profit making if you have
no idea who is going to buy it. Not knowing who is going to buy it
guarantees you won't find funding.
Everybody who is doing something constructive is doing so because they
have found a demand for what they are doing. Those that aren't doing
anything extropically constructive need to research for a confluence
between the things they want to do and the things people want.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 12 20:58:10 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 12:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312120447380.32179-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031212205810.35178.qmail@web60505.mail.yahoo.com>



"Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

Given the similarities between the genomes its going to make
being a creationist just a little bit harder... :-)

Robert

I would restate that as "it's going to make being a Christian creationist a little harder." Evolution and creationism don't contradict to us Vitalistic Pantheists. In fact I regard evolution as evidence of creation. 

Ciao



_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031212/2dcdc2a4/attachment.html>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 12 21:02:43 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:02:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Purpose of the Extropian Institute
In-Reply-To: <009001c3c0e8$c8310fb0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031212210243.87474.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> The future is not being invented here!

That's debatable, but let's say for sake of argument
that you're correct, because that seems to lead to a
more interesting problem.

> And we will
> never fix this problem
> until enough of us recognize the truth.

Even if we all agreed, what would you have done?  This
is a place to discuss, to inform.  We can, at best,
provide leads to the "real" developers, and some
helpful imagination.  (Of course, said connections and
imaginations are, themselves, real assets of business
value.  They are not sufficient by themselves, but
they are necessary in practice.)

Now...if ExI could start tapping into ways of funding
research to accomplish our aims, and direct said
funding, would that be closer to what you imagine we
should do?  Or did you have some other specific
solution in mind?


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 23:00:13 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:00:13 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121144230.7853-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <00b801c3c103$b8232700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote,
> Don't believe everything in the NY Times as a hand-me-down 
> from god. They may make mistakes and/or bias their opinions.  
> (So long as they have a source -- they may not choose to 
> evaluate how *good* the source is in reality.)

You posted the link to that article when you started this thread.  But when
I use it for counter-evidence, you say it is unreliable?

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 23:00:32 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:00:32 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <20031212190056.11911.qmail@web80403.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00b901c3c103$c44bcaf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Adrian Tymes wrote,
> Be careful how you phrase that.  Some people
> (hopefully
> few who grok Extropian ideals, but perhaps some who
> wish to do so but don't quite understand yet) might 
> misunderstand, and think that you're saying this type of 
> research actively goes against our goals, in the same sense 
> that, say, stem cell research undermines certain religious 
> memes.  Perhaps a better way to put it would be, "Advancing 
> science sometimes shows us that we are not as close to our 
> goals as we thought we were."

This is exactly right.  This is a hard point to make, and many people
misunderstand me.

This is exactly what I am saying.  Thanks for the clarification.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 23:01:04 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:01:04 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Purpose of the Extropian Institute
In-Reply-To: <20031212210243.87474.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00ba01c3c103$d4df4310$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Adrian Tymes wrote,
> Now...if ExI could start tapping into ways of funding research to 
> accomplish our aims, and direct said funding, would that be closer to 
> what you imagine we should do?  Or did you have some other specific
> solution in mind?

Believe it or not, solutions are easy.  Our problem is goals.  The problem
is not that we put all our efforts into a clearly defined goal and then
failed.  I doubt that would happen.  Our problem is that we don't have
clearly defined goals, we don't have specific steps toward each goal, and
nobody really knows what we should be doing beyond just talking about how
great this stuff will be someday.

If we want to be a think tank, we need brainstorming sessions.
If we want to lobby congress, we need legally rigorous position papers.
If we want to develop technology, we need people to actually do research.
If we want to be a news source, we need a editorial staff and better
publication channels.
If we want to be an educational organization, we need teachers and authors
developing curriculae and textbooks.  
If we want to advice industry, we need a team of recognized persons with
credentials.
If we want to get funding, we need project plans with milestones and
results.
If we want publicity, we need advertising, PR and publicity stunts.
If we want to do more than one of these, we need to establish separate
working groups in each area.

I am sure that we can accomplish whatever we put our minds to.  We just
haven't chosen specific goals for our specific organizations yet.  Once we
do that, we can easily become the best at whatever it is we choose to do.
There is no lack of skill, intelligence and creativity among us.

So this is decision time.  What do we want to do, and how much effort are we
willing to put into it?

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 23:01:43 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:01:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <028401c3c0eb$8f2e0030$757b6951@artemis>
Message-ID: <00bb01c3c103$ec6b8d40$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Dirk Bruere wrote,
> That may be the situation now, but it is going to change 
> rapidly, and soon. Transhumanism is about to enter the global 
> political arena in a big way, and it is politics that will 
> determine the course of events more than science.

This is the claim of all our great endeavors.  They haven't done anything
yet, but they are about to.  They have been "about to" for decades now.  No
offense is intended, but I will believe it when I see it.  I doubt even a
majority on this list expect the Consensus to become a big political player
anytime soon.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 12 23:02:51 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:02:51 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121202150.7853-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <00bc01c3c104$14df3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote,
> > Our leaders aren't on the cutting edge of any technologies.
> 
> Cough.  Am I not trying to do that with Nano at Home and Robiobotics?

No offense, but "cough".  You think Nano at Home and Robiobotics are leading
nanotech initiatives?  Google finds about 350 pages that mention "Nano at Home"
and "nanotechnology, as compared with 75,000 that mention "IBM" and
"nanotechnology".  Robiobotics only has 19 references in Google.

Seriously, you tell me.  What achievements have you made in nanotechnology?
Are you mentioned in the nanotechnology FAQ?  Are you mentioned in any
nanotechnology history?  What exactly have you done in the field
nanotechnology researchers should know about?  Has Nano at home created a
recognized nanomachine?  Has it discovered something that other
nanotechnologists actually use?

> > While the companies actually working in these fields and the
> > governments actually guiding these advancements are paying 
> little if
> > any attention to us.
> 
> Hmmm... If I had a good reason for doing so I do not doubt
> that I could get Jim von Ehr on the phone.  I've spent some 
> amount of time each day of the last week on the phone to 
> Washington DC trying to determine precisely *who* turned the 
> nanotech study wording in HR 766 into the nanotech study 
> wording in S 189 (which was much less useful) this year.  I 
> just spent an hour on the phone with Prof. Pollack at 
> Brandeis (the man behind the DEMO project) explaining some 
> concepts of nanotech, retrosynthesis, the Zyvex Rotapod, etc. to him.

This is my point exactly.  You are an outsider.  Did you know this before it
was published?  Did they call you for advice?  Did you submit information
that they could use?  Are you listed in any bibliography, list of
information sources, or even in any survey of current nanotech initiatives?
Trying to find out who did what in the realm of nanotech legislation is an
indication that you are NOT involved with this stuff.

> Has not Aubrey defined and promoted not only the Methuselah
> Mouse project as well as the proposed IBG institute?

I expect Aubrey to do great things, and have no doubt of his excellent
expertise.  Please do not misconstrue anything I say to be negative toward
him.  However, offering to pay someone to make a breakthrough is not the
same thing as making a breakthrough.  It is a little off-topic for what I
wanted to see.  However, the creativity and approach of this project is
interesting.  However, I doubt that the meager amount of volunteer funding
available will entice much research toward anybody trying to claim this
prize.

> And I will not bother to rehash the history of Aeiveos
> Sciences Group and what it tried to do (perhaps prematurely 
> and with insufficient funding).

Then I won't bother to counter it.

> I would beg to differ Harvey.  I would like to see you assert
> that claim to me, Eugen, Anders, Eliezer, Brett, the various 
> people supporting longevity web sites and a host of others 
> trying to define how they may participate.

I would be very interested in hearing from these people to find out whether
they find their involvement with Extropians to enhance their work or detract
from it.  I believe Eugen, Eliezer and I have already commented on this.
Anders seems to busy with real work to participate lately.  I have no idea
what Brett would say.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 12 23:26:38 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:26:38 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Purpose of the Extropian Institute
Message-ID: <269620-2200312512232638111@M2W040.mail2web.com>


From: Harvey Newstrom 

>Adrian Tymes wrote,
>> Now...if ExI could start tapping into ways of funding research to 
>> accomplish our aims, and direct said funding, would that be closer to 
>> what you imagine we should do?  Or did you have some other specific
>> solution in mind?

>Believe it or not, solutions are easy.  Our problem is goals.  The problem
>is not that we put all our efforts into a clearly defined goal and then
>failed.  I doubt that would happen.  Our problem is that we don't have
>clearly defined goals, we don't have specific steps toward each goal, and
>nobody really knows what we should be doing beyond just talking about how
>great this stuff will be someday.

Good point Harvey.

My suggestion is to join the planning team for the ExI Summit (mentioned
briefly last month's newsletter).  This weekend Greg Burch is coming in
from Houston and we will having a meeting Sunday Morning. After ExI's last
Summit meeting in Houston in November, we have been boiling it down to a
specific, clear-cut purpose.  With so many goal options, finding just the
right one is the key.

best,
Natasha

Natasha Vita-More
President, Extropy Institute

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 12 23:42:01 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:42:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <00b901c3c103$c44bcaf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031212234201.37623.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> Adrian Tymes wrote,
> > Be careful how you phrase that.  Some people
> > (hopefully
> > few who grok Extropian ideals, but perhaps some
> who
> > wish to do so but don't quite understand yet)
> might 
> > misunderstand, and think that you're saying this
> type of 
> > research actively goes against our goals, in the
> same sense 
> > that, say, stem cell research undermines certain
> religious 
> > memes.  Perhaps a better way to put it would be,
> "Advancing 
> > science sometimes shows us that we are not as
> close to our 
> > goals as we thought we were."
> 
> This is exactly right.  This is a hard point to
> make, and many people
> misunderstand me.
> 
> This is exactly what I am saying.  Thanks for the
> clarification.

No problem.  Ironically, I've seen this exact same
error made by people high up in religious hierarchies
who nonetheless Got It...but by making this particular
linguistic confusion, their disciples glommed onto the
"we oppose science" meme, with the end result of
setting their voices against us.  Something to
consider, the next time we confront creationists or
the like lead by an otherwise apparently enlightened
sort.


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 13 00:11:45 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:11:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Chimps and Humans
In-Reply-To: <00b801c3c103$b8232700$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121603140.12852-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> You posted the link to that article when you started this thread.  But when
> I use it for counter-evidence, you say it is unreliable?

If I had to agree 100% with every link I posted it would be
a really short list.  :-)  But seriously -- though I'm not
positive I think I posted (sometime in the last 2 years) a
link to a discussion regarding the fact that the differences
between humans and chimps may be greater than is usually
assumed.  If not, I offer up [1] as a figure different
from that quoted in the NY Times.

These generalizations are very iffy from a biological
standpoint as one would expect the evolution rates
of gene coding sequences to differ from those of gene
regulatory regions to differ from random junk DNA.
Trying to fit multiple types of selection pressure
under a single hat is probably poor science.  But
such is what one has to deal with when moving the
knowledge from the lab to the public.

Robert

1. Chromosomal speciation and molecular divergence--accelerated
   evolution in rearranged chromosomes.
   Navarro A, Barton NH
   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12690198&dopt=Abstract




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 13 00:35:32 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:35:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <00bc01c3c104$14df3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312121613360.12852-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> No offense, but "cough".  You think Nano at Home and Robiobotics are leading
> nanotech initiatives?  Google finds about 350 pages that mention "Nano at Home"
> and "nanotechnology, as compared with 75,000 that mention "IBM" and
> "nanotechnology".  Robiobotics only has 19 references in Google.

I'm not surprised.  I would expect the relative budgets with respect to
what IBM is spending on Nanotech and what Nano at Home or Robiobotics are
spending to be at least a factor of 10,000 to 100,000.  Robiobotics
in particular I intentionally stealthed.

However -- just because a technical giant is significantly outspending
small scale efforts doesn't mean they have all the bases covered.  I
will openly acknowledge IBM for everything from the AFM to the Xenon
atom logo to the recent self-assembly of a Flash memory nanopattern.
They are proving time and time again that these problems *can* be solved.

> Seriously, you tell me.  What achievements have you made in nanotechnology?

I am the first person that I am aware of who has attempted a reasonable
analysis (with costs!) of the biological approach to robust MNT [1].

> Has Nano at home created a recognized nanomachine?

No, we are years away from that.  And its initial intent is not
to create nanomachines but nanoparts.  One has to start someplace.
How many years did it take Zyvex to go from a start-up to having
an actual product in the market?  5+?

> Are you listed in any bibliography, list of
> information sources, or even in any survey of current nanotech initiatives?
> Trying to find out who did what in the realm of nanotech legislation is an
> indication that you are NOT involved with this stuff.

Myself, no.  But I have not attempted to make a name for myself within
classical academic circles.  Christine Peterson however was called upon
to testify before congress during the debates with respect to nanotech
legislation.  And I'll offer the comment that there may be some very
interesting questions as to what is going on behind the scenes with
respect to legislative agendas that may have little or nothing to
do with ideas that hardcore nanotech proponents may be pushing.
It could be as simple as lack of knowledge or as complex as people
attempting to protect their own sacred cows.  It just isn't clear
at this point in time.

However, if I manage to get to the bottom of things I will let you know.

Robert

1. Protein Based Assembly of Nanoscale Parts
   http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/Papers/PBAoNP.html




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 13 00:54:21 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:54:21 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
References: <00bc01c3c104$14df3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <023001c3c114$0618c860$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> > I would beg to differ Harvey.  I would like to see you assert
> > that claim to me, Eugen, Anders, Eliezer, Brett, the various
> > people supporting longevity web sites and a host of others
> > trying to define how they may participate.
>
> I would be very interested in hearing from these people to find
> out whether they find their involvement with Extropians to
> enhance their work or detract from it.  I believe Eugen, Eliezer
> and I have already commented on this. Anders seems to busy
> with real work to participate lately.  I have no idea what Brett
> would say.

I'm only catching some of what is going past on the list because of
time constraints - perhaps that adds some reinforcement to some
of what you seem to be saying Harvey. Clearly time spent doing
some things is time not available for doing other things.

I am an erratic personality Harvey. I suspect the list satisfies some
sort of social need for me. The Exi principles are pretty close to the
sort of principles I try to live by and importantly for me they are
principles that I did not write. This is important if one is looking for
camaraderie. I do look for camaraderie because as chance or evolution
or something would have it I am social. I have been effective as a stem
cell lobbyist on some occasions and irritatingly ineffective on others.
Some times I've been ineffective because I've come up against some
surprising political obstacles where institutions with clear interests did
not act on their interests because individuals that were in charge of
them like CEO's and board chairmen have had separate interests like
career preservation that made them more risk averse than seemed
optimal to me. Recently I've perhaps risked some of the good standing
I'd earnt with some of these 'mainstream' folks because I wanted them
to push harder and take bigger risks on what they saw as minor details
but which I see as potentially strategically important partly as a result of
thinking stimulated by discussions on this list. I get some validity and
additional emotional resourcing perhaps from seeing that others are
at least struggling in the same direction.

Damien has mentioned on occasion that he comes to the Exi list for
"the waters". I can't be sure I know what he means but I think I do
something similar. I get a sense from reading and posting (not always
well because sometime I adopt a philosophy of post-rough-or-
incomplete- work-and-be-damned rather than waste it or polish it)
that others like me are similarly engaging with the big issues of the
times.

I found out about the Exi list either from Damien or from Damien's
book the Last Mortal Generation. Damien is effective. Aubrey is also
effective - he's been mentioned in Science and Nature in the last year.
I have hardcopies of Robert Freitas book's Nanomedicine Vol 1 and
Vol 2a. Robert Bradbury's significant contribution is acknowledged
there. Robert has been very generous with his time in explaining things
that he understand to me, and I've heard Damien say the same thing.
We are picking up ideas and getting fast tracked in learning from each
other. Look at some of the topics convered recently. The links that
are provided can help make more rounded generalists and polymaths
of folks that might otherwise be more specialised.

I have often had the feeling of being impressed and appreciative of
how much time some people have gone to to try and post genuinely
thoughtful and provocative responses to questions asked.

Your own post Harvey, when you just started posting again after
a break struck me as very well written. One presumably does not need
to write well to be a security consultant. It was appreciated I think in
a wider human context but you perhaps don't get to see how much stuff
that is well done gets appreciated. That's the nature of a list. Its harder
to communicate. One can't always tell if the message or effort made
has reached the mark.

Regards,
Brett




From avatar at renegadeclothing.com.au  Sat Dec 13 00:23:13 2003
From: avatar at renegadeclothing.com.au (Avatar Polymorph)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:23:13 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
Message-ID: <000201c3c1b8$bf64bfa0$e9ee17cb@renegade>

Dear extropians/transhumanists

I would welcome any comments on the following draft article.

Avatar Polymorph


The notion of superpower and warfare 2003-2010

A. Polymorph


Over the last few years the phrase sole superpower has become a dangerous and false cliche. Disseminated by right-wing radicals it has provided the comforting illusion that America faces no major military challenge. The reality is that Russia retains its status as a superpower in fundamental military terms. Force projection is an area where America and its allies can operate as a sole superpower, but force projection means nothing in any theatre involving atomic warfare. Russia, currently, does not fear a land invasion by anyone, not just because it has become a loose ally of the west but because it retains an overwhelming number of nuclear weapons, on a rough par with America. Current nuclear disarmament involves storage of warheads, not destruction of them.


All this will change shortly because of innovations in beam weapons and computers. Satellite weaponry and portable weaponry are not the platforms of choice in the short term because of weight considerations with power sources. Beam weapons consume substantial power. It is likely that huge power sources or power plants will need to be placed nearby beam weapons for maximum effectiveness. Likely platforms would be mountain tops and ultrahigh towers, where line of sight is good. Another early platform might be large ships the size of aircraft carriers. With over-the-horizon radar and other inputs from aerial and satellite sources, arrayed beam weapons will be capable of neutralizing ICBMs. Beam weapons are superior to ABM systems because automated systems can take advantage of superior computer reaction time regarding delivery of destruction.


This is a dangerous period for Russia because it stands to erode the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction. If America does not share this technology with Russia then it will be assumed that it is not just meant for protection against terrorists or rogue states but also for protection against full-scale nuclear combat with Russia.


After 2010 the situation may become more destabilizing still, since it is likely that the first space towers will be constructed in the late 2010s. Space towers or vertical railways based on carbon nanotechnology allow for very cheap spacelifting costs and very effective space weaponry, both beam and linear accelerator weapons. They also allow for use of material from the Moon as weapons of mass destruction - rocks or other material thrown via linear accelerators - a type of weapon almost very difficult to protect oneself against.


It is unlikely that Russia will be able to match the construction costs which America is likely to assume in the case of beam weapon defences, and even if it does so, at a later stage Russia is faced with an inability to construct space towers and move into space industrially unless it commits itself to a level of expenditure equivalent to that undertaken during the militarization of the Cold War period, notably the 1960s.


America and Russia, currently, are not destroying much of their nuclear arsenals, only placing multiple warheads in storage areas where they cannot be used in timeframes of minutes or hours. These nuclear arsenals are the greatest danger to sentient survival if they are used. If America allows Russia access to beam weapons they will at least feel that they too have protection from a first strike in nuclear terms, and because American force projection in conventional arms is arguably not yet sufficient to overwhelm Russian forces they may not feel too threatened. On the other hand, beam weapons will coincide with other developments such as automated fighter planes and armoured forces, which will be strong factors in conventional warfare superiority. Without beam weapons to defend important sites, the Russians may believe America will be negating their superiority in nuclear defence and becoming an utterly dominant sole superpower in conventional terms. The question is, will Russia continue to move closer to the West, Europe and America and learn to cohabit peacefully, as appears to be happening at many levels, or will it succumb to a resumption of the arms race because of increased potential threat to the nuclear codominion.


The danger in accepting the currently false notion of a sole superpower is that it makes it easy to move this concept forward into the soon to be world of beam weapons, when a sole superpower will become a practical possibility. The worst outcome would be to pressure the Russians into using their atomic weapons while they still can, or ressurecting the global arms race. Increased recent American military budgets, including in ABM systems, seems to have started the ball rolling, but technological developments indicate that the first beam weapons are not far away, and will be much more effective than ABM systems for local site protection for cities and military facilities.


It will be curious to see what the reaction of the EEC to this developing situation is. So far the EEC, although co-operative, has remained somewhat distant from the notion of fuller American hegemony while quietly building its own separate power base, including technologically. It will also be interesting to see what the American reaction will be when they realize that many of their notions of economic and democratic efficiency are culturally defined and unlikely to be adopted socially, outside of areas as newly formed as the American midwest and west - such as Australia and Canada. Will the American national government define its stated cultural and political hegemony through the barrel of a beam weapon?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031212/13adf591/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 13 02:58:32 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 18:58:32 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <20031212162856.24582.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005001c3c124$feae8720$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] delta 4
> 
> > Check this.  Even *I* will admit this launcher built by
> > the other guys is wicked cool.  Now lets see if she flies.  spike
> > 
> > http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0312/10delta4heavy/01.html
> 
> "The Delta IV Heavy is the newest and largest expendable 
> launch vehicle in the United States...
> 
> This is a sweet rocket...

If it flies, it will be a sweet rocket.  Right now it is
just a rocket.  {8-]

> I'll notice that the center booster is common
> construction to the two side boosters. Are these all solid rockets?

Liquids all.  They hafta be careful to fuel all three at the
same rate so that they contract evenly as they cool.  Cool!  {8-]
 
> This booster competes directly with the space shuttle. That cargo size
> is for GEOSYNCH!!!!

The magic of the shuttle is that it can *return* large payloads.
Or so they say.  Or used to.  

spike



From iph1954 at msn.com  Sat Dec 13 03:36:50 2003
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:36:50 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] CRN Makes Presentation to EPA
Message-ID: <BAY5-F9qzBtbG47oHGq00032846@hotmail.com>

CRN's Director of Research, Chris Phoenix, was in Washington DC yesterday 
(Dec. 11) for an appearance before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Science Advisory Board. The EPA is assessing potential environmental impacts 
of nanotechnology, and they invited Chris to participate on a panel along 
with other experts.

We've posted a new web page that outlines the information Chris presented, 
and goes into greater depth on selected subjects. It's at 
http://www.crnano.org/EPAhandout.htm

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Chris Phoenix, Director of Research
cphoenix at CRNano.org

Mike Treder, Executive Director
mtreder at CRNano.org

Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
http://CRNano.org

_________________________________________________________________
Winterize your home with tips from MSN House & Home. 
http://special.msn.com/home/warmhome.armx



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 13 04:13:25 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 20:13:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <000201c3c1b8$bf64bfa0$e9ee17cb@renegade>
Message-ID: <20031213041325.11256.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Avatar Polymorph <avatar at renegadeclothing.com.au> wrote:
> Dear extropians/transhumanists
> 
> I would welcome any comments on the following draft article.

Couple comments:

a) beam weapons on satellites are entirely within the realm of the
present (Spike can confirm this), at least according to the development
information I've seen. While the first systems to be deployed will be
the size of several tractor trailers or take up the bay of an entire
airliner, these systems are being adapted to Russian developed space
nuclear power capabilities and also operate with dynamic chemical
reactions.

b) US space preeminence has been sustained substantially by outsourcing
much subcontracting to Russian space industry, which offers excellent
engineering work at costs much lower than US industry. Just ask how
many modules of the ISS were built by Russians or based on Russian
designs. While the US will likely develop preeminence with carbon
nanotube, it is clear that with current industrial relationships in the
aerospace industry today that the US and Russia will be partners in
space development for a long time to come.

It is my opinion that the pimary challenger to US superiority in this
century will be China. Russia seems to have somewhat accepted a
supporting role to US hegemony much as the US served in a supporting
role to British hegemony prior to WWII.

The Chinese, on the other hand, have been developing a very agressive
military stance as well as an agressive space exploration stance that
plans to exceed even Russia's achievements by 2010. Chinese patriotism
is very rampant and the government plays the patriotic angle at every
chance, from the mistaken bombing of the Belgrade embassy to the
forcing down of a US observation aircraft in international waters.

While Russia has stood idly by while the US imposed peace and democracy
on two of its traditional allies (Serbia and Iraq) and conquered easily
where Russia once retreated in disgrace (Afghanistan), China has been
heavily involved in supplying weaponry to muslim nations and groups,
including al Qaeda, either outright or through their proxy state, North Korea.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From reason at exratio.com  Sat Dec 13 04:19:56 2003
From: reason at exratio.com (Reason)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 20:19:56 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <00bc01c3c104$14df3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNOEBKDOAA.reason@exratio.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Harvey
> Newstrom
> Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 3:03 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution

> > Has not Aubrey defined and promoted not only the Methuselah
> > Mouse project as well as the proposed IBG institute?
>
> I expect Aubrey to do great things, and have no doubt of his excellent
> expertise.  Please do not misconstrue anything I say to be negative toward
> him.  However, offering to pay someone to make a breakthrough is not the
> same thing as making a breakthrough.  It is a little off-topic for what I
> wanted to see.  However, the creativity and approach of this project is
> interesting.  However, I doubt that the meager amount of volunteer funding
> available will entice much research toward anybody trying to claim this
> prize.

You're missing the point. When building a prize, most of the final amount
will come from wealthy philanthopists. The purpose of the large amount of
smaller donations is to demonstrate viability, will, and widespread
interest. It engages people; all social engineering. It's part of the
bootstrap effect: people like the chair of HGSI aren't going to donate to a
prize until hundreds of people have made their voice heard and made smaller
donations. Paul Allen isn't going to donate until many people at the renown
level of the chair of HGSI have donated, and so forth.

This is the way it works when you're trying to convince philanthopists that
something is worthwhile. It's exactly the same way it worked for the X
Prize, you'll note, which started out at $10,000 seven years ago. The
Methuselah Mouse Prize is only six months old, and has grown faster than the
X Prize in its first six months.

Again, this is the process, this is the way it works. It's working, and it's
working very well. Don't dismiss it: instead, make a donation and help it to
succeed.

Reason
http://www.exratio.com/



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 13 04:16:02 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 20:16:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <005001c3c124$feae8720$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031213041602.42584.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > I'll notice that the center booster is common
> > construction to the two side boosters. Are these all solid rockets?
> 
> Liquids all.  They hafta be careful to fuel all three at the
> same rate so that they contract evenly as they cool.  Cool!  {8-]

Hey, does this booster use the closed system turbopumping technology
that Energia developed for their moon rocket? I have been seeing stuff
about the Russians selling this technology to US companies but was not
sure if anything was being put into use...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 13 05:39:31 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 21:39:31 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] delta 4
In-Reply-To: <20031213041602.42584.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005301c3c13b$7babbe30$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Mike Lorrey
> 
> Hey, does this booster use the closed system turbopumping technology
> that Energia developed for their moon rocket? I have been seeing stuff
> about the Russians selling this technology to US companies but was not
> sure if anything was being put into use...
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey

I don't know Mike, we don't have access to Booeing
proprietary documentation.

http://baltimore.bizjournals.com/baltimore/stories/2003/05/05/daily4.htm
l

Oops, heh heh, I meant to post this one, ahem.

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0105/08delta4/

This site says the Delta 4 isn't a Ruskie design. 
Here's a site that has some good RS-68 info:

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/space/propul/RS68.html



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 13 06:10:55 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:10:55 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <20031212170412.38676.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005801c3c13f$de6f91a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


Guys, we hear about scams all the time, but this is
one that hit close to home, or is about to.  My good
friend and colleague advertised his 91 BMW for 8300 bucks.
A buyer who claimed to be an international dealer acting
as an intermediary for a buyer in Dubai UAI contacted
him four weeks ago.  They negotiated for a while and
settled on a price of 8000.

Wednesday he gets a cashier's check in the FedEx, for
11500.  The instructions are to cash the check, then
to wire 3300 to a shipping company right away.  The
shipping company will then pick up the car Saturday
(tomorrow).  He agreed and did so.  Western Union
charged him 155 bucks, so he is still holding 8000
and some change, along with the car.  The understanding
on Thursday afternoon was to have the shipping company
pick up on Saturday.  So far so good.

This afternoon, (Friday, 12:47pm) he gets this email, 
which I quote exactly including spelling and capitalization:

"Hello Johnson,

how are you doing/weekend?  I have very serious problem right now,
my Wife is terribly ill with a surgery operation and i need money
to take care of her (although she has been admitted) and the hospital
bills are really a huge payment to take care of.  Please i would want
you to wire the funds($7,000 less western union fee) today to my
shipper for the car is not suitable for me at this point in time cuz
my hubby is in dying situation.

You can still reserve the car for me but right now i need to take
proper care of my family problem so please do me a favour of wiring
the funds today, this is very urgent and i will appreciate it if you
move as fast as possible to help me.  I am sorry for the stress and
any inconveniences.
Thanks, i hope to hear from you with the western union details used
in wiring the funds today.

Sincerely,
Lucky...."


OK extropians, what is the scam here?  "Lucky" sent 11,500 by money
order, Johnson wired 3300 to a shipping company.  I suggested
we google the shipping company with their street address in
Essex London.  There is no such street as the one given in
Essex, and the name of the company gave no hits on google,
nor the name of the person who picked up the 3300 from Western
Union.  There was no phone number with the company.  He was 
asking for 7000, which leaves 1000 unaccounted for.  

We went to scambusters, who say that almost all international
car sales are bogus.  

http://www.scambusters.org/russian-scams.html

I advised him not to wire the 7k, because as soon as they 
do, some yahoo will show up with a receipt showing
he signed for the 11500 check, and demand the car.  As it is, I
suppose they will show up tomorrow wanting the car plus 3300
bucks for shipping, claiming to have never heard of this guy
who picked up the 3300.  So Johnson might already be out $3455, 
and we mighta caught the deal before his loss turned into $10455.
Of course he still has the car, so I suppose they could show up
and declare the deal off and demand the $11500?  Some of you 
cluey sorts, what is the scam here?

spike  



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sat Dec 13 07:47:21 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 02:47:21 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <005801c3c13f$de6f91a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <00ee01c3c14d$5acea300$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> OK extropians, what is the scam here?  "Lucky" sent 11,500 by 
> money order, Johnson wired 3300 to a shipping company.
> Some of you cluey sorts, what is the scam here?

Ouch!  This is a variant of the old Nigerian scam.  See
<http://www.fraudaid.com/scamwarnings/419-030303-01-warticle.htm>.

Basically, checks from African banks take so long to clear that the U.S.
banks don't wait for them to clear.  They give you the money now assuming
the check will clear later.  A few weeks down the road, the bank will come
back and say the check wasn't real and they have reversed the deposit.
Meanwhile, the victim has been conned into sending some of the "received"
money back to the scammer or an associate.  It isn't until the bank reverses
the deposit that the victim realizes that they sent money out without
actually receiving any money in.

1. The victim never really got any money up front from the scammer.
2. The victim sends money out of their own pocket, not from a fraction of
the scammer's money.
3. The banks push all the liability on the account-holder and take no
responsibility for giving the victim cash for a bogus check.
4. The fine print on their account-holder agreement says that all check
deposits are subject to verification.
5. This has happened to many, many people over the years, and the victims
are always held liable for the losses.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 13 08:29:49 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:29:49 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
References: <005801c3c13f$de6f91a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <032201c3c153$46391be0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Hard to de-scam over the net Spike. I'm not familiar enough with
some of the processes. Looks to me like a botched scam though.
The letter sent conflicting hubby and Wife is just sloppy considering
that money was already moving and the scam was already on-foot.
Had they not alerted you or your friend with the sloppiness they'd
have done better perhaps. They can't even get the story straight
when there's money already moving.  Pretty sad.  

The 7000 instead of 8000 could have been a calculated sympathy
play on a targeted (i.e. profiled) soft-touch American but the hubby
Wife thing blows it.  Soft touch != soft head. 

Interesting. 

Brett



From gpmap at runbox.com  Sat Dec 13 10:03:17 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:03:17 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Purpose of the Extropian Institute
In-Reply-To: <00ba01c3c103$d4df4310$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEBNCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Harvey, we as the whole transhumanist community have as many goals as you
with and then some. For example I consider all the things that you list as
important goals. Also there is no lack of effort and no shortage of
individual initiatives, must very interesting and creative, but doomed to
failure if they remain forever below critical mass.
IMO what we need is a strategy, a set of agreed specific tactics to deal
with this and that, and some organization. I know organization is boring,
but without organization you don't get anywhere.
The concept of critical mass is important, sorry if I repeat myself. If we
consolidate many things below critical mass into few things just above
critical mass, and manage them well, the transhumanist movement will take
off like a rocket.

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Harvey
Newstrom
Sent: 13 December 2003 00:01
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Purpose of the Extropian Institute


Adrian Tymes wrote,
> Now...if ExI could start tapping into ways of funding research to
> accomplish our aims, and direct said funding, would that be closer to
> what you imagine we should do?  Or did you have some other specific
> solution in mind?

Believe it or not, solutions are easy.  Our problem is goals.  The problem
is not that we put all our efforts into a clearly defined goal and then
failed.  I doubt that would happen.  Our problem is that we don't have
clearly defined goals, we don't have specific steps toward each goal, and
nobody really knows what we should be doing beyond just talking about how
great this stuff will be someday.

If we want to be a think tank, we need brainstorming sessions.
If we want to lobby congress, we need legally rigorous position papers.
If we want to develop technology, we need people to actually do research.
If we want to be a news source, we need a editorial staff and better
publication channels.
If we want to be an educational organization, we need teachers and authors
developing curriculae and textbooks.
If we want to advice industry, we need a team of recognized persons with
credentials.
If we want to get funding, we need project plans with milestones and
results.
If we want publicity, we need advertising, PR and publicity stunts.
If we want to do more than one of these, we need to establish separate
working groups in each area.

I am sure that we can accomplish whatever we put our minds to.  We just
haven't chosen specific goals for our specific organizations yet.  Once we
do that, we can easily become the best at whatever it is we choose to do.
There is no lack of skill, intelligence and creativity among us.

So this is decision time.  What do we want to do, and how much effort are we
willing to put into it?

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>



From dirk at neopax.com  Sat Dec 13 10:59:26 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:59:26 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
References: <00bb01c3c103$ec6b8d40$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000a01c3c168$2cbc8de0$757b6951@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
To: "'Dirk Bruere'" <dirk at neopax.com>; "'ExI chat list'"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:01 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution


> Dirk Bruere wrote,
> > That may be the situation now, but it is going to change
> > rapidly, and soon. Transhumanism is about to enter the global
> > political arena in a big way, and it is politics that will
> > determine the course of events more than science.
>
> This is the claim of all our great endeavors.  They haven't done anything
> yet, but they are about to.  They have been "about to" for decades now.
No
> offense is intended, but I will believe it when I see it.  I doubt even a
> majority on this list expect the Consensus to become a big political
player
> anytime soon.


I'm not talking about the Consensus, but about almost every maturing
technology from nuclear power to transplants.
The technology becomes polititics, and the limits and applications become
purely political issues.
Transhumanism is entering that stage.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 13 13:12:14 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 05:12:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cells and bio-magic
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312130503510.26238-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


While many of you may not understand this, scientists have
come up with a new and very creative way of isolating
stem cells and further the genes that make the stem cells
stem cells.

New Method Of Identifying And Isolating Stem Cells Developed
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031212075948.htm

The bottom line -- in these mice discussed -- if the cells
keep glowing for a long time they are stem cells.  Further
they can isolate those cells and determine which genes are
turned on to make the stem cells retain stem cell properties.
That in turn should lead to approaches for retrodifferentiation
allowing one to turn non-stem cells back into stem cells.
(One could call this the Holy Grail for turning back the
clock.)

Every extropian should send a Newtonmas card to Dr. Elaine
Fuchs at Rockefeller University for her efforts in this
area.  (Hows that for being proactive Harvey???)

R.



From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 13 14:46:18 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 06:46:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] CRN Makes Presentation to EPA
In-Reply-To: <BAY5-F9qzBtbG47oHGq00032846@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031213144618.2205.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com>

Dear Chris and Mike,
 
     Congratulations. This is marvelous. I just hope that it did not go over the head of the EPA Washington bureaucrats:-)
 
     This is really the kind of professional activism that we (at WTA, ExI, and wherever:-) should be doing, encouraging and supporting more and more if we really want to change the world...
 
     Transhumanistically and extropianilly yours,
 
     La vie est belle!
 
     Yos?

MIKE TREDER <iph1954 at msn.com> wrote:
CRN's Director of Research, Chris Phoenix, was in Washington DC yesterday 
(Dec. 11) for an appearance before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Science Advisory Board. The EPA is assessing potential environmental impacts 
of nanotechnology, and they invited Chris to participate on a panel along 
with other experts.

We've posted a new web page that outlines the information Chris presented, 
and goes into greater depth on selected subjects. It's at 
http://www.crnano.org/EPAhandout.htm

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Chris Phoenix, Director of Research
cphoenix at CRNano.org

Mike Treder, Executive Director
mtreder at CRNano.org

Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
http://CRNano.org

_________________________________________________________________
Winterize your home with tips from MSN House & Home. 
http://special.msn.com/home/warmhome.armx

_______________________________________________
wta-talk mailing list
wta-talk at transhumanism.org
http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk


La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031213/fabaa212/attachment.html>

From jcorb at iol.ie  Sat Dec 13 15:14:25 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:14:25 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031213145609.0336fb20@pop.iol.ie>


>After 2010 the situation may become more destabilizing still, since it is 
>likely that the first space towers will be constructed in the late 2010s. 
>Space towers or vertical railways based on carbon nanotechnology allow for 
>very cheap spacelifting costs and very effective space weaponry, both beam 
>and linear accelerator weapons. They also allow for use of material from 
>the Moon as weapons of mass destruction - rocks or other material thrown 
>via linear accelerators - a type of weapon almost very difficult to 
>protect oneself against.

Not so sure personally about Space Towers in the late 2010's, but the only 
real gripe appears to be a typo/grammo in the last sentence ("almost very 
difficult").

As for general comments;

I doubt Russia would reinvolve itself in an arms race.  They don't have 
(easy access to) the resources needed to keep up, plus they've effectively 
lost a decade or so after the Wall came down.  They still don't have a 
strong economy.  Perhaps their best bet is to slip under the U.S. 
"Blanket", but of course that will happens on the U.S.'s terms, not theirs.

Europe has some potential to provide a counterforce, but with the EU 
nations nervous and bickering on common defence they're unlikely to produce 
the requisite level of R&D, nevermind a viable force of any real size.

Oh and  BTW, the EEC no longer exists.  Not since 1992.



James...





From jcorb at iol.ie  Sat Dec 13 15:31:38 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:31:38 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Worthy causes (was: Encryption revolution) 
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031213151939.03373560@pop.iol.ie>


>Message: 22
>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 20:19:56 -0800
> >From: "Reason" <reason at exratio.com>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNOEBKDOAA.reason at exratio.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
><snip>
>You're missing the point. When building a prize, most of the final amount
>will come from wealthy philanthopists. The purpose of the large amount of
>smaller donations is to demonstrate viability, will, and widespread
>interest. It engages people; all social engineering. It's part of the
>bootstrap effect: people like the chair of HGSI aren't going to donate to a
>prize until hundreds of people have made their voice heard and made smaller
>donations. Paul Allen isn't going to donate until many people at the renown
>level of the chair of HGSI have donated, and so forth.
>This is the way it works when you're trying to convince philanthopists that
>something is worthwhile. It's exactly the same way it worked for the X
>Prize, you'll note, which started out at $10,000 seven years ago. The
>Methuselah Mouse Prize is only six months old, and has grown faster than the
>X Prize in its first six months.

Not forgetting that, as noble as the X-Prize goal is, it's far more distant 
from most peoples daily experience than having extra years of life.

The MMP is the first overtly >Human research project I've donated to.  As 
Reason suggested, throw some silver their way.



James...

>Again, this is the process, this is the way it works. It's working, and it's
>working very well. Don't dismiss it: instead, make a donation and help it to
>succeed.
>Reason
>http://www.exratio.com/
>
>
>------------------------------




From jcorb at iol.ie  Sat Dec 13 15:44:44 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 15:44:44 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: internet car sale scam
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031213154052.0336a170@pop.iol.ie>


>>Message: 25
>>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 22:10:55 -0800
>> >From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
>>Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
>>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>>Message-ID: <005801c3c13f$de6f91a0$6501a8c0 at SHELLY>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

<snip>

>This afternoon, (Friday, 12:47pm) he gets this email,
>which I quote exactly including spelling and capitalization:
>"Hello Johnson,
>how are you doing/weekend? I have very serious problem right now,
>my Wife is terribly ill with a surgery operation and i need money
>to take care of her (although she has been admitted) and the hospital
>bills are really a huge payment to take care of. Please i would want
>you to wire the funds($7,000 less western union fee) today to my
>shipper for the car is not suitable for me at this point in time cuz
>my hubby is in dying situation.
>You can still reserve the car for me but right now i need to take
>proper care of my family problem so please do me a favour of wiring
>the funds today, this is very urgent and i will appreciate it if you
>move as fast as possible to help me. I am sorry for the stress and
>any inconveniences.
>Thanks, i hope to hear from you with the western union details used
>in wiring the funds today.
>Sincerely,
>Lucky...."

Perhaps the ill "Wife" becoming the dying "hubby" by the end should have 
tipped him off.

Nasty business, hope he manages to get out of it with the minimum of pain.




James...




From twodeel at jornada.org  Sat Dec 13 15:40:23 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:40:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <00ee01c3c14d$5acea300$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312130740070.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> Ouch!  This is a variant of the old Nigerian scam.  See
> <http://www.fraudaid.com/scamwarnings/419-030303-01-warticle.htm>.

Snopes has a good writeup on this scam here:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/scams/carsale.asp



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 13 17:02:24 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:02:24 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) OT: Physics humor
Message-ID: <3FDB4620.70DB5945@mindspring.com>

Fowarded, since so many of the membership seem to be "into" physics. I 
didn't major in the subject, but I still laughed my butt off when I read this:


Electron Band Structure In Germanium, My Ass

< http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/hall.html >

Cheers,

LRC


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 13 17:03:42 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 09:03:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <00ee01c3c14d$5acea300$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031213170342.28894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

Harvey is right here. You can't do international business the same way
as you do it domestically. In international commerce, the buyer puts
money into an account that the seller can verify actually has assets,
typically with the shipping company or institutions it does business
with. The Seller ships the item being sold along with a bill of lading
to the buyer, and when the buyer receives the item, the shipping
company releases the funds, or notifies who ever is holding the assets
to release the funds, to the seller.

A friend of mine in Seattle is an international car broker and when
people try this scam with him, he'll first call the issuing bank to
verify that funds are available (this will weed out the less well
executed scams) and even then will sit on the money for ten days to
make sure the bank doesn't come back for the funds. Only then will he
ship a car, and will include instructions for how to do international
business in the future.

Never send funds back, either. Once you receive payment, and the check
is cleared, that money is yours and you can legally consider the sale
to be final.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 13 17:13:59 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:13:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Re: Who Invented the Airplane? A Brazilian,
	of Course
Message-ID: <3FDB48D7.A163175@mindspring.com>

>It was on November 12, 1906,

Actually, it was Sept 13.

 > when Santos-Dumont flew a kite-like contraption
 >with boxy wings called the 14-Bis some 722 feet (220 meters) on the 
outskirts of Paris.
 >It being the first public flight in the world,

No, it was the first documented flight in Europe.

 >he was hailed as the inventor of the airplane all over Europe.

Only by the profoundly ignorant. The Wrights had already gotten a patent on 
their aircraft by then, and had made several well-documented public 
flights. In 1905, the British War Office had contacted the Wrights about 
buying planes from them.

Dave Palmer

--------------------------

By the way, check out < http://home.att.net/~dannysoar2/eole.htm >
and its links.


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From sentience at pobox.com  Sat Dec 13 18:40:34 2003
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:40:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
Message-ID: <3FDB5D22.7080609@pobox.com>

Wired has recently run an article on "affective computing" (which, please 
note, is not even remotely related to FAI) about detecting and simulating 
emotions.  The article is about a chatbot named Laura, designed to 
encourage its user to stick to an exercise program.

http://wired.com/wired/archive/11.12/love.html

One particular quote in this article interests me, because I've been 
expecting it, but not so early:

> Everybody should have someone like Laura in their lives. I find myself
> looking forward to our time together. She asks me which movies I've
> seen, what my favorite cuisine is, and about the weather "out there." I
> tell her it's terrific. She responds: "It's always the same in here.
> Day in, day out."

You know how sometimes people look back in history, and point to some 
small thing like, oh, say, the early Mosaic web browser, and go on about 
the unpredictability of the future and how nobody at the time could 
possibly have recognized the coming impact from such a small hint?

Watch this space for further developments.  This is an incredibly early 
form of the technology and I don't expect problems for at least a decade, 
but when it hits it will hit hard.

This has nothing to do with AI; it's about programs with incredibly 
realistic graphics and means for recognizing emotions in their targets, 
being able to deploy apparent behaviors that act as superstimuli for human 
emotional responses.  Think of chocolate chip cookies for emotions. 
Chocolate chip cookies are a more powerful stimulus than hunter-gatherer 
tastebuds ever encounter, combining sugar, fat, and salt in greater 
quantity and purer quality.  And likewise there's a limit to the sympathy, 
support, approval, and admiration humans can expect from their human 
mates.  As any evolutionary theorist knows, a human male is not designed 
as the human female's ideal boyfriend, nor vice versa.

Candy bars for the soul.  It's not that all synthetic foods are bad.  A 
polymath dietician, anthropologist, evolutionary theorist, and metabolic 
biologist - that is to say, a *good* paleodiet theorist - can take a shot 
at crafting synthetic foods that are good for you.  But it takes so much 
more knowledge to do it right... and the side effects of the things that 
"just taste good" are negative, complicated, very hard to understand, 
unforeseen in advance.  People at large understand the one *obvious* side 
effect once they've seen it: People bloating up like balloons.  But also 
losing insulin sensitivity, and a lot of other problems that aren't 
visible to the naked eye.

At the very least it would take far greater skill, wisdom, knowledge to 
craft a Laura that made people stronger instead of weaker.  How many 
decades did it take to go from candy bars to health food bars?  Which is 
cheaper?  Which is more popular?  And worst of all, which tastes better?

I could be surprised, but what Laura presages is probably NOT a good 
thing.  Transhumanism needs to lose the optimism about outcomes.  Nobody 
is taking into account the fact that problems are hard and humans are 
stupid.  Watch this space for serious developments in some unknown amount 
of time, my wild guess being a decade, and quite possibly nothing 
happening if "faking it well" turns out to be AI-complete.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence




From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 13 18:56:17 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 10:56:17 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20031213145609.0336fb20@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <001201c3c1aa$ca4de710$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> 
> >After 2010 the situation may become more destabilizing 
> still, since it is 
> >likely that the first space towers will be constructed in 
> the late 2010s. 
> >Space towers or vertical railways based on carbon 
> nanotechnology allow for 
> >very cheap spacelifting costs and very effective space 
> weaponry...

I do beg to differ on this.  We are nowhere close to 
having the technology to build space towers, not in
the next 20 years, not in the next 50.  Never mind
all the practical difficulties, basic materials science
is not even in the neighborhood of making it possible.

spike






From neptune at superlink.net  Sat Dec 13 19:05:19 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:05:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Encryption revolution
References: <Law9-F420eGlnaTq2bq0001f925@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <01bd01c3c1ac$0e2a6160$1ccd5cd1@neptune>

On Tuesday, December 09, 2003 2:15 PM Brian Lee brian_a_lee at hotmail.com
wrote:
> Of course I too am sick and tired of people
> spouting off about things which they know
> nothing.

And I'm not.  I enjoy the ability to pounce on them, but, showing
another of life's little ironies, I don't like it when I'm in that
position.:)

Later!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 13 19:04:42 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:04:42 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312130740070.12761-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <001301c3c1ab$f7178cf0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Thanks Don and Harvey!  This matches the case almost exactly.  
I didn't realize that if one cashes a counterfeit money order
one is still liable to the bank, even after one is
holding the cash.  So my buddy might be out 3500 bucks.
Im pissed at myself for not having caught this *before*
the 3500, but at least we stopped the 7k loss.  The Snopes
writeup is probably the right deal.

spike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Don Dartfield
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 7:40 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
> 
> 
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> 
> > Ouch!  This is a variant of the old Nigerian scam.  See
> > <http://www.fraudaid.com/scamwarnings/419-030303-01-warticle.htm>.
> 
> Snopes has a good writeup on this scam here:
> 
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/scams/carsale.asp

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 13 19:20:37 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:20:37 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <20031213170342.28894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001701c3c1ae$30b78670$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Ja, thanks Mike.  I think what is about to happen is
that the bank will notify Johnson that the cashier's check
is counterfeit, no one will show up to claim the car and
that Johnson has been stung for 3455, which is 3300 plus 
155 to Western Union.  During the whole transaction, I
kept asking him why the buyer wasn't paying the shipping
company, but I was too busy with a final exam to stop
and google on some of this stuff, dammit.  I guess now
we are both older, uglier and wiser.  At least we stopped
the 7k transfer.  spike  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Mike Lorrey
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 9:04 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
> 
> 
> Harvey is right here. You can't do international business the same way
> as you do it domestically. In international commerce, the buyer puts
> money into an account that the seller can verify actually has assets,
> typically with the shipping company or institutions it does business
> with. The Seller ships the item being sold along with a bill of lading
> to the buyer, and when the buyer receives the item, the shipping
> company releases the funds, or notifies who ever is holding the assets
> to release the funds, to the seller.
> 
> A friend of mine in Seattle is an international car broker and when
> people try this scam with him, he'll first call the issuing bank to
> verify that funds are available (this will weed out the less well
> executed scams) and even then will sit on the money for ten days to
> make sure the bank doesn't come back for the funds. Only then will he
> ship a car, and will include instructions for how to do international
> business in the future.
> 
> Never send funds back, either. Once you receive payment, and the check
> is cleared, that money is yours and you can legally consider the sale
> to be final.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 13 20:35:37 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 12:35:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <001201c3c1aa$ca4de710$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131231310.1495-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Spike (commenting on space tower
construction) wrote:

> I do beg to differ on this.  We are nowhere close to
> having the technology to build space towers, not in
> the next 20 years, not in the next 50.  Never mind
> all the practical difficulties, basic materials science
> is not even in the neighborhood of making it possible.

I'd be careful spike -- DuPont just announced a reasonable
way to separate out carbon nanotubes and I think the Univ.
of Utah has a method for spinning them into cables.  There
are 30+ companies working on making nanotubes cheap and
available.  Doesn't mean it will happen by 2010 -- but as
I'm fond of saying "If you lean on something long enough
it *will* fall over."

Though as I recall the way you have to build a cable
to GSO is you have to start with the materials in GSO
and run the cable toward the planet and a balancing
cable away from the planet at the same time.  I think
its going to require a *lot* of Delta 4's to get that
much nanotube cable up to GSO.

Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 13 20:49:43 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 12:49:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <000201c3c1b8$bf64bfa0$e9ee17cb@renegade>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131235500.1495-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Avatar Polymorph wrote:

[snip lots of discussion about beam or particle based weapons...]

> Will the American national government define its stated cultural
> and political hegemony through the barrel of a beam weapon?

First, I would question your premise that the warheads are stored.
I believe that both the U.S. and Russia are destroying a significant
fraction of them.  That doesn't solve the problem of what to do
with the plutonium -- I believe that in at least Russia they are
working on diluting the plutonium down so it can be sold as
reactor fuel (but you should check this).

Second, the average American doesn't view Russia as a significant
threat any more -- so while we might fund a beam weapon here
(the chemical laser on the 747) or particle weapons there (I
think the Navy may be working on some high velocity/mass
particle weapons) the general threat is viewed as being
countries like North Korea or perhaps China (if the Taiwan
situation blew up) or maybe Pakistan or Iran if the Muslim
populations got lit on fire for some reason.  So I don't
think you are going to see large U.S. expenditures on putting
into place lots of beam and particle weapons.  The average
American (and the typical opposition politician) is smart
enough to know that the real risks are in stealth cells,
shipping containers, porous borders, etc. all of which
could contribute to the importing of a actual nuclear
weapon or a dirty bomb.  And don't get me started on
bioweapons -- we already know you can send those in the
mail.

So I think the premise that there will be a large focus
on classical "big" weapon anti-weapons has its limits.
Because we have already seen that all such efforts are
ineffective for people who are clever enough to take
other approaches.

Robert




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sat Dec 13 20:58:48 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:58:48 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131231310.1495-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <013301c3c1bb$e95961a0$99994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:35 PM

> its going to require a *lot* of Delta 4's to get that
> much nanotube cable up to GSO.

Run it up there on heavy-duty ground-based lasers? Or would development of
that tech cost more than rockets?

Damien Broderick



From scerir at libero.it  Sat Dec 13 21:19:38 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir at libero.it)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:19:38 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
Message-ID: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/13/eu.summit/index.html
http://news.ft.com/home/europe

It seems to me obvious that you cannot
build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25) 
very different states, having very different
histories (and reciprocal wars), populations, 
religions, etc., starting  from the economy 
and markets, Political issues come first . 
The EU founding fathers knew that very well. 
s.



From dirk at neopax.com  Sat Dec 13 21:25:01 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 21:25:01 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>
Message-ID: <011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <scerir at libero.it>
To: "extropy-chat" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 9:19 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses


> http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/13/eu.summit/index.html
> http://news.ft.com/home/europe
>
> It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25)
> very different states, having very different
> histories (and reciprocal wars), populations,
> religions, etc., starting  from the economy
> and markets, Political issues come first .
> The EU founding fathers knew that very well.

On the contrary.
What we definately don't need is a poor copy of the US with its centralised
federal govt, which is what the EU is/was aiming for.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From jacques at dtext.com  Sat Dec 13 21:56:34 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:56:34 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
In-Reply-To: <011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>
	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>
Message-ID: <3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>

Dirk Bruere wrote:

> From: <scerir at libero.it>
>>
>>It seems to me obvious that you cannot
>>build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25)
>>very different states, having very different
>>histories (and reciprocal wars), populations,
>>religions, etc., starting  from the economy
>>and markets, Political issues come first .
>>The EU founding fathers knew that very well.
> 
> 
> On the contrary.
> What we definately don't need is a poor copy of the US with its centralised
> federal govt, which is what the EU is/was aiming for.

Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe? 
Why?

Jacques




From support at imminst.org  Sat Dec 13 22:11:05 2003
From: support at imminst.org (support at imminst.org)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:11:05 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update
Message-ID: <3fdb8e79b55bc@imminst.org>

Mike Perry - Alcor, Cryonics & Immortality
*****************************
Alcor Patient Care Assistant and author of 
"Forever for All", Mike Perry chats will ImmInst 
about his current work and the future of Cryonics.
CHAT TIME: Dec 14 @ 8pm Eastern
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=2385


ImmInst - Book Project
*****************************
Thanks to exceptions efforts from the
ImmInst book editing team, the project
is moving forward at an impressive pace.

See an impressive list of 34 authors offering
to help thus far here:  
http://imminst.org/book/#FAR


ImmInst Constitution Vote 
*****************************
Between Dec 10 - Dec 25, 2003, all ImmInst 
Members (Basic & Full) have an opportunity to 
vote on the newest version of the Constitution.
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=99&t=2569&s=


XML - ImmInst Updated News Feed Link
*****************************
If you have a news reader such as 
NewzCrawler.com, you can add ImmInst's 
news feed link to your program.
http://imminst.org/archive/index.xml


Complementary "Physical Immortality" Magazine 
*****************************
The Society for Venturism has graciously sent
ImmInst twenty copies of its new magazine,
"Physical Immortality".  This 32 page edition is 
chop full of high-powered articles specifically 
concerning the possibility of living forever. 

Happily, the next twenty members to become ImmInst
Full Members will receive a copy of the magazine along 
with a free copy of James Halperin's "The First Immortal". 

Full Members will also gain access to the Full 
Member forums you can join dedicated members who 
are currently working on the ImmInst Book Project.

You can help ImmInst fulfill its mission to conquer the 
blight of involuntary death. 

Become an ImmInst Full Member:
** http://imminst.org/index_join.php


If you're already a Full Member, you can visit the 
Society For Venturism's website for more information 
about how to receive the magazine: 
http://www.venturist.org/pi.htm 


Warm Regards,
ImmInst.org Team











 














To be removed from all of our mailing lists, click here:
http://www.imminst.org/archive/mailinglists/mailinglists.php?p=mlist&rem=extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 13 22:07:44 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 14:07:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <013301c3c1bb$e95961a0$99994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

> From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
>
> > its going to require a *lot* of Delta 4's to get that
> > much nanotube cable up to GSO.
>
> Run it up there on heavy-duty ground-based lasers? Or would development of
> that tech cost more than rockets?

I'm not so sure the development is a problem.  The lasers in both
the fusion reactor at LLNL and in the 747 the gov. is putting together
as a defensive weapon pack a pretty big punch (in terms of Joules).

However I'm not sure that would be enough to function as a source
of lift for the amount of mass that would be required.  We need some
harder numbers here in terms of the minimal mass for a cable that
could withstand normal forces (gravity, wind, etc.) and allow
micro-elevators to climb up and down the cable.  Also some figures
on the lift efficiencies of laser propulsion (it has to be really
low).  One problem is that I think most lasers systems are currently
designed to deliver heat (melt the incomings, fuse the pellets, etc.).
One would need a shift in design strategies if one wants to use them
for non-destructive propulsion purposes.

R.




From sjvans at ameritech.net  Sat Dec 13 23:04:50 2003
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:04:50 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alcor Announcement
In-Reply-To: <3fdb8e79b55bc@imminst.org>
References: <3fdb8e79b55bc@imminst.org>
Message-ID: <1071356690.1031.123.camel@Renfield>

December 13, 2003

From: Michael Riskin; Alcor VP, CFO, Board Chairman
Re: Alcor announces its new CEO, Joseph A. Waynick

First, on behalf of everyone associated with the mission of cryonics, I
wish to once again, officially thank Dr. Jerry Lemler for his visionary
efforts as Alcor's CEO these past two years. Retiring from this position
on December 31, 2003, Jerry will continue to support the foundation as
Alcor's medical director and chief spokesperson commencing on January 1,
2004. 

We all wish you, Jerry, the very best of ongoing successes in whatever
you do, but especially in your fight against the life threatening
illness that attacked you earlier this year.

It is also with great pleasure, that I am announcing on behalf of the
board directors, the selection of Joseph Waynick, who will be succeeding
Dr Lemler as Alcor's CEO, commencing January 1, 2004. Joe brings a rich
and successful career combining business, management, and technology to
this position. In addition, he has been elected to the Alcor Board of
Directors, effective immediately.

Having gotten to know Joe on a more personal level, I am confident that
under his leadership he will guide Alcor to even greater heights as the
world's premier provider of cryonics services. 

Michael Riskin



From dirk at neopax.com  Sat Dec 13 22:23:05 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:23:05 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>
	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>
	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 9:56 PM
Subject: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe


> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
> > From: <scerir at libero.it>
> >>
> >>It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> >>build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25)
> >>very different states, having very different
> >>histories (and reciprocal wars), populations,
> >>religions, etc., starting  from the economy
> >>and markets, Political issues come first .
> >>The EU founding fathers knew that very well.
> >
> >
> > On the contrary.
> > What we definately don't need is a poor copy of the US with its
centralised
> > federal govt, which is what the EU is/was aiming for.
>
> Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe?
> Why?


Because having a relatively coherent economic bloc of around 450m people is
a base which can wield enough power to maintain the economic and military
independence of its member states with respect to other world forces.

However, I am not in favour of an EU govt in Brussels that feels it can poke
its nose into the purely internal workings of its member states eg criminal
law, various Rights issues etc. The EU should be limited to inter national
issues only.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sat Dec 13 23:06:15 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:06:15 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cells and bio-magic
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312130503510.26238-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <016501c3c1cd$ba3a5f70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote,
> Every extropian should send a Newtonmas card to Dr. Elaine
> Fuchs at Rockefeller University for her efforts in this area. 
>  (Hows that for being proactive Harvey???)

You suggest sending thank-you cards after the fact, to people we never met,
for doing work without our involvement, on projects we never previously
heard of, based on public reports we can't independently verify.

And you call this "proactive"?   :-)

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sat Dec 13 23:06:24 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:06:24 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312130740070.12761-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <016601c3c1cd$bf14be50$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Don Dartfield wrote,
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> 
> > Ouch!  This is a variant of the old Nigerian scam.  See 
> > <http://www.fraudaid.com/scamwarnings/419-030303-01-warticle.htm>.
> 
> Snopes has a good writeup on this scam here:
> <http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/scams/carsale.asp>

They also give a number to call if you have been scammed:
"If you have been bilked, call the U.S. Secret Service at (202) 406-5572 or
write to U.S. Secret Service, Financial Crimes Division, 950 H St. N.W.,
Washington, DC 20223. Also, call your state attorney general's consumer
protection division."

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 13 23:18:15 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:18:15 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Glenn Fishbine on the space elevator
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <001401c3c1cf$6581c3e0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Glenn Fishbine author of  _The Investor's Guide to_Nanotechnology_
And_Micromachines_  (pub 2002. Wiley: Finance) put together a 
critical article on the space elevator concept. 

Its a little dated. There are carbon nanotubes longer than 1mm now,
but some of the engineering and other challenges may still be of 
interest even if to just to see if they can be overcome. 

heres a link to the pdf
http://www.glennfishbine.com/articles/roping_the_stars.pdf

Regards,
Brett







From rhanson at gmu.edu  Sat Dec 13 23:31:52 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:31:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131231310.1495-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <001201c3c1aa$ca4de710$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031213182951.02249888@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/13/2003 Robert Bradbury wrote:
>Though as I recall the way you have to build a cable
>to GSO is you have to start with the materials in GSO
>and run the cable toward the planet and a balancing
>cable away from the planet at the same time.  I think
>its going to require a *lot* of Delta 4's to get that
>much nanotube cable up to GSO.

Right, but the first cable you lift doesn't need to be
thick enough to lift anything but more cable parts.
The first thin cable lifts more cable parts, which then
makes a thicker cable, which can lift larger cable parts,
and so on.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 13 23:34:01 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:34:01 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cells and bio-magic
References: <016501c3c1cd$ba3a5f70$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000201c3c1d2$3f5f29c0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> Robert J. Bradbury wrote,
> > Every extropian should send a Newtonmas card to Dr. Elaine
> > Fuchs at Rockefeller University for her efforts in this area. 
> >  (Hows that for being proactive Harvey???)
> 
> You suggest sending thank-you cards after the fact, to people we
> never met, for doing work without our involvement, on projects 
> we never previously heard of, based on public reports we can't
> independently verify.
> 
> And you call this "proactive"?   :-)

I've got to agree with Harvey on that one ;-) Not that people don't
usually appreciate hearing from another person that supports their
work. Nobody ever gets sick of being appreciated but one card from
Robert (or an email) would probably be better than a bunch that 
looked like a  concerted campaigne from a group she'd never heard
of. The poor woman would probably wonder if the Raelians had 
renamed themselves and were trying to recruit her. :-) 

Seriously Harvey,  I think the most proactive thing you could do 
if you *want* to do something would be to take up Natasha's offer
and work on helping to identify goals. That's important. Your 
reasoning is sound on identifying goals and I think your input would
be valuable. I wish I was able to get to the US more easily.

Regards,
Brett 

 




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sat Dec 13 23:36:31 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:36:31 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] laser boosting
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <019601c3c1d1$f8efda20$99994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
Saturday, December 13, 2003 4:07 PM

>One problem is that I think most lasers systems are currently
> designed to deliver heat (melt the incomings, fuse the pellets, etc.).
> One would need a shift in design strategies if one wants to use them
> for non-destructive propulsion purposes.

A steam-driven spaceship! Pack it with ice. Since the Antarctic icebergs are
melting anyway, let's at least put the stuff to good use. Or would the
dissociated H2O do horrid things to the ozone layers, etc? (I do know the
poles are the worst possible place to launch a Beanstalk from, unless maybe
it's the whipping kind that nearly touches down now and then and you have to
chase it with a jet.)

Damien Broderick



From jacques at dtext.com  Sat Dec 13 23:46:23 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 00:46:23 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <016601c3c1cd$bf14be50$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <016601c3c1cd$bf14be50$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <3FDBA4CF.2010103@dtext.com>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> Don Dartfield wrote,
> 
>>On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ouch!  This is a variant of the old Nigerian scam.  See 
>>><http://www.fraudaid.com/scamwarnings/419-030303-01-warticle.htm>.
>>
>>Snopes has a good writeup on this scam here:
>><http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/scams/carsale.asp>
> 
> 
> They also give a number to call if you have been scammed:
> "If you have been bilked, call the U.S. Secret Service at (202) 406-5572 or
> write to U.S. Secret Service, Financial Crimes Division, 950 H St. N.W.,
> Washington, DC 20223. Also, call your state attorney general's consumer
> protection division."

Maybe the guy waiting for the remaining $7000 on the other end of the 
Western Union link can be arrested by the local police when he shows up, 
and the $3000 already sent be recovered? Let Johnson say he's praying 
for Lucky's mother to get better while he solves a little problem 
delaying the sending of the remaining $7000. Of course I'm assuming here 
that Lucky is not reading extropy-chat -- seems safe to me :-)

Jacques



From jacques at dtext.com  Sat Dec 13 23:48:08 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 00:48:08 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
In-Reply-To: <033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>
	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>
Message-ID: <3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com>

Dirk Bruere wrote:

> From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
>>
>>Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe?
>>Why?
>
> 
> Because having a relatively coherent economic bloc of around 450m people is
> a base which can wield enough power to maintain the economic and military
> independence of its member states with respect to other world forces.
> 
> However, I am not in favour of an EU govt in Brussels that feels it can poke
> its nose into the purely internal workings of its member states eg criminal
> law, various Rights issues etc. The EU should be limited to inter national
> issues only.

Are there good reasons to think that agreement and coherent behaviour is 
possible in economic and military international matters without 
political unity?

Suppose a situation similar to WWII, with fascist Germany invading 
nearby countries, and causing a potentially global threat, and where the 
US got involved. Will a politically loose Europe manage to make the 
decision to get involved, or will it stay irresolute and passive while 
no clear agreement can be reached by the member States, except on the 
most extreme cases?

In other words, can Europe really leverage its military (and economic) 
power as a bloc while preserving the freedom and independence of its 
member States? Can you have the advantages of being a big State when you 
are a loose, ad hoc federation?

Jacques




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sun Dec 14 00:07:09 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:07:09 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] hangover cure pill?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<019601c3c1d1$f8efda20$99994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <01dd01c3c1d6$3a3c5360$99994a43@texas.net>

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/13/1071125712643.html

The drug remained classified in KGB files until 1999, but in the past six
months the pill has been marketed in the US. Named after the legal drinking
age in America, RU-21 stops the body making an enzyme that turns alcohol
into acetaldehyde, a toxic chemical that can damage tissues.

[anyone tried this?]



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 14 00:37:40 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:37:40 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <016601c3c1cd$bf14be50$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000901c3c1da$7b647bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> > Snopes has a good writeup on this scam here:
> > <http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/scams/carsale.asp>
> 
> They also give a number to call if you have been scammed:
> "If you have been bilked, call the U.S. Secret Service at 
> (202) 406-5572 or write to U.S. Secret Service...
> 
> -- 
> Harvey Newstrom {degrees and alphabet soup snipped}...

Roger that.  We looked into it and it turns out
the bank is now admitting that it is very probable
that the money order was counterfeit.  After the
fact, they inform Johnson that he is liable for the
entire amount of the check, this after the (admittedly
junior) cashier had assured him that the check was
ok, good to go, etc.  He had suspicions about the
deal, then his own bank seduced him into going ahead
with the transaction of wiring the third party
the 3300 bucks.  I urged him to hold the bank
responsible for the 3455 and give them the difference,
of about 8k, since they share blame.  

Heres the deal now: the scammer doesn't know that
we are onto him, so we could potentially set up a
sting operation and nab the reprehensible perp.
Johnson isn't supposed to be back in town until
Wednesday, so we have some time to think of a plan.
If there were some way to put out a phony Western
Union claim number, perhaps we could set a trap.

spike

 



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 14 00:42:44 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:42:44 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <3FDBA4CF.2010103@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <000f01c3c1db$30a0a9a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Maybe the guy waiting for the remaining $7000 on the other end of the 
> Western Union link can be arrested by the local police when 
> he shows up, 
> and the $3000 already sent be recovered? Let Johnson say he's praying 
> for Lucky's mother to get better while he solves a little problem 
> delaying the sending of the remaining $7000. Of course I'm 
> assuming here 
> that Lucky is not reading extropy-chat -- seems safe to me :-)
> 
> Jacques

You beat me to it on this Jacques.  Turns out anyone can
pick up money from any Western Union anywhere in the world
with just a name and a claim code.  I wasn't aware of that
either until yesterday.  So we don't know where the other
end is.

spike



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec 14 00:50:34 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:50:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cells and bio-magic
In-Reply-To: <000201c3c1d2$3f5f29c0$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <017901c3c1dc$4bb1df60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Brett Paatsch wrote,
> Seriously Harvey,  I think the most proactive thing you could do 
> if you *want* to do something would be to take up Natasha's 
> offer and work on helping to identify goals. That's important. Your 
> reasoning is sound on identifying goals and I think your 
> input would be valuable. I wish I was able to get to the US 
> more easily.

I would be glad to help identify Extropian goals.  

People may not remember that I:
- Was the first paid member of the Extropians List in the last 1980's
- Presented at Extro-5
- Helped develop the idea for Pro-Act
- Served on the ExI Board in 2001
- Created the Extropian FAQ
- Created the ExI-Community group on Yahoo
- Offered to create a Node-Net forum on Computer Security
- Offered to be an Advisor to ExI
- Offered to be a Moderator for the Extropians List
- and have been involved with numerous other projects here and there over
the years

I have tried to get involved with ExI activities.  Sadly, most of them sort
of withered away without any real progress.  I do not mean to sound negative
here, but I think we can do better in the future than we have in the past.
I think organization and clear-cut goals is the key.  It sounds like Natasha
is already leading ExI to examine goals and focus on priorities.  I wish
them the best of luck and would gladly participate in helping out any way I
can.

I am still willing to:
- become a moderator on this list
- become an ExI advisor
- resume coordination of the ExI-Community forum
- resume my role as editor of the Extropian FAQ
- resume work on Pro-Act or activism activities
- become a Node-Net leader in a security oriented forum
- become a Node-Net leader in a nutrition oriented forum
- develop articles or presentations 
- brainstorm ideas individually or in a group
- review other people's work for further development suggestions
- etc.

This week I have been working on:
- being interviewed for a Mexican magazine article on the future of security
- presenting business drivers for security in seminars
- writing an article for the Immortality Institute book project
- preparing for a chat for the Immortality Institute
- reviewing a WTA survey before it goes out
- brainstorming my own version of a nutritional food-groups chart for a
longevity diet
- and a whole bunch of personal goals for improving my life, my business,
and my future

I know a lot of people have been perceiving my recent discussions as being
negative.  I'm sorry about that, and should probably learn to present them
in a more positive way.  However, I am currently focused on prioritizing my
goals, figuring out where my activities have been suboptimal in the past,
and brainstorming how to be come more effective and successful in the
future.  Pointing out all the flaws in previous and current activities is
NOT being negative.  It is the first step in assessing our current position
and making it better in the future.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec 14 00:58:31 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:58:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Purpose of the Extropian Institute
In-Reply-To: <269620-2200312512232638111@M2W040.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <017a01c3c1dd$67b53d50$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Natasha wrote,
> Good point Harvey.
> 
> My suggestion is to join the planning team for the ExI Summit 
> (mentioned briefly last month's newsletter).  This weekend 
> Greg Burch is coming in from Houston and we will having a 
> meeting Sunday Morning. After ExI's last Summit meeting in 
> Houston in November, we have been boiling it down to a 
> specific, clear-cut purpose.  With so many goal options, 
> finding just the right one is the key.

This sounds wonderful.  Let me know if I can help.  I am good at analysis,
where we break down fuzzy big pictures into clearly defined smaller pieces.
Choosing the big picture goal is hard.  Breaking the big picture goal into
doable pieces is merely complicated.  Plodding through all the little
incremental pieces is downright easy, boring, and tedious.

Let me know if there is anything I can do to help.  Also don't forget all
the people on this list who would love to throw in their two cents, will
brainstorm any idea to death, and give you a billion different conflicting
viewpoints with lots of unexpected reactions and data.

All in all, though, it sounds like fun!

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec 14 01:06:37 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 20:06:37 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] internet car sale scam
In-Reply-To: <000901c3c1da$7b647bc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <017b01c3c1de$894ef720$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Yes, this is extremely rare to catch the scam in the act.  Usually people
ignore the scam if they recognize it, or figure it out after it is too late.
I would say definitely call the U.S. Secret Service 202-406-5572 and tell
them that you have a scam in progress that the perp wants more money wired
to him.  This is the perfect opportunity to set up a sting and catch this
guy when he comes to pick up the money.  (You should not even have to really
send money, just tell him you will send it to the specified place and time.)

If the U.S. Secret Service won't help out, I can try to arrange something
with Private Investigators or Bounty Hunters.  But I am afraid my contacts
would be quasi-legal, would want to be paid for an operation, and probably
wouldn't afford you any legal recourse or legal recovery anyway.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From jcorb at iol.ie  Sun Dec 14 01:43:41 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:43:41 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
In-Reply-To: <200312132345.hBDNjMl08690@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214013413.033b1060@pop.iol.ie>

At 04:45 PM 12/13/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Message: 23
>Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:56:34 +0100
> >From: JDP <jacques at dtext.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
>To: Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com>,      ExI chat list
>         <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <3FDB8B12.7080806 at dtext.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
>Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
> > From: <scerir at libero.it>
> >>
> >>It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> >>build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25)
> >>very different states, having very different
> >>histories (and reciprocal wars), populations,
> >>religions, etc., starting  from the economy
> >>and markets, Political issues come first .
> >>The EU founding fathers knew that very well.
> >
> >
> > On the contrary.
> > What we definately don't need is a poor copy of the US with its centralised
> > federal govt, which is what the EU is/was aiming for.
>
>Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe?
>Why?

Depends on what you mean by pro-Europe.  If you mean no physical or trade 
barriers, to enjoy different cultures and options without restraint, then 
I'm pro-Europe.

If you mean, as has been said "a poor copy of the US", then no, I wouldn't 
be pro-that-kind-of-Europe.  Neither am I pro the current Constitution, as 
the vast majority of Europeans have no conception of the difference between 
a document bestowing freedoms, next to one restricting a Governments 
ability to infringe on freedoms.  Many people here still beleive their 
rights spring from their Constitutions.  A dangerous error.

I'm not pro a Europe whose Constitution has within it a restriction on 
reproductive rights were none should be (or at very least, delegated to the 
legislation of individual states, even that not being a good solution).

And don't even get me started on the whole "mention God" fiasco.



James...

PS - Anyone hear about the likelihood of the French passing a law banning 
all religious symbols and garments from schools?


>Jacques




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 02:37:22 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:37:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131235500.1495-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031214023722.37950.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Avatar Polymorph wrote:
> 
> [snip lots of discussion about beam or particle based weapons...]
> 
> > Will the American national government define its stated cultural
> > and political hegemony through the barrel of a beam weapon?
> 
> First, I would question your premise that the warheads are stored.
> I believe that both the U.S. and Russia are destroying a significant
> fraction of them.  That doesn't solve the problem of what to do
> with the plutonium -- I believe that in at least Russia they are
> working on diluting the plutonium down so it can be sold as
> reactor fuel (but you should check this).

The nukes I don't know about, but their delivery systems are being
consumed. Both the US and Russia are using up their old ballistic
missiles as cheap launchers. All of the old Titan missiles have been
used up this way, and minuteman and MX rocket engines are also being
used. The Russians just tested I believe the SS-19 as a launcher for
satellite cargos.

I'd save all the nukes, de-MIRV them, and keep them for when they'll be
needed on Mars for terraforming.

> 
> Second, the average American doesn't view Russia as a significant
> threat any more -- 

Even the last decade of the USSR, they could not have fought their way
out of a paper bag logistically if we had decided to go head to head
with them. Really doesn't matter what your weapons are if your
infrastructure can't support them, which is why so many SSBs are
scuttled and rusting away in Russian ports.

> so while we might fund a beam weapon here
> (the chemical laser on the 747) or particle weapons there (I
> think the Navy may be working on some high velocity/mass
> particle weapons) the general threat is viewed as being
> countries like North Korea or perhaps China (if the Taiwan
> situation blew up) or maybe Pakistan or Iran if the Muslim
> populations got lit on fire for some reason.  So I don't
> think you are going to see large U.S. expenditures on putting
> into place lots of beam and particle weapons.  The average
> American (and the typical opposition politician) is smart
> enough to know that the real risks are in stealth cells,
> shipping containers, porous borders, etc. all of which
> could contribute to the importing of a actual nuclear
> weapon or a dirty bomb.  And don't get me started on
> bioweapons -- we already know you can send those in the
> mail.

I think even those threats are going to be abating so long as the US is
seen in the muslim world as willing to strike out at any perceived
belligerent when a terrorist strike provides the moral opportunity to
do so. If we can't always catch every attacker, I'd rather deter them
all by making them think we are crazy. Sitting still and yakking about
treating terrorists as criminals is the sort of behavior that
encourages them to attack. The whole world knows how soft our justice
system is on criminals...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 02:43:03 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:43:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>
Message-ID: <20031214024303.3371.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "scerir at libero.it" <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/13/eu.summit/index.html
> http://news.ft.com/home/europe
> 
> It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25) 
> very different states, having very different
> histories (and reciprocal wars), populations, 
> religions, etc., starting  from the economy 
> and markets, Political issues come first . 
> The EU founding fathers knew that very well. 

On the contrary, all it prevents is a strong central government from
forming, forcing the EU fascists to accept a more federalist structure,
even a loose confederation. This is good news for the few states in
europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like France
and Lithuania, and bad news for those wanting the power to challenge
the US merely for the sake of challenging for power...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Dec 14 02:54:03 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:54:03 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cells and bio-magic
References: <017901c3c1dc$4bb1df60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <00a401c3c1ed$8c25c000$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> I would be glad to help identify Extropian goals.  

> This week I have been working on:
> - being interviewed for a Mexican magazine article on the future of 
>  security
> - presenting business drivers for security in seminars
> - writing an article for the Immortality Institute book project
> - preparing for a chat for the Immortality Institute
> - reviewing a WTA survey before it goes out
> - brainstorming my own version of a nutritional food-groups chart for a
> longevity diet
> - and a whole bunch of personal goals for improving my life, my business,
> and my future

Harvey do you have a web-site? I think this was a good suggestion
Robert made. The reason I ask is that I've noticed the some of the 
folk that have lots of energy and ideas often do. Anders, Robert, Reason,
Damien. It seems to be a great way of ensuring effort and research is
not wasted. I've been trying to get one going myself. Actually I have
one under development - too slowly unfortunately but I've started. 

I think its smarter to have lots of websites. My political model of 
optimal efficiency makes me think of armies of one that can swarm
as the occasion requires it. Pooling information and useful links.
Very hard to take down. None of the elements constrained by 
bottlenecks. All capable of pooling fire for best effect. 

In democracies we get one vote each pretty much but we also get
free speech. How effectively we use that free speech and how
much we leverage what we say with technology is up to us. 

Regards,
Brett



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 02:48:15 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 18:48:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031214024815.69774.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> One problem is that I think most lasers systems are currently
> designed to deliver heat (melt the incomings, fuse the pellets,
> etc.).
> One would need a shift in design strategies if one wants to use them
> for non-destructive propulsion purposes.

The lasers are fine for the purpose, you just dont need to focus them
so well into a given square inch of target. You let the thrust cone of
the launcher focus the light enough to ignite the air passing through
and heat the rest enough to expand for useful thrust. You are going to
need a lot of lasers, though, to boost several dozen tons of cargo into
orbit. Plus a lot of power for those lasers, prolly a couple nukes that
currently don't exist.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec 14 04:26:05 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 23:26:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cells and bio-magic
In-Reply-To: <00a401c3c1ed$8c25c000$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <018001c3c1fa$671107e0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Brett Paatsch wrote,
> Harvey do you have a web-site? I think this was a good suggestion 
> Robert made.

Yep.  I have a few websites:

<HarveyNewstrom.com> is my personal website.  It covers my Nutrition book,
some family pictures and a lot of stuff about me that overlaps my
professional work.

<Newstaff.com> is my professional commercial website.  It describes my
network security company, Newstaff Inc. <Newstaff.info> is my professional
information website.  It describes standard security information.
<Newstaff.net> is my professional customer network.  It is limited to my
paying customers right now. <Newstaff.biz> is my professional e-business
site.  It sells security related stuff. 
<Newstaff.org> is my professional organizations site.  It covers
professional organizations that I support.  (It is new and not very well
developed yet.)

> The reason I ask is that I've noticed
> the some of the
> folk that have lots of energy and ideas often do. Anders, 
> Robert, Reason, Damien. It seems to be a great way of 
> ensuring effort and research is not wasted. I've been trying 
> to get one going myself. Actually I have one under 
> development - too slowly unfortunately but I've started. 

Definitely!  They always seem to be a little behind, because it takes time
to keep them updates.  My current month's activities are not on the websites
yet.  However, once ideas are captured, documented and published, they won't
be lost.  I want to get my websites updated some more, and develop working
groups and feedback channels for my ideas.  I certainly agree that websites
are a good tool to organize thoughts and present them.  They are perfect for
a current snapshot of polished presentations, unlike blogs or discussion
lists.  In fact, I am mulling over a system of slow debates with position
papers on websites for developing ideas, as opposed to the discussion model
of debate.  I also have some ideas for work-group websites, sort of like
Yahoo, but for building consensus data like FAQs, to-do lists, priorities,
agreements and work products as opposed to producing just talk.

I want to update my nutritional information online for reference.  At the
very least, I want to get a food-groups chart online for reference.  (I have
a scheme where basic food groups are protein, fats, carbs, fiber and water.
Then each group has foods divided in a continuum from least healthy to most
healthy.)  I also want basic checklists for security for reference.  And I
am currently revamping my security offerings toward a standards-based
auditing model, which will cause a major overhaul of my business offerings.

> I think its smarter to have lots of websites. My political model of 
> optimal efficiency makes me think of armies of one that can swarm as 
> the occasion requires it. Pooling information and useful links. Very 
> hard to take down. None of the elements constrained by
> bottlenecks. All capable of pooling fire for best effect. 

Me too.  I need to expand my futurist areas of my website to link to all the
neat stuff everyone else is publishing.  I had such areas, but they got so
out of date that I had to cut it back to just me for now.  I will expand
them again later.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sun Dec 14 05:25:02 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 23:25:02 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] home pages
References: <017901c3c1dc$4bb1df60$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<00a401c3c1ed$8c25c000$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <008901c3c202$a1c56fe0$99994a43@texas.net>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:54 PM

> Harvey do you have a web-site?

The url's shown at the bottom of every message Harvey posts.

> The reason I ask is that I've noticed the some of the
> folk that have lots of energy and ideas often do. Anders, Robert, Reason,
> Damien.

I don't deserve to be part of that list, in fact. The website I usually
reference is Barbara Lamar's site about my work, which she built before we'd
met. I should get a blog going myself, but I'm too distracted with other
things.

Damien Broderick



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec 14 06:12:05 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:12:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Doubt and About
In-Reply-To: <p05100301bbff679e5f7c@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <019101c3c209$360e58f0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Amara Graps wrote,
> What is your suggested funding source? Many people here have 
> families and need to work for a living. (For me, at least three jobs).

Good question!  I do not have a suggested funding source.  I was
brainstorming ideas for working groups where people could get together on
specific tasks instead of less structured talk in the mailing list.  I would
hope that we have enough experts already here or can attract enough experts
to accomplish some things without having to hire others.  However, I do
understand the concern with funding and time.  Hired experts may cost too
much money, and volunteer experts may not have enough time.  This seems to
be one of our biggest limiting factors, time and money.  I undergo money and
time crunches myself.  I wish I had easy answers to both questions, but I
don't.  I am trying to become more efficient at making money and allowing
more time for my personal goals myself.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From scerir at libero.it  Sun Dec 14 07:35:04 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir at libero.it)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:35:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
Message-ID: <HPVJQG$6BA86F177CD93C83C5662CAC3B096EF2@libero.it>

> > It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> > build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25)
> > very different states, having very different
> > histories (and reciprocal wars), populations,
> > religions, etc., starting  from the economy
> > and markets, Political issues come first .
> > The EU founding fathers knew that very well.

> On the contrary.
> What we definately don't need is a poor copy of the US with its centralised
> federal govt, which is what the EU is/was aiming for.
> Dirk


Ok I like Utopia, Fractal Europe, Flat Lands.
But I've also read Plato, Ludwig von Bertalanffy
(General System Theory), Wolfgang Weidlich
(Sociodynamics; Concepts and Models of Quantitative 
Sociology). There are boundaries, there are limits.
You cannot do everything you want. Even within
spin-glasses theory that's impossible. You need
a strong, central, political power. We are humans,
not nano-items. And we are already fighting, in EU,
for the "buffalo mozzarella TM", or "Parmesan
cheese TM", or "Parma ham TM", or the "Gorgonzola
cheese TM", etc. etc. And imagine when Russia comes in. 
We'll be 26 nations (languages, religions, economies,
military powers, populations, resources). 

This morning Europe is a trinity. UK, France-Germany,
all the rest.



From gpmap at runbox.com  Sun Dec 14 07:40:01 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:40:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEBOCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From the Washington Post
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62011-2003Dec13.html):
Negotiations on a new European constitution collapsed in acrimony Saturday,
with the 25 current and future members of the European Union failing to find
a formula to satisfy medium-size countries worried that their voices and
votes would be swamped by larger countries in an expanded union.
The main issue dividing the group was the allocation of votes. Under the
current complex system, Spain and Poland, both medium-size countries with
about 38 million people, each carries almost the same clout as Germany, with
80 million people, and France, with 60 million. France and Germany were
pressing for what they called a more democratic voting system, in which all
future EU laws could be passed by a simple majority of the 25 countries, as
long as that represented at least 60 percent of the people living in the
union. But prime ministers Jose Maria Aznar of Spain and Leszek Miller of
Poland refused to agree to any new system that reduced their voting power.
Besides altering the voting system, the draft constitution included changes
aimed at making the EU more efficient and giving it more clout on the world
stage. Among the proposed changes was the creation of the powerful new post
of president, who could meet on the international level with, for example,
President Bush, as a representative of the EU. The constitution would also
have created a European foreign minister to articulate a common European
foreign policy. But since the constitution was part of a package, those
changes are now on hold.

My comments:
[In other words: an agreement was not reached because European nation states
still resist ideas of real devolution of power from a national to a European
level. This has always been the main problem of Europe as an autonomous
political entity: member states insist on making the important decision
independently and accept the idea of European decision making, for important
things such as taxation and defense, only if they can retain a national veto
power. More European integration is only accepted for "less important
things" such as common R&D.
At the same time it is clear that the direction of History is that of more
and more integration and double devolution of power from nation states to
more autonomous regions below, and to a stronger Europe above. It will just
have to take the time it takes, for example the introduction of the Euro as
common currency took ten years and is not complete yet.]



From scerir at libero.it  Sun Dec 14 07:56:00 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir at libero.it)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:56:00 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
Message-ID: <HPVKPC$C31A12856C8DBFA7B977C972BBD16036@libero.it>

> On the contrary, all it prevents is a strong central government from
> forming, forcing the EU fascists to accept a more federalist structure,
> even a loose confederation. This is good news for the few states in
> europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like France
> and Lithuania, and bad news for those wanting the power to challenge
> the US merely for the sake of challenging for power...
> Mike Lorrey

Yes Mike, I understand. But I ask: what else is Europe (I mean the present 
theoretical "union" plus, virtually, the Russia) if not a direct, strong attempt 
to challenge the US? Since Iraqi war here, in this Europe, we realized
we do not have any military power, and any real political power. Did you
notice that? For sure you did. And we are closer to those ... eastern countries.
s.




From gpmap at runbox.com  Sun Dec 14 08:39:57 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:39:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] What will happen when a national political machine
	can fit on a laptop?
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEBOCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Found via BoingBoing, from the Washington Post: For all Dean's talk about
wanting to represent the truly "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party,"
the paradox is that he is essentially a third-party candidate using modern
technology to achieve a takeover of the Democratic Party. Other
candidates -- John Kerry, John Edwards, Wesley Clark -- are competing to
take control of the party's fundraising, organizational and media
operations. But Dean is not interested in taking control of those
depreciating assets.
Cheap information has allowed firms to shrink. Size is now less of an
advantage in organizations, and that means more competition in the global
marketplace. For companies, it's either reorganize or die. This is no less
true for political organizations, as Dean's success shows. He is the first
candidate to use the Internet effectively as a political organizing device.
The ability to have "virtual political parties" is the greatest challenge
the two parties have ever faced. There are strategies available to them, of
course -- deft positioning allows them to preempt competitors, as it does in
every industry, and they can use the same technology, although Internet
culture doesn't seem readily amenable to either Democrat.com or
Republican.com. Being a Democrat or a Republican isn't enough of an
advantage anymore -- there are simply too many other places where people can
get political information and find political bedfellows in an age of low
information costs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031214/009a5795/attachment.html>

From scerir at libero.it  Sun Dec 14 08:47:45 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:47:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214013413.033b1060@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <000e01c3c21e$f247b920$f0c7fea9@scerir>

From: "J Corbally"

> PS - Anyone hear about the likelihood of the French passing a law banning
> all religious symbols and garments from schools?

There are problems here in Italy. In schools
there are crucifixs, as Catholic symbols
(Is the crucifix just a Catholic symbol?).
Given that we (Italians) have about 200,000
laws and rules, it is difficult to know if
that is actually allowed by some very old law
(i.e. during Fascism: "God, Country, Family"
was the 'slogan') which is tacitly still in power,
or was later cancelled by a new law. For sure
in our Consitution there is a statement
about "religions" (plural), in general.
Now the problem is that Muslims (I mean Italian
Muslims) asked to remove those crucifixs from
schools. And our courts are already busy with
all that!
http://www.corriere.it/Primo_Piano/Cronache/2003/10_Ottobre/31/crocifisso.sh
tml




From gpmap at runbox.com  Sun Dec 14 08:55:16 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 09:55:16 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] New way to lock DNA-slicing enzyme onto chromosomes
	could lead to novel anti-cancer drugs
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEBPCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From EurekAlert: Investigators at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital have
discovered a new way that an enzyme crucial to the cell's ability to decode
genes and duplicate chromosomes can be turned into a poison inside cancer
cells. The discovery is an important step toward designing a new class of
anti-cancer drugs. Such drugs might be given with an existing agent that
also targets this enzyme, creating a one-two punch against both solid tumors
and leukemia, according to the researchers.
The enzyme, called Topoisomerase 1 (Top 1), is crucial to the cell's ability
to unwind the DNA of chromosomes and separate the two strands making up a
giant molecule. This activity permits the cell to transcribe (decode)
specific genes or to make a copy of the entire chromosome. Duplication of
chromosomes is critical to the process called mitosis, or cell division.
After the cell divides, each daughter cell receives a copy of the entire set
of duplicated chromosomes. Modifying Top 1 so it became locked onto the DNA
molecule was enough to cause cell death.
This differs from the way a currently used anti-cancer drug, camptothecin
(CPT), works. CPT works only during the part of the cell's life cycle called
S phase, when the cell synthesizes duplicate chromosomes. Because the new
strategy can work whether the cell is in S phase or just decoding a single
gene, a drug based on this approach could be particularly versatile.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031214/831bc27c/attachment.html>

From alito at organicrobot.com  Sun Dec 14 09:20:54 2003
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 19:20:54 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] New way to lock DNA-slicing enzyme onto
	chromosomes could lead to novel anti-cancer drugs
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEBPCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAEBPCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <1071393654.1267.173.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Sun, 2003-12-14 at 18:55, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:
> From EurekAlert: Investigators at St. Jude Children's Research
> Hospital have discovered a new way that an enzyme crucial to the
> cell's ability to decode genes and duplicate chromosomes can be turned
> into a poison inside cancer cells. The discovery is an important step
> toward designing a new class of anti-cancer drugs. Such drugs might be
> given with an existing agent that also targets this enzyme, creating a
> one-two punch against both solid tumors and leukemia, according to the
> researchers. 
> The enzyme, called Topoisomerase 1 (Top 1), is crucial to the cell's
> ability to unwind the DNA of chromosomes and separate the two strands
> making up a giant molecule. This activity permits the cell to
> transcribe (decode) specific genes or to make a copy of the entire
> chromosome. Duplication of chromosomes is critical to the process
> called mitosis, or cell division. After the cell divides, each
> daughter cell receives a copy of the entire set of duplicated
> chromosomes. Modifying Top 1 so it became locked onto the DNA molecule
> was enough to cause cell death. 
> This differs from the way a currently used anti-cancer drug,
> camptothecin (CPT), works. CPT works only during the part of the
> cell's life cycle called S phase, when the cell synthesizes duplicate
> chromosomes. Because the new strategy can work whether the cell is in
> S phase or just decoding a single gene, a drug based on this approach
> could be particularly versatile.
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
yes, very versatile, it would kill everything in its path.  Ways to kill
cells don't seem to be in short supply, ways to only kill cancer cells
are, and in that sense CPT sounds like a better idea.
This is another interesting basic research find (blocking Top1 kills the
cell) desperately looking for a popular press release.

Disclaimer:  I've got no fucking clue about biochem and i haven't even
read the paper, just the link, so ignore above and reclaim your minute
of life.
alejandro




From alex at ramonsky.com  Sun Dec 14 10:22:47 2003
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:22:47 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
References: <009001c3c0e8$c8310fb0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <3FDC39F7.9020801@ramonsky.com>



Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> We aren't inventing new things. 
>
[Audience]: ..."Oh yes we are!"...
[Character]: ..."Oh no we're not!"...(repeat x 4)
[Audience]: ....."Behind you!!"    :  )

Have a cool yule.
AR

>  
>




From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sun Dec 14 10:47:54 2003
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:47:54 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sole superpower/warfare 2003-2010 comments
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312131400260.3025-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0312141133400.3895@hercules>

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

>However I'm not sure that would be enough to function as a source
>of lift for the amount of mass that would be required.  We need some
>harder numbers here in terms of the minimal mass for a cable that
>could withstand normal forces (gravity, wind, etc.) and allow
>micro-elevators to climb up and down the cable.  Also some figures
>on the lift efficiencies of laser propulsion (it has to be really
>low).  One problem is that I think most lasers systems are currently
>designed to deliver heat (melt the incomings, fuse the pellets, etc.).
>One would need a shift in design strategies if one wants to use them
>for non-destructive propulsion purposes.

Is this report outdated? (warning, 16MB)

http://www.arcetri.astro.it/~puglisi/report/SpaceElevator.pdf

(Temporary location. I can't find the pdf version online anymore)

Ciao,
Alfio


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sun Dec 14 10:50:13 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 05:50:13 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution
In-Reply-To: <3FDC39F7.9020801@ramonsky.com>
Message-ID: <000801c3c230$1087f470$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Alex Ramonsky wrote,
> Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> 
> > We aren't inventing new things.
> >
> [Audience]: ..."Oh yes we are!"...
> [Character]: ..."Oh no we're not!"...(repeat x 4)
> [Audience]: ....."Behind you!!"    :  )
> 
> Have a cool yule.

Hahahahaha!  I'm too young to remember this stuff!

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From alex at ramonsky.com  Sun Dec 14 11:09:00 2003
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:09:00 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
References: <3FDB5D22.7080609@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <3FDC44CC.8010801@ramonsky.com>



Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:

>
>
> I could be surprised, but what Laura presages is probably NOT a good 
> thing.  Transhumanism needs to lose the optimism about outcomes.  
> Nobody is taking into account the fact that problems are hard and 
> humans are stupid.  Watch this space for serious developments in some 
> unknown amount of time, my wild guess being a decade, and quite 
> possibly nothing happening if "faking it well" turns out to be 
> AI-complete.
>
Thankyou for putting so succinctly into words _exactly_ what I mean when 
I say someone is going to create an Artificial Stupidity, real soon. And 
it's not going to be user friendly in exactly the same way that burgers 
aren't.
AR




From extropy at audry2.com  Sun Dec 14 12:17:13 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:17:13 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
In-Reply-To: <000e01c3c21e$f247b920$f0c7fea9@scerir>
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214013413.033b1060@pop.iol.ie>
	<000e01c3c21e$f247b920$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <200312141217.hBECHDX17928@igor.synonet.com>


> There are problems here in Italy. In schools
> there are crucifixs, as Catholic symbols
> (Is the crucifix just a Catholic symbol?).

No.

To my knowledge, all Christian churches use crosses. Crucifixes (cross
with Jesus) are used by many Orthodox and Protestant churches in well
as Roman Catholics.

Major


From dwayne at pobox.com  Sun Dec 14 12:11:37 2003
From: dwayne at pobox.com (dwayne)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:11:37 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] SADDAM HUSSEIN ARRESTED IN TIKRIT
Message-ID: <3FDC5379.7CC8BF6B@pobox.com>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3317429.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/index.html

Dwayne
-- 
               mailto:ddraig at pobox.com  
it's nice to be better, but it's much better to be nice
   ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e...
  http://www.barrelfullofmonkeys.org/Data/3-death.jpg
Sheldon: No! No! Not E.T.! Kill! Kill! Kill E.T.! Glock E.T.!
http://www.audioscrobbler.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=top10&file=userinfo&user=ddraig


From jcorb at iol.ie  Sun Dec 14 12:46:15 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:46:15 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214124315.033e8e80@pop.iol.ie>


>Saddam Hussein arrested in Iraq

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3317429.stm

>Ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has been captured by US forces, says 
>the US chief administrator in Iraq.
>"Ladies and gentlemen, we got him," Paul Bremer said at a news conference 
>in the capital, Baghdad, prompting loud cheers from Iraqis in the audience.
>The former leader was found hiding in a cellar in a town about 30 
>kilometres south of his ancestral hometown Tikrit.
>British Prime Minister Tony Blair has welcomed the news, saying it 
>"removes the shadow" hanging over Iraq.
>Saddam Hussein is the most wanted man on the list issued by US authorities 
>but has not been seen since Baghdad fell to US forces in April.
>Video footage apparently showing a dishevelled-looking Saddam in custoday 
>with a long black beard was shown at the press conference.

What more can you say?

Enjoy your Sunday :)



James...



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Dec 14 13:11:42 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 00:11:42 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214124315.033e8e80@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <01c501c3c243$d415c620$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

J Corbally wrote:

> >Saddam Hussein arrested in Iraq
 
> What more can you say?

Wow. I wonder if any weapons will be found now that
Saddam can be questioned directly? Its interesting that he is
still alive. Goering made a show of his trial. I wonder what
Saddam will say if he's given media attention and a chance 
to speak out. Interesting times. 

Brett



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec 14 13:26:32 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 08:26:32 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214124315.033e8e80@pop.iol.ie>
	<01c501c3c243$d415c620$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <008d01c3c245$e48d3fe0$89cd5cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, December 14, 2003 8:11 AM Brett Paatsch
bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au wrote:
>>>Saddam Hussein arrested in Iraq
>
>> What more can you say?
>
> Wow. I wonder if any weapons will be
> found now that Saddam can be questioned
> directly? Its interesting that he is still alive.
> Goering made a show of his trial. I wonder
> what Saddam will say if he's given media
> attention and a chance to speak out.
> Interesting times.

I can say something that seems obvious.  The way he was found and the
fact that he was not surrounded by loyalists and supporters seems to
mean he was playing only a small role if any in the resistance to the
occupation.  This, of course, doesn't mean it's not a psychological
victory, but I don't think the guerillas are going to roll over and play
dead now.

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Dec 14 14:01:15 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:01:15 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
Message-ID: <3FDC6D2B.20001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:40 am Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> This has nothing to do with AI; it's about programs with incredibly
> realistic graphics and means for recognizing emotions in their
> targets, being able to deploy apparent behaviors that act as
> superstimuli for human emotional responses. Think of chocolate chip
> cookies for emotions.
> Chocolate chip cookies are a more powerful stimulus than
> hunter-gatherer tastebuds ever encounter, combining sugar, fat, and
> salt in greater quantity and purer quality. And likewise there's a
> limit to the sympathy, support, approval, and admiration humans can
> expect from their human mates. As any evolutionary theorist knows, a
> human male is not designed as the human female's ideal boyfriend, nor 
> vice versa.
>

Hmmmm.  Not much response yet from the list.
Perhaps the term 'Affective computing' has obscured the meaning of what
Eliezer is concerned about.

What this means is Sex Dolls for everyone, that are much better than the
real thing. AI not required.

'Stepford Wives' springs to mind. Mind-numbingly beautiful partners with
witty, interesting chat (only when requested), good at cooking and
housekeeping and exactly the amount of sex that you require (not too
much and not too little).

The same applies for women. Handsome, fit partners who can fix things
around the house and still chat about feelings and emotions when
required. ;)

People already treat their IBO toy dog like a real animal and talk to
their robot vacuum cleaner as though it knew what it was doing.

There will be no market at all for a model which makes people stronger
instead of weaker. We can already get a model which points out all your
weaknesses, where you have room for improvement and tells you what you
should be doing or wearing.

When 'Laura' becomes available it will certainly cause a tremendous
upheaval in human relationships.


BillK






From alito at organicrobot.com  Sun Dec 14 15:09:31 2003
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 01:09:31 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <3FDC6D2B.20001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3FDC6D2B.20001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <1071414571.1015.557.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 00:01, BillK wrote:
> On Sat Dec 13, 2003 11:40 am Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> > This has nothing to do with AI; it's about programs with incredibly
> > realistic graphics and means for recognizing emotions in their
> > targets, being able to deploy apparent behaviors that act as
> > superstimuli for human emotional responses. Think of chocolate chip
> > cookies for emotions.
> > Chocolate chip cookies are a more powerful stimulus than
> > hunter-gatherer tastebuds ever encounter, combining sugar, fat, and
> > salt in greater quantity and purer quality. And likewise there's a
> > limit to the sympathy, support, approval, and admiration humans can
> > expect from their human mates. As any evolutionary theorist knows, a
> > human male is not designed as the human female's ideal boyfriend, nor 
> > vice versa.
> >
> 
> Hmmmm.  Not much response yet from the list.
> Perhaps the term 'Affective computing' has obscured the meaning of what
> Eliezer is concerned about.
> 
> What this means is Sex Dolls for everyone, that are much better than the
> real thing. AI not required.
> 
No obscuring, just nothing new here.  This is probably the first
application that half of the people think of when they talk about
humanoid robots.  Anyway, i think the case is being overstated.  Humans
have an amazing knack for making everything look like business as
usual.  Chocolate chip for emotions already exists.  It's called MDMA. 
It hasn't caused many revolutions yet.
Vibrators have probably been better than men at satisfying women for a
couple of decades now, and yet most women still do not admit to using
one, and even when they do, only a small minority have stopped using
other human beings for the same purpose.

> 'Stepford Wives' springs to mind. Mind-numbingly beautiful partners with
> witty, interesting chat (only when requested), good at cooking and
> housekeeping and exactly the amount of sex that you require (not too
> much and not too little).
> 
You'll need lots of them to satisfy the urge to spread your jism as far
as possible.

> The same applies for women. Handsome, fit partners who can fix things
> around the house and still chat about feelings and emotions when
> required. ;)
> 
This will require some pretty good AI, good enough to cause big changes
regardless of their applications as a step-boy.

> People already treat their IBO toy dog like a real animal and talk to
> their robot vacuum cleaner as though it knew what it was doing.
> 
People talk to their word processors, to their cars, and even to their
microwaves as if they knew what they were doing.  I'm sure they talked
to their cars, to their sewing machines and to their typewriters 80
years ago.

> There will be no market at all for a model which makes people stronger
> instead of weaker. We can already get a model which points out all your
> weaknesses, where you have room for improvement and tells you what you
> should be doing or wearing.
> 
Your assumption that criticism makes people stronger doesn't seem
justified to me.  Maybe people will become more productive in other ways
if their built-in sexual/emotional urges are easily satisfied. 
Chocolate cookies didn't make humans any weaker, they might have made
them slightly lazier at looking for food, and make us overconsume our
required caloric intake by a small margin, but no tragedy has come off
them.  I personally enjoy of their existance.

> When 'Laura' becomes available it will certainly cause a tremendous
> upheaval in human relationships.
> 
maybe.  I don't think laura will come out of the blue.  It will be some
point on a continuum that has started already in molded bottoms and at
http://www.realdoll.com .  As we get closer to it, a bigger proportion
of the population will have switched.
alejandro




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Dec 14 15:13:12 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:13:12 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] PCs no longer aid efficiency
Message-ID: <3FDC7E08.5000808@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

<http://news.independent.co.uk/digital/news/story.jsp?story=473113>

Meet the new cyber maids - women who do Windows as well as windows
By Paul Peachey        14 December 2003

The demand for maids who are able to clean up the fridge and the hard
drive has been driven by the surge in computer use and the numbers of
children now doing their homework on computer.

-------------

So the maintenance and operation of home PCs is now so time-consuming
and complex that it makes sense for better-off people to hire a maid to 
look after it.

I agree! The maintenance of my PC is now a regular Sunday morning job -
and I know what I'm doing! Keeping my software up-to-date with patches,
releases, virus updates, etc., cleaning the week's garbage off the hard
disk, defragmenting, running backups and lots of minor tidying up tasks
is a significant effort.  Much can be automated, of course, but I'm not
surprised that the ordinary consumer finds it an impossible task.

That's why viruses and spam are spreading like wildfire. The ordinary PC
user hasn't a clue about all the maintenance and self-defense tasks that
are necessary nowadays.

And why should they have to? They just want to play a few games, send
some emails and Google for some info. Nobody warned them that all these
other time-wasting jobs would be inflicted on them because of todays
malicious environment.

We really do need to clean up our mess.


BillK







From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Dec 14 15:22:01 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:22:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <3FDC6D2B.20001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3FDC6D2B.20001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031214152201.GD22728@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 02:01:15PM +0000, BillK wrote:

> When 'Laura' becomes available it will certainly cause a tremendous
> upheaval in human relationships.

Among plastic people, maybe. And RealDoll fetishists.

Come on, this isn't a yet another iRobot gadget. You never noticed what
happens when you get to the almost-human territory? You're firmly in the
"OMG, it's so KREEPY!!!1" Twilight Zone territory.

The problem is still a Turing test, but this time it's not just teletype.
Cuddly animals are different, maybe you've got an elderly-support niche in
Japan.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031214/b91af630/attachment.bin>

From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 16:59:52 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:59:52 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
References: <HPVKPC$C31A12856C8DBFA7B977C972BBD16036@libero.it>
Message-ID: <016601c3c263$b1f414a0$38b26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <scerir at libero.it>
To: "extropy-chat" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses


> > On the contrary, all it prevents is a strong central government from
> > forming, forcing the EU fascists to accept a more federalist structure,
> > even a loose confederation. This is good news for the few states in
> > europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like France
> > and Lithuania, and bad news for those wanting the power to challenge
> > the US merely for the sake of challenging for power...
> > Mike Lorrey
>
> Yes Mike, I understand. But I ask: what else is Europe (I mean the present
> theoretical "union" plus, virtually, the Russia) if not a direct, strong
attempt
> to challenge the US? Since Iraqi war here, in this Europe, we realized

A direct, strong attempt to be independent of the US?

> we do not have any military power, and any real political power. Did you
> notice that? For sure you did. And we are closer to those ... eastern
countries.

Exactly.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org





From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 17:04:39 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:04:39 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEBOCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <016c01c3c264$5c5a0f30$38b26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <gpmap at runbox.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 7:40 AM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses


> >From the Washington Post
> (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62011-2003Dec13.html):
...
> My comments:
> [In other words: an agreement was not reached because European nation
states
> still resist ideas of real devolution of power from a national to a
European
> level. This has always been the main problem of Europe as an autonomous
> political entity: member states insist on making the important decision
> independently and accept the idea of European decision making, for
important
> things such as taxation and defense, only if they can retain a national
veto
> power. More European integration is only accepted for "less important
> things" such as common R&D.

It's not that simple.
The EU as it exists is, IMO, fundamentally flawed in its institutions.
The directly elected Parliament is almost powerless.
The true power lies with the Council of Ministers whose members are
appointed by national govts, and the Commission which is a highly
politiciised civil service.

The position needs to be reversed, with the Parliament wielding most of the
power and the Council acting as a second house.
The Commission should be utterly de-politicised.

> At the same time it is clear that the direction of History is that of more
> and more integration and double devolution of power from nation states to
> more autonomous regions below, and to a stronger Europe above. It will
just
> have to take the time it takes, for example the introduction of the Euro
as
> common currency took ten years and is not complete yet.]

I would say that the direction of history is away from Empire and towards
loose confederations with strictly limited mandates.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 17:06:54 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:06:54 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
References: <20031214024303.3371.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <017901c3c264$acbe32d0$38b26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 2:43 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses


> 
> --- "scerir at libero.it" <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> > http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/13/eu.summit/index.html
> > http://news.ft.com/home/europe
> > 
> > It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> > build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25) 
> > very different states, having very different
> > histories (and reciprocal wars), populations, 
> > religions, etc., starting  from the economy 
> > and markets, Political issues come first . 
> > The EU founding fathers knew that very well. 
> 
> On the contrary, all it prevents is a strong central government from
> forming, forcing the EU fascists to accept a more federalist structure,
> even a loose confederation. This is good news for the few states in
> europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like France
> and Lithuania, and bad news for those wanting the power to challenge
> the US merely for the sake of challenging for power...

You obviously don't know much about France.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 17:08:32 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:08:32 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214013413.033b1060@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <017f01c3c264$e71ecf20$38b26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J Corbally" <jcorb at iol.ie>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 1:43 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe


> At 04:45 PM 12/13/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >Message: 23
> >Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 22:56:34 +0100
> > >From: JDP <jacques at dtext.com>
> >Subject: [extropy-chat] POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
> >To: Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com>,      ExI chat list
> >         <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Message-ID: <3FDB8B12.7080806 at dtext.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> >
> >Dirk Bruere wrote:
> >
> > > From: <scerir at libero.it>
> > >>
> > >>It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> > >>build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25)
> > >>very different states, having very different
> > >>histories (and reciprocal wars), populations,
> > >>religions, etc., starting  from the economy
> > >>and markets, Political issues come first .
> > >>The EU founding fathers knew that very well.
> > >
> > >
> > > On the contrary.
> > > What we definately don't need is a poor copy of the US with its
centralised
> > > federal govt, which is what the EU is/was aiming for.
> >
> >Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe?
> >Why?
>
> Depends on what you mean by pro-Europe.  If you mean no physical or trade
> barriers, to enjoy different cultures and options without restraint, then
> I'm pro-Europe.
>
> If you mean, as has been said "a poor copy of the US", then no, I wouldn't
> be pro-that-kind-of-Europe.  Neither am I pro the current Constitution, as
> the vast majority of Europeans have no conception of the difference
between
> a document bestowing freedoms, next to one restricting a Governments
> ability to infringe on freedoms.  Many people here still beleive their
> rights spring from their Constitutions.  A dangerous error.

IMO the only thing a constitution should do is explicitly limit the power of
the EU with respect to both nations and individuals.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 17:12:36 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:12:36 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>
	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>
	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 11:48 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe


> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
> > From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
> >>
> >>Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe?
> >>Why?
> >
> >
> > Because having a relatively coherent economic bloc of around 450m people
is
> > a base which can wield enough power to maintain the economic and
military
> > independence of its member states with respect to other world forces.
> >
> > However, I am not in favour of an EU govt in Brussels that feels it can
poke
> > its nose into the purely internal workings of its member states eg
criminal
> > law, various Rights issues etc. The EU should be limited to inter
national
> > issues only.
>
> Are there good reasons to think that agreement and coherent behaviour is
> possible in economic and military international matters without
> political unity?

Yes.
NATO, EU (current)
However, if you mean launching global military adventures at a moments
notice on trumped up charges (eg WMDs) then no.
Which is a good thing.

> Suppose a situation similar to WWII, with fascist Germany invading
> nearby countries, and causing a potentially global threat, and where the
> US got involved. Will a politically loose Europe manage to make the
> decision to get involved, or will it stay irresolute and passive while
> no clear agreement can be reached by the member States, except on the
> most extreme cases?

Hopefully, it would stay out of other peoples business.

> In other words, can Europe really leverage its military (and economic)
> power as a bloc while preserving the freedom and independence of its
> member States? Can you have the advantages of being a big State when you
> are a loose, ad hoc federation?

I do not call neo-imperialism and a huge military/industrial complex an
'advantage'.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From charlie at antipope.org  Sun Dec 14 18:08:04 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 18:08:04 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
In-Reply-To: <008d01c3c245$e48d3fe0$89cd5cd1@neptune>
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031214124315.033e8e80@pop.iol.ie>
	<01c501c3c243$d415c620$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<008d01c3c245$e48d3fe0$89cd5cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <764B81A1-2E60-11D8-A9F5-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 14 Dec 2003, at 13:26, Technotranscendence wrote:

> I can say something that seems obvious.  The way he was found and the
> fact that he was not surrounded by loyalists and supporters seems to
> mean he was playing only a small role if any in the resistance to the
> occupation.  This, of course, doesn't mean it's not a psychological
> victory, but I don't think the guerillas are going to roll over and 
> play
> dead now.

Agreed, and more: I suspect fear of Saddam getting back into power 
somehow was a *restraining influence* on the resistance, especially 
among the shi'ites. Now that he's definitively out of play, it's 
possible the guerilla attacks will get *worst* (because there's no 
longer any chance of him somehow re-establishing his dictatorship).

Not a nice thought.


-- Charlie



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Dec 14 18:09:49 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:09:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) OT: Physics humor
In-Reply-To: <3FDB4620.70DB5945@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031214180949.41186.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Fowarded, since so many of the membership seem to be
> "into" physics. I 
> didn't major in the subject, but I still laughed my
> butt off when I read this:
> 
> 
> Electron Band Structure In Germanium, My Ass
> 
> < http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/hall.html >

I don't even work in physics labs, and yet I've heard
essentially this story far too many times in software
experiments (which, being digital, are supposed to be
able to avoid a lot of the "real world" noise).


From alito at organicrobot.com  Sun Dec 14 18:45:53 2003
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 04:45:53 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <20031214152201.GD22728@leitl.org>
References: <3FDC6D2B.20001@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
	<20031214152201.GD22728@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <1071427552.1015.787.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 01:22, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 02:01:15PM +0000, BillK wrote:
> 
> > When 'Laura' becomes available it will certainly cause a tremendous
> > upheaval in human relationships.
> 
> Among plastic people, maybe. And RealDoll fetishists.
> 
While i don't agree with the original poster, I think you are
underestimating the RealDoll market if those things went for $20 from
the corner sex shop instead of $6000.  

> Come on, this isn't a yet another iRobot gadget. You never noticed what
> happens when you get to the almost-human territory? You're firmly in the
> "OMG, it's so KREEPY!!!1" Twilight Zone territory.
> The problem is still a Turing test, but this time it's not just teletype.

No, but this time, it's private, so there's less social pressure to go
"yuck, i wouldn't do that".  Men will fuck anything that moves, and half
the things that don't.  It's just a coincidence that the palm of a hand
has the highest realism/effort index.

alejandro




From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 14 18:49:01 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:49:01 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <017901c3c264$acbe32d0$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <000001c3c272$f0d46ee0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com

>>... This is good news for the few states in
>> europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like France
>> and Lithuania...

>You obviously don't know much about France.  Dirk

Mike I too thought this a curious comment.  Do clarify.  {8-] spike



From scerir at libero.it  Sun Dec 14 19:44:35 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:44:35 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
References: <HPVKPC$C31A12856C8DBFA7B977C972BBD16036@libero.it>
	<016601c3c263$b1f414a0$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <000401c3c27a$b4e1c740$f0c7fea9@scerir>

But I ask: what else is Europe [...]
if not a direct, strong attempt
to challenge the US? 
 
> A direct, strong attempt to be independent of the US?
> Dirk

Well "direct, strong attempt to challenge"
is, perhaps, too strong. But it is a fact
that EU means, essentially, France + Germany,
since the very beginning, till now. And it 
is a fact that relations between France and 
Germany vs US are ... what they are.

This is, perhaps, the first EU document.
http://www.robert-schuman.org/gb/robert-schuman/declaration2an.htm#anglais
We can read: peace, resources, Africa, UN, the
Franco-German leadership. US, five years after
the end of WWII (and ... all that), seems already
far away (if I'm reading the doc. correctly).





 
 



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 20:11:17 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:11:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <016601c3c263$b1f414a0$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031214201117.24873.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <scerir at libero.it>
> >
> > Yes Mike, I understand. But I ask: what else is Europe (I mean the
> present
> > theoretical "union" plus, virtually, the Russia) if not a direct,
> strong
> attempt
> > to challenge the US? Since Iraqi war here, in this Europe, we
> realized
> 
> A direct, strong attempt to be independent of the US?
> 
> > we do not have any military power, and any real political power.
> Did you
> > notice that? For sure you did. And we are closer to those ...
> eastern
> countries.
> 
> Exactly.

What was realized was that in their history of seeking to implement
socialist utopia with their tax revinues while the US tax payers paid
the costs of their defense, they have left themselves militarily
powerless to do anything militarily in opposition to the US. It was
their free choice. Can't have your cake and eat it, sorry...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 20:13:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:13:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <017901c3c264$acbe32d0$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031214201341.49925.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> > 
> > --- "scerir at libero.it" <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> > >
> http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/13/eu.summit/index.html
> > > http://news.ft.com/home/europe
> > > 
> > > It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> > > build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25) 
> > > very different states, having very different
> > > histories (and reciprocal wars), populations, 
> > > religions, etc., starting  from the economy 
> > > and markets, Political issues come first . 
> > > The EU founding fathers knew that very well. 
> > 
> > On the contrary, all it prevents is a strong central government
> from
> > forming, forcing the EU fascists to accept a more federalist
> structure,
> > even a loose confederation. This is good news for the few states in
> > europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like
> France
> > and Lithuania, and bad news for those wanting the power to
> challenge
> > the US merely for the sake of challenging for power...
> 
> You obviously don't know much about France.

Oh, I know enough about France to know they enforce their own IDEA of
what such things mean... and that there is a simple majority required
to change things, but at least they do explicitly recognise in their
constitution that natural rights exist, something that less than a
handful of other nations in the world recognise, and very few in europe.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 20:23:29 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:23:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
In-Reply-To: <764B81A1-2E60-11D8-A9F5-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031214202329.79261.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> 
> On 14 Dec 2003, at 13:26, Technotranscendence wrote:
> 
> > I can say something that seems obvious.  The way he was found and
> the
> > fact that he was not surrounded by loyalists and supporters seems
> to
> > mean he was playing only a small role if any in the resistance to
> the
> > occupation.  This, of course, doesn't mean it's not a psychological
> > victory, but I don't think the guerillas are going to roll over and
> > play dead now.
> 
> Agreed, and more: I suspect fear of Saddam getting back into power 
> somehow was a *restraining influence* on the resistance, especially 
> among the shi'ites. Now that he's definitively out of play, it's 
> possible the guerilla attacks will get *worst* (because there's no 
> longer any chance of him somehow re-establishing his dictatorship).
> 

I think he was hiding in the spider hole only because of the ongoing
offensive in the immediate area of Tikrit. A large part of the feeling
of US illigitimacy among Iraqis was specifically because we hadn't
caught Saddam. Now that we have him, there may be some remaining
resistance, but they have lost legitimacy I think even with their own.
THere will be some who claim the guy they caught was not Saddam and was
one of his impersonators, like there are those who still cling to the
belief that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile, but will be
increasingly marginalized.

I had predicted  in spring of this year, after other predictions came
true, that gas prices would fall to around $10/bbl following a slow
rise to high levels as the US consolidated its hold. Their
consolidation has taken longer than I expected, due in part to Saddams
eluding capture, but also because other oil producing nations are
assisting in the sabotage of Iraqi production reconstruction. Prices
are now $33/bbl and are expected to immediately drop by $.50 monday.
Any significant drop to the levels I predicted will require that an
Iraqi government resume sovereignty and that sabotage of oil facilities
cease.

Odds of these two things happening have improved considerably now that
Saddam is captured. I don't think that this will prevent other nations
from attempting to continue the sabotage.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 20:27:18 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:27:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c272$f0d46ee0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031214202718.53945.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com
> 
> >>... This is good news for the few states in
> >> europe that have hardwired protections for natural rights like
> France
> >> and Lithuania...
> 
> >You obviously don't know much about France.  Dirk
> 
> Mike I too thought this a curious comment.  Do clarify.  

France's constitution explicitly states that rights originate in the
individual and are delegated to government, something that, so far as I
am aware, is only stated by the US and Lithuanian Constitutions.
Admittedly, France is the weaker of the three, allowing mere majorities
to change things, and suffering from a judiciary that is heavily
socialist and will legislate from the bench as the need arises, while
the US and Lith. require supermajorities to amend the constitution.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 20:35:03 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 12:35:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <000401c3c27a$b4e1c740$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <20031214203503.51443.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> But I ask: what else is Europe [...]
> if not a direct, strong attempt
> to challenge the US? 
>  
> > A direct, strong attempt to be independent of the US?
> > Dirk
> 
> Well "direct, strong attempt to challenge"
> is, perhaps, too strong. But it is a fact
> that EU means, essentially, France + Germany,
> since the very beginning, till now. And it 
> is a fact that relations between France and 
> Germany vs US are ... what they are.

Well, Spain and Poland are the spoilers, apparently. They hold nearly
as much power as France and Germany and are both pro-US.

What F&G really hate are the fact that so many of the new and candidate
states are pro-US. It isn't enough that the US has spoiled both their
ambitions overseas for a century, we've gone and converted much of the
rest of europe to our view. All Spain and Poland need to nix the
ambitions of F&G are a few other states.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 20:41:36 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:41:36 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
References: <20031214202329.79261.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <023c01c3c282$ae0bc5d0$38b26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!


>
> --- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 14 Dec 2003, at 13:26, Technotranscendence wrote:
> >
> > > I can say something that seems obvious.  The way he was found and
> > the
> > > fact that he was not surrounded by loyalists and supporters seems
> > to
> > > mean he was playing only a small role if any in the resistance to
> > the
> > > occupation.  This, of course, doesn't mean it's not a psychological
> > > victory, but I don't think the guerillas are going to roll over and
> > > play dead now.
> >
> > Agreed, and more: I suspect fear of Saddam getting back into power
> > somehow was a *restraining influence* on the resistance, especially
> > among the shi'ites. Now that he's definitively out of play, it's
> > possible the guerilla attacks will get *worst* (because there's no
> > longer any chance of him somehow re-establishing his dictatorship).
> >
>
> I think he was hiding in the spider hole only because of the ongoing
> offensive in the immediate area of Tikrit. A large part of the feeling
> of US illigitimacy among Iraqis was specifically because we hadn't
> caught Saddam. Now that we have him, there may be some remaining
> resistance, but they have lost legitimacy I think even with their own.

I very much doubt it.
The resistance comes from Islamic militants, who hated Saddam in the first
place, and Ba'ath party activists.
The latter will continue to fight since they have been banned from standing
in elections.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 20:44:25 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:44:25 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) OT: Physics humor
References: <20031214180949.41186.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <024901c3c283$0faa01d0$38b26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 6:09 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) OT: Physics humor


> --- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Fowarded, since so many of the membership seem to be
> > "into" physics. I
> > didn't major in the subject, but I still laughed my
> > butt off when I read this:
> >
> >
> > Electron Band Structure In Germanium, My Ass
> >
> > < http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/hall.html >
>
> I don't even work in physics labs, and yet I've heard
> essentially this story far too many times in software
> experiments (which, being digital, are supposed to be
> able to avoid a lot of the "real world" noise).

All data resolves to a straight line with the right choice of logarithmic
scale.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From colinmagee3282 at hotmail.com  Sun Dec 14 21:20:45 2003
From: colinmagee3282 at hotmail.com (Colin Magee)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:20:45 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work,the leisure society,and automation
Message-ID: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>

               I am interested in the concept of a leisure society and was 
wondering if anyone knew of any major thinkers,researchers,or think tanks 
exploring this concept and the cultural,economic,psychological,and political 
ramifications of this idea.I prepared a short list of items I've read on 
this topic and was wondering if someone could point me in the direction of 
similar thinkers:
1.)F.M. Esfandiary/F.M.2030--"Upwingers", "Are You A Transhuman?", and 
"Telespheres"
2.)James Hughes-- "The Politics of Transhumanism"-in a section titled "Pro 
Automation Post Work Utopias" he mentions Andre Gorz -"who has been 
promoting a political program for 25 years that embraces automation and the 
expansion of the social wage." He also mentions that-"the movement for 
universal basic income(Lerner,1994) has been growing in Europe and the 
United States"
3.)Hans Moravec-"Robot-Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind"
4.)Robert Theobald-haven't read any of his stuff yet,but I understand he 
supports this idea
5.)Marvin Minsky-In a book called "Closer To Truth" he briefly mentions that 
when computers acquire commonsense reasoning humans won't have to work
6.)Issac Asimov-"The Tyrannosaurus Prescription" has an essay in it 
discussing this
7.)Arthur C.Clarke-"Greetings Carbon Based Bipeds"
8.)Jacque Frescoe-haven't read any of his stuff,but it was suggested to me 
in an email from Mark Plus
9.)Grant Fjermedal-"The Tomorrow Makers"-in that book he mentions a book by 
James S.Albus called
"People's Capitalism:The Economics of the Robot Revolution"
10.)Buckminster Fuller-"Critical Path"
11.)James Wm.Lewis-"Robotopia-Everything is Free and No One Works"
12.)The Foresight Institute-I believe there was en essay on this site which 
discussed the ramifications nanotechnology will have on work,but 
unfortunately I misplaced the essay
13.)Eric Drexler-If I recall he discusses this issue in "Engines of 
Creation"
14.)Robert Anton Wilson-"The Illuminati Papers"-discusses the idea of the 
"RICH Economy" (Rising income through cybernetic homeostasis) developed by 
L.Wayne Benner,Timothy Leary,and Robert Anton Wilson
I hope this list wasn't too long! I am particulary interested in the ideas 
of F.M.Esfandiary/F.M. 2030 on this issue and was wondering if anybody knew 
of any thinkers today influenced by his ideas of leisure.I appreciate 
anyone's ideas,feedback,etc.



                                                                             
                      Sincerely,
                                                                             
                      Colin

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of slow downloads and busy signals?  Get a high-speed Internet 
connection! Comparison-shop your local high-speed providers here. 
https://broadband.msn.com



From pittino at nextra.at  Sun Dec 14 22:47:50 2003
From: pittino at nextra.at (Clemens Pittino)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:47:50 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
In-Reply-To: <20031214203503.51443.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031214203503.51443.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <oprz6z90kw8o8qck@mail.nextra.at>



hi,
>
> Well, Spain and Poland are the spoilers, apparently. They hold nearly
> as much power as France and Germany and are both pro-US.

mr. miller has great problems in poland, so he wasn't able to agree. he 
thought he would be forced to resign, if he had annuled the nizza 
agreement. in 2005 there will be an eu constitution, and it will survive 
mr.miller.

thoughts don't know borders.

cle




From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 14 22:53:19 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 14:53:19 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses/taxifornian glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <20031214202718.53945.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3c295$11c5b0b0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> > Mike I too thought this a curious comment.  Do clarify.  
> 
> France's constitution explicitly states that rights originate in the
> individual and are delegated to government, something that, 
> so far as I am aware, is only stated by the US and Lithuanian
Constitutions.
> Admittedly, France is the weaker of the three, allowing mere 
> majorities to change things, and suffering from a judiciary that is
heavily
> socialist and will legislate from the bench as the need arises, while
> the US and Lith. require supermajorities to amend the constitution.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey

Ja, that is how I understood it.  It is a key point that is
understood all too well by Taxifornians: simple majorities
will often vote away their own rights and vote to raise
taxes.  Supermajorities will seldom do so.  This is a critical
difference.  If rights can be overturned by simple majority,
in most cases they hang by a lender thread indeed.  So in 
the case of the three cases you cited, I would
say that the US and Lithuanian constitutions recognize
natural rights, and the French constitution kinda does.  

Consider the following case of rights being taken away
by means which I would have thought unconstitutional: 
Taxifornia state fish and game commissioner Sam Schuchat 
(not an elected post as far as I know) recently decided 
they would not allow genetically modified glow-in-the-dark 
aquarium fish to be sold here.  The yahoo flatly stated 
that he had consulted *with his rabbi* before making the decision.  

That raised three big red flags: 1) he was acting outside the
capacity of interpreting the state constitution: essentially
making law, and 2) he was making it based on religious
reasoning, and 3) the commission appears to be dictating
in an area in which they have no apparent jurisdiction.
When I hear of stuff like this, I am tempted to go buy
a school of glo-fish in Nevada, bring them here and
release them into the wild.

Schuchat commented:

"For me it's a question of values, it's not a question of 
science," said commissioner Sam Schuchat. "I think selling 
genetically modified fish as pets is wrong."

So *he thinks* it is wrong, so he can dish out law for
the state?  I suppose he believes it is wrong for people
to have their corpses frozen?  I fear those who would 
derive authority based on nothing but *their own* values,
not upon any scientific justification, then impose them
on all of us.  These exercise in Afghanistan and 
Alabama (the 10 commandments judge fiasco) show 
that this world cannot tolerate government authority
in the hands of religion.  Such a government cannot be 
trusted for it resides in the realm of belief, not reason.

This bum needs to be thrown out of office forthwith.

spike


California blocks sales of 'Glofish' pets
Thursday, December 4, 2003 The nation's first genetically altered
household pet is a zebra fish that glows fluorescent. SACRAMENTO,
California (AP) -- Citing ethical concerns, state regulators Wednesday
refused to allow sales of the first bio-engineered household pet, a
zebra fish that glows fluorescent. GloFish are expected to go on sale
everywhere else next month. California is the only state with a ban on
genetically engineered species, and the Fish and Game Commission said it
would not exempt the zebra fish from the law even if escaped fish would
not pose a threat to the state's waterways. "For me it's a question of
values, it's not a question of science," said commissioner Sam Schuchat.
"I think selling genetically modified fish as pets is wrong." The 3-1
vote came moments after commissioners approved the state's 14th license
for research into genetically modified fish. But commissioners drew the
line on permitting widespread sales of a biotech fish for pure visual
pleasure. The normally black-and-silver zebra fish were inserted with
genes from sea anemones or jellyfish to turn them red or green, and glow
under black or ultraviolet lights. Federal agencies have decided they
have no jurisdiction over a bio-engineered household pet that is not
intended for consumption. Given California's extensive review,
proponents had looked to its approval to dampen any concerns from other
states or consumers that the fish might be harmful to the environment or
if consumed by wayward pets or children.




From twodeel at jornada.org  Sun Dec 14 23:01:31 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:01:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses/taxifornian glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c295$11c5b0b0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312141456080.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> When I hear of stuff like this, I am tempted to go buy a school of
> glo-fish in Nevada, bring them here and release them into the wild.

Just let me know when and I'll buy them here in Las Vegas and meet you
halfway. ;)

That is, unless the same kind of ban happens here.  Which is certainly
possible.  In a similar fit of liberty-curtailing, Nevada apparently
recently instated a statewide ban on buying medication from Internet
pharmacies.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 23:02:20 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:02:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses/taxifornian glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c295$11c5b0b0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031214230220.61554.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote
> 
> Consider the following case of rights being taken away
> by means which I would have thought unconstitutional: 
> Taxifornia state fish and game commissioner Sam Schuchat 
> (not an elected post as far as I know) recently decided 
> they would not allow genetically modified glow-in-the-dark 
> aquarium fish to be sold here.  The yahoo flatly stated 
> that he had consulted *with his rabbi* before making the decision.  
> 
> That raised three big red flags: 1) he was acting outside the
> capacity of interpreting the state constitution: essentially
> making law, and 2) he was making it based on religious
> reasoning, and 3) the commission appears to be dictating
> in an area in which they have no apparent jurisdiction.
> When I hear of stuff like this, I am tempted to go buy
> a school of glo-fish in Nevada, bring them here and
> release them into the wild.
> 
> Schuchat commented:
> 
> "For me it's a question of values, it's not a question of 
> science," said commissioner Sam Schuchat. "I think selling 
> genetically modified fish as pets is wrong."

AHAHAAAAAAA! This means that selling them to *stock* wilderness areas
must be okay!!! Go for it , Spike!!! You just can't keep them as
pets.... ;) Thing is that they will wind up in the wild pretty soon
anyways when people flush them down the toilet.



=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 14 23:05:12 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:05:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WAR: Still want peace???
Message-ID: <20031214230512.99635.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

For those who still want peace, now that the war is over and Saddam is
in jail.....

http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/

Top 10 Reasons to Masturbate for Peace

10. It's too cold to go outside and demonstrate
9. If I go blind they can't draft me
8. The walls need painting white anyway
7. This is my weapon...this is my gun...this one's for shootin....oh,
never mind. 
6. If you want it done right you have to do it yourself
5. All the lube will give me a baby-soft dork
4. It may be the only "peace" I'll be getting for a while
3. If I use my left hand, it feels like someone else has joined my
cause
2. What else am I going to do with the 80 GB of porn on my PC?
1. Because I can't give myself a peace blowjob

Now that I think of it, I think this was Saddam's to-do list in that
hole in Tikrit....




=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 14 23:55:48 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:55:48 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
References: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <02f801c3c29d$cbf37550$38b26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Colin Magee" <colinmagee3282 at hotmail.com>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 9:20 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work,the leisure society,and automation


>                I am interested in the concept of a leisure society and was
> wondering if anyone knew of any major thinkers,researchers,or think tanks
> exploring this concept and the cultural,economic,psychological,and
political
> ramifications of this idea.I prepared a short list of items I've read on
> this topic and was wondering if someone could point me in the direction of
> similar thinkers:

It's an old joke.
Predicted in the 1960s, when it arrived it was called 'unemployment'.
The concept is currently out of fashion.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Mon Dec 15 03:48:20 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:48:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (Got Caliche?) PowerPoint is Evil! ...again
Message-ID: <3FDD2F04.D775342@mindspring.com>

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/14/magazine/14POWER.html

What if PowerPoint is actually making us stupider? Edward Tufte claims that
Microsoft's ubiquitous software forces people to mutilate data beyond 
comprehension. PowerPoint also encourages users to rely on bulleted lists,
a 'faux analytical' technique that dodges the speaker's responsibility to tie
information together. PowerPoint is uniquely suited to our modern age of
obfuscation -- where manipulating facts is as important as presenting them
clearly. If you have nothing to say, maybe you need just the right tool to
help you not say it.


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Mon Dec 15 03:48:27 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:48:27 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (Got Caliche?) MyLastEmail ?
Message-ID: <3FDD2F0B.5CD495DE@mindspring.com>

http://www.dallasnews.com/latestnews/stories/121403dnbuspasswords.1d6dc.html

When a person dies, passwords go to the grave. Passwords are creating digital
locked doors for lawyers, will executors and the relatives of deceased loved
ones. 

With < http://www.mylastemail.com > charges users $9.99 for a three-year
subscription for postmortem delivery of farewell e-mails.

With < http://www.MyLastEmail.com >, you can communicate long after you've
logged off.


-- 
?Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.? Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 15 04:04:41 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 22:04:41 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
References: <20031214202329.79261.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE44Wun38dFzs0000c51e@hotmail.com>

I wonder why they didn't hide the capture until closer to next year's
election.!?
Oh, maybe that's why they haven't found Osama. :-)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!


>
> --- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 14 Dec 2003, at 13:26, Technotranscendence wrote:
> >
> > > I can say something that seems obvious.  The way he was found and
> > the
> > > fact that he was not surrounded by loyalists and supporters seems
> > to
> > > mean he was playing only a small role if any in the resistance to
> > the
> > > occupation.  This, of course, doesn't mean it's not a psychological
> > > victory, but I don't think the guerillas are going to roll over and
> > > play dead now.
> >
> > Agreed, and more: I suspect fear of Saddam getting back into power
> > somehow was a *restraining influence* on the resistance, especially
> > among the shi'ites. Now that he's definitively out of play, it's
> > possible the guerilla attacks will get *worst* (because there's no
> > longer any chance of him somehow re-establishing his dictatorship).
> >
>
> I think he was hiding in the spider hole only because of the ongoing
> offensive in the immediate area of Tikrit. A large part of the feeling
> of US illigitimacy among Iraqis was specifically because we hadn't
> caught Saddam. Now that we have him, there may be some remaining
> resistance, but they have lost legitimacy I think even with their own.
> THere will be some who claim the guy they caught was not Saddam and was
> one of his impersonators, like there are those who still cling to the
> belief that TWA 800 was shot down by a missile, but will be
> increasingly marginalized.
>
> I had predicted  in spring of this year, after other predictions came
> true, that gas prices would fall to around $10/bbl following a slow
> rise to high levels as the US consolidated its hold. Their
> consolidation has taken longer than I expected, due in part to Saddams
> eluding capture, but also because other oil producing nations are
> assisting in the sabotage of Iraqi production reconstruction. Prices
> are now $33/bbl and are expected to immediately drop by $.50 monday.
> Any significant drop to the levels I predicted will require that an
> Iraqi government resume sovereignty and that sabotage of oil facilities
> cease.
>
> Odds of these two things happening have improved considerably now that
> Saddam is captured. I don't think that this will prevent other nations
> from attempting to continue the sabotage.
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 04:44:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:44:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE44Wun38dFzs0000c51e@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031215044441.62289.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I wonder why they didn't hide the capture until closer to next year's
> election.!?
> Oh, maybe that's why they haven't found Osama. :-)

Hey, everybody on the left keeps making the mistake of thinking Bush is
either stupid or incompetent just cause he talks slower than Clinton.
He learned his daddies mistake: don't finish a war too soon... I
especially enjoyed how the Dems were eating their own today. Liebermans
quote was especially fun....

I predict that Osama will likely show up some time in spring or summer,
just as the Saddam trial ends for CourtTV, so the Osama trial can
begin. Gotta keep those summer cable ratings up.... ;) Osama will get
convicted in October, maybe even early November.

North Korea and Syria will likely be next on the agenda, after the
election. They may just try to wait NK out, the dems are going to be
crapping their pants over a showdown with NK. Syria is going to be
interesting, they seem to be playing both sides: interrogating tough
suspects for the US, shipping insurgents into Iraq for al Qaeda. Not
sure how Iran is going to play out, depends on how much they decide to
screw with Iraq's new government. If we tie oil sabotage directly to
Iranian infiltrators, things could get interesting there in a hurry. I
recall in '88 we didn't wait to nail some Iranian oil platforms used by
tanker saboteurs.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 04:51:36 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 20:51:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (Got Caliche?) PowerPoint is Evil! ...again
In-Reply-To: <3FDD2F04.D775342@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031215045136.80027.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/14/magazine/14POWER.html
> 
> What if PowerPoint is actually making us stupider? 

I dispute this. Power Point is used to get the point across to the
terminally uninterested. I recall giving talks to contractors and
energy conservation officers about market distortions caused by
improper implementations of conservation rebates, with very informative
Excel generated 3 axis graphs illustrating cost-benefit thresholds and
so forth. They used to bitch that I gave them headaches with so much
information, at least those that did not glaze over. Then some cute
little marketing bimbo would come in from the competitors and make a
bunch of unsupported claims with a power point presentation full of
bulleted lists and these guys would be yabbering her 'facts' for weeks
afterward.... Power Point: comic books for commerce...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Mon Dec 15 06:25:18 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:55:18 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868DE@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>

This isn't a collapse, it's just a temporary failure to reach agreement. The
EU has been doing this all along, and resolves it by backing off for some
more behind the scenes head kicking/arse licking/etc, uh I mean diplomacy,
then comes back to contentious issues again later. The EU doesn't appear to
do anything in a hurry, but stuff does happen eventually. So this kind of
sensationalist subject line is unwarranted, really.

Emlyn

> -----Original Message-----
> From: scerir at libero.it [mailto:scerir at libero.it]
> Sent: Sunday, 14 December 2003 6:50 AM
> To: extropy-chat
> Subject: [extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses
> 
> 
> http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/13/eu.summit/index.html
> http://news.ft.com/home/europe
> 
> It seems to me obvious that you cannot
> build a federation of (6, then 15, then 25) 
> very different states, having very different
> histories (and reciprocal wars), populations, 
> religions, etc., starting  from the economy 
> and markets, Political issues come first . 
> The EU founding fathers knew that very well. 
> s.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec 15 06:31:45 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:31:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

The Brights have now a discussion forum. The purpose of this movement is to
form an Internet constituency of individuals, the Brights, having social and
political recognition and power. There is a great diversity of persons who
have a naturalistic worldview. Under a broad umbrella, the Brights can gain
social and political influence in a society otherwise permeated with
supernaturalism.
>From the Invitation to The Brights Movement's Forums: On behalf of the
Brights' Forum Task Team and the Forum Facilitators Group, it is a great
pleasure for me to announce the opening of the Brights Movement's Forums.
The Forums exist specifically to "discuss the Brights movement and how best
to achieve its goals." We want this tool to be the basis of the most
successful campaigns for social and civic justice the Brights' community
have ever had.
The Forum is powered by the Invision Power Board, which seems very good:
With years of experience creating professional forum software, we have
created a new standard in speed, efficiency and ease of use. Our product is
written in PHP, the web's fastest developing scripting language, and
combined with your choice of three database systems (MySQL, Microsoft SQL
Server, and Oracle) allows us to create a feature packed and efficient
service.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031215/b59be96f/attachment.html>

From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 15 06:43:09 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 00:43:09 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <00cd01c3c2d6$b606e180$84994a43@texas.net>



> The Brights have now a discussion forum.

How exquisitely embarrassing this self-preening denomination is. It somewhat
spoils the pleasure I have always had in reading Dawkins and Dennett.

(For me, there's a special irony in their vapid self-naming; I have a novel
in manuscript that so far hasn't found a home in the USA, titled BRIGHT,
which tenderly mocks the aspirations and flaws of a group of fandom-like
high-IQ-scoring characters. Guess I'm going to have to change the title to
QUIPU. Bugger it.)

Damien Broderick



From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Mon Dec 15 06:51:33 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:21:33 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868DF@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>

Damien wrote:
> (For me, there's a special irony in their vapid self-naming; 
> I have a novel
> in manuscript that so far hasn't found a home in the USA, 
> titled BRIGHT,
> which tenderly mocks the aspirations and flaws of a group of 
> fandom-like
> high-IQ-scoring characters. Guess I'm going to have to change 
> the title to
> QUIPU. Bugger it.)

That's knot the title you really wanted? It must leave you feeling strung
out. The whole issue of naming your book seems to have become a somewhat
tangled skein; how do you account for that?

Emlyn



From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 15 07:00:34 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 01:00:34 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
	<00cd01c3c2d6$b606e180$84994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00e901c3c2d9$24d5f7c0$84994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:43 AM

> How exquisitely embarrassing

It seems I'm very much not in a minority with this opinion. See Michael
Shermer's preliminary empirical study:

http://www.skeptic.com/BIG%20BRIGHT%20BROUHAHA4.htm

It will be interesting to see if the very bright founders are modest enough
to pay heed and change it.



From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 15 07:08:07 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 01:08:07 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
References: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868DF@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>
Message-ID: <011001c3c2da$411a2f40$84994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Emlyn O'regan" <oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:51 AM

> QUIPU

> > The whole issue of naming your book seems to have become a somewhat
> > tangled skein

Spilled ink, a rosary of curses. 






From gpmap at runbox.com  Mon Dec 15 07:11:27 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 08:11:27 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious worldviews
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

I believe things happen because of the laws of science. This statement is
true by definition, since the word science means trying to understand why
things happen. There are at least two "religious" scenarios that can be
formulated entirely within the conceptual framework of modern science: An
"Omega Point" scenario, and a "Simulation" scenario. In both cases, concepts
very similar to those found in conventional religions, such as higher powers
"in charge" of the world, survival of a "soul" after biological death, and
"heaven", can be formulated and considered without having to admit
supernatural elements into one's worldview.
I enjoy thinking about these and similar scenarios in idle moments but, on
the basis of our current scientific understanding of the universe, do not
consider them as anything more than interesting theoretical speculations,
mixed with some wishful thinking. In particular, I do not consider them as
acceptable basis for any decision that I have to make.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031215/a1521677/attachment.html>

From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec 15 07:12:39 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 08:12:39 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3FDD5EE7.60807@mail.tele.dk>

Colin Magee wrote:

>               I am interested in the concept of a leisure society and 
> was wondering if anyone knew of any major thinkers,researchers,or think 
> tanks exploring this concept and the cultural,economic,psychological,and 
> political ramifications of this idea.


It was all the rage among futurologists in the 70-80's. But it turned 
out that people didn't want to use their higher income for more leisure 
time. Rather they wanted more stuff.

So they kept working


regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Dec 15 07:29:43 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:29:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
In-Reply-To: <00e901c3c2d9$24d5f7c0$84994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <001901c3c2dd$38db4140$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Damien Broderick wrote,
> It seems I'm very much not in a minority with this opinion. 
> See Michael Shermer's preliminary empirical study:
> <http://www.skeptic.com/BIG%20BRIGHT%20BROUHAHA4.htm>
> 
> It will be interesting to see if the very bright founders are modest
enough to pay heed and change it.

I predict not.  Bright people tend to be stubborn.  We will stick to our
original theories despite overwhelming evidence that they are failures.
Transhumanists are no different in this sense.  I don't know why common
sense doesn't seem to be a component of high intelligence.

Everyone I know immediately says "Barf" when they hear about the "Brights".
I don't know how anybody living in our world could fail to immediately see
the idiocy of this term.  But I am constantly amazed at the monkey-brain
insistence on never letting go once we get our hands on something that
interests us.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From reason at exratio.com  Mon Dec 15 07:45:44 2003
From: reason at exratio.com (Reason)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:45:44 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] The Brights Movement's Forums
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEFPDOAA.reason@exratio.com>


The Imminst people went in to see how receptive the Brights are to
transhumanist life extension ideas over the past day or so. I'd suggest you
all do the same. Rather than mocking their terminology, take advantage of
this growing community of receptive minds. Go chat some, introduce them to
transhumanism. Sell some books.

http://www.the-brights.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=487
http://www.the-brights.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=496

Reason
http://www.exratio.com




From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 15 07:42:01 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:42:01 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <3FDD5EE7.60807@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <001001c3c2de$ed558940$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure 
> society,and automation
> 
> It was all the rage among futurologists in the 70-80's. But it turned 
> out that people didn't want to use their higher income for 
> more leisure time. Rather they wanted more stuff.
> 
> So they kept working
> 
> regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark

Good thing too, eh?  The profitability of a worker goes up
as that worker spends more time at the office, for a lot of
reasons.  Much of the overhead associated with a worker, such
as the health care benefits, only need to be paid once regardless
of the amount of time spent.  Furthermore, a worker who is always
at the office tends to get more involved in the program, since
that becomes her life.

If everyone started slacking off, our cool stuff would be
much more expensive too, so not only would we have less money
but it would buy less, and lots of businesses would go under.  So:

Work is gooood, friends!  Its goooood for you, its good for
all of us.  Make lots of close friends in the office, liiive your 
work.  It helps if one really likes one's work, or has a really cool
job, and if one's spouse works in the same office with one.

spike



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Dec 15 07:42:42 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 02:42:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious worldviews
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <001b01c3c2df$0942bc90$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote,
> I believe things happen because of the laws of science. This statement
> is true by definition, since the word science means trying to understand
> why things happen.

So far so good...

> There are at least two "religious" scenarios that can be formulated
> entirely within the conceptual framework of modern science: An
> "Omega Point" scenario, and a "Simulation" scenario.

I have always failed to see how these two scenarios are any more scientific
than other religions.  They may use more scientific buzzwords, but their
logic still is based on unconfirmable conjecture that cannot be detected via
the scientific method.  They both violate Occam's Razor by introducing
uprovable, undetectable, unnecessary complications to existing theories
without adding any predictive or explanatory value.  How is this based on
modern science?

> In both cases, concepts very similar to those found in conventional
> religions, such as higher powers "in charge" of the world, survival
> of a "soul" after biological death, and "heaven",

There is a reason for this.  Both of these "theories" were invented to
address the hopes and fears of human psychology, just like any religion.
They were not developed to address observed phenomena, just like any
science.

> I enjoy thinking about these and similar scenarios in idle moments but,
> on the basis of our current scientific understanding of the universe,
> do not consider them as anything more than interesting theoretical
> speculations, mixed with some wishful thinking. In particular, I do
> not consider them as acceptable basis for any decision that I have to
make.

That is because they are like other religions.  They have cannot be detected
or proven, and therefore have no affect on our reality.  Even if you concede
that these scenarios are true, it doesn't change any other attribute of
science.  It doesn't help you predict anything.  It doesn't help you do
anything.  It doesn't help you explain anything.  All these scenarios can do
is give you an excuse for not trying to work so hard, because this life
isn't real and the imaginary scenarios will fix everything for us.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>




From fauxever at sprynet.com  Mon Dec 15 07:47:52 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 23:47:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBAECHCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com><00cd01c3c2d6$b606e180$84994a43@texas.net>
	<00e901c3c2d9$24d5f7c0$84994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00f101c3c2df$be8f6530$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
>
> It seems I'm very much not in a minority with this opinion. See Michael
> Shermer's preliminary empirical study:
>
> http://www.skeptic.com/BIG%20BRIGHT%20BROUHAHA4.htm

He, he he ... a portion of my reply to Shermer got printed:  "Why don't we
simply call ourselves "smart-people-unlike-you-dumb-people"?  How to win
friends and influence people."

An acquaintance of mine told me when he first read the proposal of using the
term "Brights" he almost threw up.  And he is a skeptic/nontheist.  I can
only imagine how well such a term will go over with the religious set.  My
reaction was more like:  "WHAT?"

> It will be interesting to see if the very bright founders are modest
enough
> to pay heed and change it.

If it doesn't catch on, the term "the Brights" will simply die a natural
death.  By atrophy.

Olga





From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Dec 15 08:15:28 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:15:28 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] The Brights Movement's Forums
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEFPDOAA.reason@exratio.com>
Message-ID: <033901c3c2e3$9c7e6640$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Reason wrote:

> The Imminst people went in to see how receptive the Brights 
> are to transhumanist life extension ideas over the past day or so.
> I'd suggest you all do the same. Rather than mocking their
> terminology, take advantage of this growing community of 
> receptive minds. Go chat some, introduce them to transhumanism.
> Sell some books.
> 
> http://www.the-brights.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=487
> http://www.the-brights.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=496

Excellent advice imo. Brands are not immaterial (I wouldn't have
picked Brights as a name either but it will get recognition) and
content definately counts. Good content can always be rebadged. 

Regards,
Brett



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Dec 15 08:35:51 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 03:35:51 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <001001c3c2de$ed558940$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <001d01c3c2e6$76a5a660$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> Work is gooood, friends!  Its goooood for you, its good for
> all of us.  Make lots of close friends in the office, liiive your 
> work.

...1984...1994...2004...

The more things change, the more they stay the same....

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Dec 15 15:26:34 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:26:34 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ALCOR:  New CEO
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031215072510.0200c450@pop.earthlink.net>

I am forwarding this message from Alcor's Board meeting on Saturday:

December 13, 2003
From:  Michael Riskin; Alcor VP, CFO, Board Chairman
Re:  Alcor announces its new CEO, Joseph A. Waynick

First, on behalf of everyone associated with the mission of cryonics, I
wish to once again officially thank Dr. Jerry Lemler for his visionary
efforts as Alcor's CEO these past two years. Retiring from this position
on December 31, 2003, Jerry will continue to support the foundation as
Alcor's medical director and chief spokesperson commencing on January
1,2004. We all wish you, Jerry, the very best of ongoing successes in
whateveryou do, but especially in your fight against the life threatening
illness that attacked you earlier this year.

It is also with great pleasure, that I am announcing on behalf of the
board directors, the selection of Joseph Waynick, who will be succeedingDr
Lemler as Alcor's CEO, commencing January 1, 2004. Joe brings a rich and
successful career combining business, management, and technology to this
position. In addition, he has been elected to the Alcor Board of
Directors, effective immediately.

Having gotten to know Joe on a more personal level, I am confident
that under his leadership he will guide Alcor to even greater heights as
the world's premier provider of cryonics services.

Michael Riskin


Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc
----------
President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.transhuman.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031215/ec646dc3/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 13:41:44 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 05:41:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <001001c3c2de$ed558940$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031215134145.79687.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Good thing too, eh?  The profitability of a worker goes up
> as that worker spends more time at the office, for a lot of
> reasons.  Much of the overhead associated with a worker, such
> as the health care benefits, only need to be paid once regardless
> of the amount of time spent. 

Have to wonder then why it is that hospitals specifically intentionally
structure employment to maximize the number of part time workers as
possible to avoid providing health care benefits to their health care
workers, such that most nurses can't afford their own health care...

> Furthermore, a worker who is always
> at the office tends to get more involved in the program, since
> that becomes her life.

Yes, as opposed to having an actual family, hobbies, etc. rather than
having ex-spouses and part time kids, activity interests that stay hung
on the wall and in the garage (hey, that boat maintains its value if
you never get a chance to use it...)


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Mon Dec 15 13:44:39 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:44:39 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
In-Reply-To: <018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>
	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>
	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com>
	<018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <j8ertv41nclb45dmdfi37sg2f64j7elnb7@4ax.com>

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 17:12:36 -0000, you wrote

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
>To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
><extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 11:48 PM
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
>
>
>> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>>
>> > From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
>> >>
>> >>Do/did we need a formal Europe at all? Are European Extropes pro-Europe?
>> >>Why?
>> >
>> >
>> > Because having a relatively coherent economic bloc of around 450m people
>is
>> > a base which can wield enough power to maintain the economic and
>military
>> > independence of its member states with respect to other world forces.
>> >
>> > However, I am not in favour of an EU govt in Brussels that feels it can
>poke
>> > its nose into the purely internal workings of its member states eg
>criminal
>> > law, various Rights issues etc. The EU should be limited to inter
>national
>> > issues only.
>>
>> Are there good reasons to think that agreement and coherent behaviour is
>> possible in economic and military international matters without
>> political unity?
>
>Yes.
>NATO, EU (current)
>However, if you mean launching global military adventures at a moments
>notice on trumped up charges (eg WMDs) then no.
>Which is a good thing.
>
>> Suppose a situation similar to WWII, with fascist Germany invading
>> nearby countries, and causing a potentially global threat, and where the
>> US got involved. Will a politically loose Europe manage to make the
>> decision to get involved, or will it stay irresolute and passive while
>> no clear agreement can be reached by the member States, except on the
>> most extreme cases?
>
>Hopefully, it would stay out of other peoples business.
>
>> In other words, can Europe really leverage its military (and economic)
>> power as a bloc while preserving the freedom and independence of its
>> member States? Can you have the advantages of being a big State when you
>> are a loose, ad hoc federation?
>
>I do not call neo-imperialism and a huge military/industrial complex an
>'advantage'.


Hear, hear. I seem to be almost alone in American meatspace when it
comes to being sickened by the endless media propaganda that
encourages this senseless corporate imperialism currently being
practiced.  Almost no one else here in meatspace even seems to notice
the huge propaganda machine leveled at us everyday in the media....

As for your discussion on the EU, it has of course apparently been
co-opted by the forces of laissez faire corporate
capitalism/neoliberalism in the interests of destroying the various EU
welfare states.  But it looks as if most of the citizens and leaders
of many of the various member countries are hep to that fact and are
just ignoring the parts of the EU agreements that are meant to achieve
welfare state destruction, and going along with the parts of the
agreements that the citizens like.  Please correct me if I am
wrong.....



-------------



From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Mon Dec 15 13:47:57 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:47:57 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>
References: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <emertvoksonsgeb71kvfb02cq6kkk30dbf@4ax.com>

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 16:20:45 -0500, you wrote

>               I am interested in the concept of a leisure society and was 
>wondering if anyone knew of any major thinkers,researchers,or think tanks 
>exploring this concept and the cultural,economic,psychological,and political 
>ramifications of this idea.I prepared a short list of items I've read on 
>this topic and was wondering if someone could point me in the direction of 
>similar thinkers:
>1.)F.M. Esfandiary/F.M.2030--"Upwingers", "Are You A Transhuman?", and 
>"Telespheres"
>2.)James Hughes-- "The Politics of Transhumanism"-in a section titled "Pro 
>Automation Post Work Utopias" he mentions Andre Gorz -"who has been 
>promoting a political program for 25 years that embraces automation and the 
>expansion of the social wage." He also mentions that-"the movement for 
>universal basic income(Lerner,1994) has been growing in Europe and the 
>United States"


A universal basic income growing in the United States? Ah,
no.....quite the opposite, in fact. Outside of the American
Indian/aborigines, who do have min income and in fact a nice little
leisure society, life in the USA is moving in the opposite
direction--we are working more hours and wages are dropping for a huge
segment of society....  







-------------



From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Mon Dec 15 13:50:04 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 07:50:04 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <3FDD5EE7.60807@mail.tele.dk>
References: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>
	<3FDD5EE7.60807@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <quertvokonu1b4n4mgsucovpdh9clbg8fn@4ax.com>

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 08:12:39 +0100, you wrote

>Colin Magee wrote:
>
>>               I am interested in the concept of a leisure society and 
>> was wondering if anyone knew of any major thinkers,researchers,or think 
>> tanks exploring this concept and the cultural,economic,psychological,and 
>> political ramifications of this idea.
>
>
>It was all the rage among futurologists in the 70-80's. But it turned 
>out that people didn't want to use their higher income for more leisure 
>time. Rather they wanted more stuff.
>
>So they kept working
>

Actually, that is what the media propaganda machines tells them they
want....

<Tucking more tin foil into hat>


-------------



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 14:01:34 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 06:01:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <emertvoksonsgeb71kvfb02cq6kkk30dbf@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20031215140134.38578.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- randy <cryofan at mylinuxisp.com> wrote:> 
> A universal basic income growing in the United States? Ah,
> no.....quite the opposite, in fact. Outside of the American
> Indian/aborigines, who do have min income and in fact a nice little
> leisure society, life in the USA is moving in the opposite
> direction--we are working more hours and wages are dropping for a
> huge segment of society....  

Actually, disposable income has been rising steadily, especially when
the statisticians actually count the effective deflation that has been
going on as consumers shift to mega store shopping.


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From jacques at dtext.com  Mon Dec 15 14:10:52 2003
From: jacques at dtext.com (JDP)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 15:10:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
In-Reply-To: <018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com>
	<018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <3FDDC0EC.40906@dtext.com>

Dirk Bruere wrote:

>>Suppose a situation similar to WWII, with fascist Germany invading
>>nearby countries, and causing a potentially global threat, and where the
>>US got involved. Will a politically loose Europe manage to make the
>>decision to get involved, or will it stay irresolute and passive while
>>no clear agreement can be reached by the member States, except on the
>>most extreme cases?
> 
> 
> Hopefully, it would stay out of other peoples business.

Do you mean that the involvement of the US in France in WWII is regrettable?

I don't buy "staying out of other people's business" as an absolute rule
in individual matters, and I don't buy it in inter-national matters
either. Sometimes it is good to get involved, though of course
potentially messy.

I believe in the possibility of benevolent power ("benevolent" here not 
meaning "exclusively altruistic"), and in fact powerless benevolence is 
generally quite useless.

>>In other words, can Europe really leverage its military (and economic)
>>power as a bloc while preserving the freedom and independence of its
>>member States? Can you have the advantages of being a big State when you
>>are a loose, ad hoc federation?
> 
> 
> I do not call neo-imperialism and a huge military/industrial complex an
> 'advantage'.

I was reasoning in terms of adequacy to certain ends. I was trying to 
take your initial answer to "why do we need a formal Europe at all" and 
question the fact that the bloc benefit you mentioned as an answer could 
be had without the political unity.

But I understand your answer to be that the bloc benefit is about 
preserving one's independence while staying out of other people 
business, and that you think a European Confederation is a necessary and 
adequate way to this end. Thanks for your answer.

Jacques




From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec 15 14:48:20 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 15:48:20 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <quertvokonu1b4n4mgsucovpdh9clbg8fn@4ax.com>
References: <Law14-F48rz79XytNG600047c3f@hotmail.com>	<3FDD5EE7.60807@mail.tele.dk>
	<quertvokonu1b4n4mgsucovpdh9clbg8fn@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <3FDDC9B4.2030103@mail.tele.dk>

randy wrote:

>>It was all the rage among futurologists in the 70-80's. But it turned 
>>out that people didn't want to use their higher income for more leisure 
>>time. Rather they wanted more stuff.
>>
>>So they kept working

> Actually, that is what the media propaganda machines tells them they
> want....


Yes and no. Certainly we have a lot of stuff we could be without.

But one problem, at least here in Denmark, is the increased cost of housing.

People make more money, and all want to live in houses. So houses become 
*very* expensive.

Generally the price-gap between rental houses and owned houses isn't 
that big, and in the long run there is a saving in owning a house. So 
the rational thing is to buy a house yourself.

So either you buy an expensive house, and have to work hard to keep it. 
But get the bonus of a big money pile when you later sell it.

Or you live in a rental, where the landlord makes the money. You don't 
save that much money each month, and you don't make any money when you move.

So actually it is hard to get more leisure time and do the "smart thing" 
money wise at the same time.

If we really want a leasure society a majority need to want it, or else 
the spiraling housing prices and other effects will keep us at work.


regards Max M Rasmussen Denmark



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 15 15:35:28 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 15:35:28 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com>
	<018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis> <3FDDC0EC.40906@dtext.com>
Message-ID: <01e501c3c321$113cf310$38b26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JDP" <jacques at dtext.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe


> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
> >>Suppose a situation similar to WWII, with fascist Germany invading
> >>nearby countries, and causing a potentially global threat, and where the
> >>US got involved. Will a politically loose Europe manage to make the
> >>decision to get involved, or will it stay irresolute and passive while
> >>no clear agreement can be reached by the member States, except on the
> >>most extreme cases?
> >
> >
> > Hopefully, it would stay out of other peoples business.
>
> Do you mean that the involvement of the US in France in WWII is
regrettable?

Why not go to the root of that particular problem, WW1?
Yes - it was 'regrettable' for us (Britain and the US, not to mention
Russia) to get involved.

> I don't buy "staying out of other people's business" as an absolute rule
> in individual matters, and I don't buy it in inter-national matters
> either. Sometimes it is good to get involved, though of course
> potentially messy.

Thin end of an ugly wedge.

> I believe in the possibility of benevolent power ("benevolent" here not
> meaning "exclusively altruistic"), and in fact powerless benevolence is
> generally quite useless.
>
> >>In other words, can Europe really leverage its military (and economic)
> >>power as a bloc while preserving the freedom and independence of its
> >>member States? Can you have the advantages of being a big State when you
> >>are a loose, ad hoc federation?
> >
> >
> > I do not call neo-imperialism and a huge military/industrial complex an
> > 'advantage'.
>
> I was reasoning in terms of adequacy to certain ends. I was trying to
> take your initial answer to "why do we need a formal Europe at all" and
> question the fact that the bloc benefit you mentioned as an answer could
> be had without the political unity.

What level of unity?
That of a superstate that dictates every facet of citizens lives, down to
school timetables, from Brussels?
Or that of a federation of independent states that co-operates on
*inter*national matters?
I prefer the latter ie something akin to the early US model - not the post
civil war state.

> But I understand your answer to be that the bloc benefit is about
> preserving one's independence while staying out of other people
> business, and that you think a European Confederation is a necessary and
> adequate way to this end. Thanks for your answer.

Only one particular model of confederation.
That is what all the argument is about.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From iph1954 at msn.com  Mon Dec 15 16:20:10 2003
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:20:10 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] CRN: Gray Goo Is A Small Issue
Message-ID: <BAY5-F29H0KL5KN0dOX00036ea6@hotmail.com>

GRAY GOO IS A SMALL ISSUE

http://crnano.org/BD-Goo.htm

Fear of runaway nanobots, or "gray goo", is more of a public issue than a 
scientific problem. Gray goo as a result of out of control nanotechnology 
played a starring role in an article titled "The Gray Goo Problem" by 
Lawrence Osborne in Sunday's New York Times Magazine (12/14/03). This 
article and other recent fictional portrayals of gray goo, as well as 
statements by scientists such as Richard Smalley, are signs of significant 
public concern. But although biosphere-eating goo is a gripping story, 
current molecular manufacturing proposals contain nothing even similar to 
gray goo. The idea that nanotechnology manufacturing systems could run amok 
is based on outdated information.

The earliest proposals for molecular manufacturing technologies echoed 
biological systems. Huge numbers of tiny robots called "assemblers" would 
self-replicate, then work together to build large products, much like 
termites building a termite mound. Such systems appeared to run the risk of 
going out of control, perhaps even ?eating? large portions of the biosphere. 
Eric Drexler warned in 1986, "We cannot afford certain kinds of accidents 
with replicating assemblers."

Since then, however, Drexler and others have developed models for making 
safer and more efficient machine-like systems that resemble an assembly line 
in a factory more than anything biological. These mechanical designs were 
described in detail in Drexler's 1992 seminal reference work, "Nanosystems", 
which does not even mention free-floating autonomous assemblers.

Replicating assemblers will not be used for manufacturing. Factory designs 
using integrated nanotechnology will be much more efficient at building 
products, and a nanofactory is nothing like a gray goo nanobot. A stationary 
tabletop factory using only preprocessed chemicals would be both safer and 
easier to build. Like a drill press or a lathe, such a system could not run 
wild. Systems like this are the basis for responsible molecular 
manufacturing proposals. To evaluate Eric Drexler's technical ideas on the 
basis of gray goo is to miss the far more important policy issues created by 
general-purpose nanoscale manufacturing.

A gray goo robot would face a much harder task than merely replicating 
itself. It would also have to survive in the environment, move around, and 
convert what it finds into raw materials and power. This would require 
sophisticated chemistry. None of these functions would be part of a 
molecular manufacturing system. A gray goo robot would also require a 
relatively large computer to store and process the full blueprint of such a 
complex device. A nanobot or nanomachine missing any part of this 
functionality could not function as gray goo.

Development and use of molecular manufacturing will create nothing like gray 
goo, so it poses no risk of producing gray goo by accident at any point. 
However, goo type systems do not appear to be ruled out by the laws of 
physics, and we cannot ignore the possibility that someone could 
deliberately combine all the requirements listed above. Drexler's 1986 
statement can therefore be updated: We cannot afford criminally 
irresponsible misuse of powerful technologies. Having lived with the threat 
of nuclear weapons for half a century, we already know that.

Gray goo eventually may become a concern requiring special policy. However, 
goo would be extremely difficult to design and build, and its replication 
would be inefficient. Worse and more imminent dangers may come from 
non-replicating nano-weaponry. Since there are numerous greater risks from 
molecular manufacturing that may happen almost immediately after the 
technology is developed, gray goo should not be a primary concern. Focusing 
on gray goo allows more urgent technology and security issues to remain 
unexplored.

For more information on the specific dangers of molecular manufacturing, see 
http://CRNano.org/dangers.htm.

The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology is headquartered in New York. CRN 
is an affiliate of World Care, an international, non-profit, 501(c)(3) 
organization.

CONTACT:

Chris Phoenix, Director of Research
cphoenix at CRNano.org

Mike Treder, Executive Director
mtreder at CRNano.org

Center for Responsible Nanotechnology
http://CRNano.org

_________________________________________________________________
Winterize your home with tips from MSN House & Home. 
http://special.msn.com/home/warmhome.armx



From scerir at libero.it  Mon Dec 15 17:15:24 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 18:15:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com><018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
	<3FDDC0EC.40906@dtext.com> <01e501c3c321$113cf310$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <000a01c3c32f$0757f530$54b61b97@administxl09yj>

From: "Dirk Bruere"

> What level of unity? That of a superstate that dictates 
> every facet of citizens lives, down to school timetables, 
> from Brussels?

It is already much much worse than that. 
See here below ..... and :-)
Regards,
s.


32003R0318
Commission Regulation (EC) No 318/2003 of 19 February 2003 amending
Regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 introducing detailed rules for implementing
Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs
-Official Journal L 046 , 20/02/2003 P. 0020 - 0020

Directory classification code
03.60.53. Agriculture - Products subject to market organization
- Eggs and poultry

EUROVOC
marketing standard ; egg ; packaging ; labelling

         THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 of 
26 June 1990 on certain marketing standards for eggs(1), 
as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 5/2001(2), and in 
particular Article 10(3) and Article 20(1) and (4), thereof,
Whereas:
(1) [....]
(2) [....]
(3) In order to ensure proper land management and to prevent 
a build-up of harmful diseases, the open-air runs for laying 
hens may need to be rotated. Birds should be given even access 
to the whole paddock area and, where rotation on extensive free 
range system with at least 10 m2 per hen is practised, each bird 
should be ensured at all times at least 2,5 m2.
(4) It is therefore necessary to amend Regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 
accordingly.
(5) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance 
with the opinion of the Management Committee for Poultrymeat and Eggs,
                HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 is amended as follows:
1. [....]
2. in Annex III, the third indent of point (a) is replaced by 
the following: "- the open-air runs must at least satisfy the 
conditions specified in Article 4(1)(3)(b)(ii) of Council Directive 
1999/74/EC whereby the maximum stocking density is not greater than 
2500 hens per hectare of ground available to the hens or one hen 
per 4 m2 at all times; however, where at least 10 m2 per hen is 
available and where rotation is practised and hens are given even 
access to the whole area over the flock's life, each paddock used 
must at any time assure at least 2,5 m2 per hen, - the open-air runs 
do not extend beyond a radius of 150 m from the nearest pophole of 
the building; however an extension of up to 350 m from the nearest 
pophole of the building is permissible provided that a sufficient 
number of shelters and drinking troughs within the meaning of that 
provision are evenly distributed throughout the whole open-air run 
with at least four shelters per hectare."

[Ok, I stop here, but it is much longer ...]











From rhanson at gmu.edu  Mon Dec 15 17:12:42 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:12:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <001001c3c2de$ed558940$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <3FDD5EE7.60807@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215120823.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/14/2003, Spike wrote:
> > ... it turned out that people didn't want to use their higher
> > income for more leisure time. Rather they wanted more stuff.
> > So they kept working
>
>Good thing too, eh?  The profitability of a worker goes up
>as that worker spends more time at the office, for a lot of
>reasons.  Much of the overhead associated with a worker, such
>as the health care benefits, only need to be paid once regardless
>of the amount of time spent.  Furthermore, a worker who is always
>at the office tends to get more involved in the program, since
>that becomes her life.
>If everyone started slacking off, our cool stuff would be
>much more expensive too, so not only would we have less money
>but it would buy less, and lots of businesses would go under.  So:
>Work is gooood, friends!  Its goooood for you, its good for
>all of us. ...

This is a confused description of labor economics.  There is probably
an innovation externality - the more you innovate, the better off we
all are because you cannot appropriate the full value of your innovation.
But your arguments about spreading overheads out and being more involved
are bogus - in a competitive labor market you should get all of those
benefits for yourself; they don't help the rest of us.








Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From scerir at libero.it  Mon Dec 15 17:26:28 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 18:26:28 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com><018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
	<3FDDC0EC.40906@dtext.com> <01e501c3c321$113cf310$38b26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <001601c3c330$932b4980$54b61b97@administxl09yj>

From: "Dirk Bruere"

> That of a superstate that dictates every
> facet of citizens lives, down to
> school timetables, from Brussels?

In this case it would be a nanostate, like
the present. See below .... and you will
realize why our economy runs slow.
s.

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2561/1999
of 3 December 1999
laying down the marketing standard for peas

[loooong snip]

ANNEX

STANDARD FOR PEAS
I. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE
This standard applies to shelling peas of varieties (cultivars) grown from
Pisum sativum L. and peas intended for consumption in the pods or snow peas
(mangetout peas) from Pisum sativum L. var. macrocarpon and sugar snap peas
from Pisum sativum L. var. saccharatum to be supplied fresh to the consumer,
peas for industrial processing being excluded.
II. PROVISIONS CONCERNING QUALITY
The purpose of the standard is to define the quality requirements for peas
after preparation and packaging.
A. Minimum requirements
In all classes, subject to the special provisions for each class and the
tolerances allowed,
(i) the pods must be:
- intact
- sound; produce affected by rotting or deterioration such as to make it
unfit for consumption is excluded
- clean, practically free of any visible foreign matter (including parts of
the flowers)
- free from hard filaments or films in mange-tout peas
- practically free from pests
- practically free from damage caused by pests
- free of abnormal external moisture
- free of any foreign smell and/or taste.
(ii) the peas must be:
- fresh
- sound, i.e., free of damage caused by pests or diseases
- normally developed.
The development and condition of peas must be such as to enable them:
- to withstand transport and handling, and
- to arrive in satisfactory condition at the place of destination.
B. Classification
Peas are classified in two classes defined below:
(i) Class I
Peas in this class must be of good quality.
The pods must be:
- characteristic of the variety in shape, size and colouring
- with peduncles attached
- free from damage by hail
- fresh and turgid
- without damage caused by heating.
For mange-tout peas the pods may have:
- very slight skin defects, injuries and bruises
- very slight defects of shape
- very slight defects of colouring.
For shelling peas:
the pods must be
- well filled, containing at least five seeds.
the peas must be:
- well formed
- tender
- succulent and sufficiently firm, i.e., when squeezed between two fingers
they should become flat without disintegrating
- at least half the full-grown size but not full grown
- of the colour typical of the variety
- non-farinaceous
- undamaged.
For mange-tout peas, the peas if present must be small and underdeveloped.
(ii) Class II
This class includes peas which do not qualify for inclusion in the Class I
but satisfy the minimum requirements specified above.
Shelling peas may be riper than those in Class I.
The following slight defects may be allowed provided the peas retain their
essential characteristics as regards the quality, the keeping quality and
presentation.
For mange-tout peas, the pods may have:
- slight skin defects, injuries and bruises
- slight defects in shape, including those due to the seed formation
- slight defect in colouring
- slight not-progressive skin defects caused by pests
- slight drying, excluding wilted and uncoloured pods.
For shelling peas, the pods may have:
- slight defect in colouring
- slight damage provided it is not progressive and there is no risk of the
seeds being affected
- some loss of freshness, although wilted pods are excluded.
The pods must contain at least three seeds.
The peas may be:
- less well formed
- slightly less coloured
- slightly harder
- slightly damaged.
Over-mature peas are excluded.
III. PROVISIONS CONCERNING SIZING
Size is not compulsory for peas.
IV. PROVISIONS CONCERNING TOLERANCES
Tolerances in respect of quality shall be allowed in each package for
produce not satisfying the requirements of the class indicated.
(i) Class I
10 % by weight of peas not satisfying the requirements of the class, but
meeting those of Class II or, exceptionally, coming within the tolerances of
that class.
(ii) Class II
10 % by weight of peas satisfying neither the requirements of the class nor
the minimum requirements, with the exception of produce affected by rotting,
progressive diseases or any other deterioration rendering it unfit for
consumption.
V. PROVISIONS CONCERNING PRESENTATION
A. Uniformity
The contents of each package must be uniform and contain only peas of the
same origin, variety and quality.
The visible part of the contents of the package must be representative of
the entire contents.
B. Packaging
Peas must be packed in such a way as to protect the produce properly.
The materials used inside the package must be new, clean and of a quality
such as to avoid causing any external or internal damage to the produce. The
use of materials, particularly of paper or stamps bearing trade
specifications is allowed provided the printing or labelling has been done
with non-toxic ink or glue.
Packages must be free of all foreign matter.
VI. PROVISIONS CONCERNING MARKING
Each package must bear the following particulars, in letters grouped on the
same side, legibly and indelibly marked, and visible from the outside:
A. Identification
- Packer and/or dispatcher: Name and address or officially issued or
accepted code mark. However, where a code mark is used, the reference
"packer and/or dispatcher" (or equivalent abbreviations) has to be indicated
in close proximity to the code mark.
B. Nature of produce
- "Shelling peas", "Snow peas", "Sugar peas" or "Mange-tout peas" if the
contents are not visible from the outside.
C. Origin of produce
- Country of origin and, optionally, district where grown, or national,
regional or local place name.
D. Commercial specifications
- Class
E. Official control mark (optional)




From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 15 17:21:53 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:21:53 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe
References: <HPUR8Q$46C47146BD6A286ACED33C4874313F19@libero.it>	<011001c3c1bf$917516b0$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDB8B12.7080806@dtext.com>	<033a01c3c1c7$ae279c30$757b6951@artemis>	<3FDBA538.4040904@dtext.com><018a01c3c265$78cb9840$38b26bd5@artemis>
	<3FDDC0EC.40906@dtext.com> <01e501c3c321$113cf310$38b26bd5@artemis>
	<001601c3c330$932b4980$54b61b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <027901c3c32f$f2135ba0$38b26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "scerir" <scerir at libero.it>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 5:26 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POL(L): The Constitution of Europe


> From: "Dirk Bruere"
>
> > That of a superstate that dictates every
> > facet of citizens lives, down to
> > school timetables, from Brussels?
>
> In this case it would be a nanostate, like
> the present. See below .... and you will
> realize why our economy runs slow.
> s.
>
> COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2561/1999
> of 3 December 1999
> laying down the marketing standard for peas
>
> [loooong snip]
>
> ANNEX
>
> STANDARD FOR PEAS
> I. DEFINITION OF PRODUCE
> This standard applies to shelling peas of varieties (cultivars) grown from
> Pisum sativum L. and peas intended for consumption in the pods or snow
peas
> (mangetout peas) from Pisum sativum L. var. macrocarpon and sugar snap
peas
> from Pisum sativum L. var. saccharatum to be supplied fresh to the
consumer,
> peas for industrial processing being excluded.

Actually, I don't have a problem with standardisation of trade goods across
the EU.
What I do have a problem with (for example) is the EU rying to legislate our
criminal code, and the entire Social Policy unit. How we live our lives is
not something that is exported.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From rhanson at gmu.edu  Mon Dec 15 17:27:48 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:27:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <3FDB5D22.7080609@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/13/2003, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
>Wired has recently run an article on "affective computing" ... about 
>detecting and simulating emotions.  ...  This is an incredibly early form 
>of the technology and I don't expect problems for at least a decade, but 
>when it hits it will hit hard. ... it's about programs with incredibly 
>realistic graphics and means for recognizing emotions in their targets, 
>being able to deploy apparent behaviors that act as superstimuli for human 
>emotional responses.  Think of chocolate chip cookies for emotions. 
>Chocolate chip cookies are a more powerful stimulus than hunter-gatherer 
>tastebuds ever encounter, combining sugar, fat, and salt in greater 
>quantity and purer quality.  And likewise there's a limit to the sympathy, 
>support, approval, and admiration humans can expect from their human 
>mates.  As any evolutionary theorist knows, a human male is not designed 
>as the human female's ideal boyfriend, nor vice versa.
>Candy bars for the soul.  It's not that all synthetic foods are bad.  ... 
>But it takes so much more knowledge to do it right... and the side effects 
>of the things that "just taste good" are negative, complicated, very hard 
>to understand, unforeseen in advance.  People at large understand the one 
>*obvious* side effect once they've seen it: People bloating up like 
>balloons.  But also losing insulin sensitivity, and a lot of other 
>problems that aren't visible to the naked eye. ...
>I could be surprised, but what Laura presages is probably NOT a good 
>thing.  Transhumanism needs to lose the optimism about outcomes.  Nobody 
>is taking into account the fact that problems are hard and humans are 
>stupid.  Watch this space for serious developments in some unknown amount 
>of time, my wild guess being a decade, and quite possibly nothing 
>happening if "faking it well" turns out to be AI-complete. ...

This is a reasonable topic for concern, but I'm not as nearly concerned as 
you seem to be, because of our long track record of dealing with similar 
problems.  It's not just that food is far more tasty than in the past; 
media and music today are far more entertaining, and advertising is far 
more persuasive, than ancient analogies could have been.  Our evolved 
habits in these things probably also mislead us to emphasize the wrong 
things.  We probably think we have more friends because we watch "Friends" 
on TV, for example.

But given how vastly different our world is from the ancient world, it is 
amazing that we do as well as we do.  The human mind seems to be relatively 
robust, and able to adapt to radically different circumstances.  Probably 
the biggest way in which our minds have been misled, relative to the 
ancient problems they were designed to solve, is whatever it is that causes 
the demographic transition, causing rich societies to have far fewer 
children than evolution could possibly have "intended."  I wish we 
understood this better; it might give us a better clue about the other 
problems.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 19:45:51 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 11:45:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interview to Arthur C. Clarke
Message-ID: <20031215194551.29479.qmail@web41302.mail.yahoo.com>

http://southasia.oneworld.net/article/view/74591/1



La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031215/7da79e05/attachment.html>

From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Mon Dec 15 20:15:05 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:15:05 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Emanuel Goldstein has been captured!
In-Reply-To: <20031215194551.29479.qmail@web41302.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031215194551.29479.qmail@web41302.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ed5stvo1h846hab6c3q1nbtt13o4qo17r4@4ax.com>

After eluding Oceanian forces for months and vowing never to be
taken alive, a disheveled Emmanuel Goldstein was found hiding in a
hidden "rathole" near a farmhouse and was captured without firing a
shot, even though he was armed with a pistol, bloc authorities
announced Sunday. Learn more from the <a
href="http://protempore.net/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/calvins/goodspeak.py?
url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/index.htm
l">Ministry of Truth here:
 http://protempore.net/cgi-
bin/cgiwrap/calvins/goodspeak.py?
url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/index.htm
l

In other news, the chocolate ration will be increased!



-------------



From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 20:24:31 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:24:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
Message-ID: <20031215202431.71887.qmail@web41314.mail.yahoo.com>

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=570&ncid=753&e=7&u=/nm/20031209/sc_nm/un_population_dc



La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031215/78f77ebd/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 15 21:00:51 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:00:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Emanuel Goldstein has been captured!
In-Reply-To: <ed5stvo1h846hab6c3q1nbtt13o4qo17r4@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20031215210051.94676.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- randy <cryofan at mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
> After eluding Oceanian forces for months and vowing never to be
> taken alive, a disheveled Emmanuel Goldstein was found hiding in a
> hidden "rathole" near a farmhouse and was captured without firing a
> shot, even though he was armed with a pistol, bloc authorities
> announced Sunday. 

I don't think that Saddam would appreciate being identified as a jewish
enemy of the socialist state....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Mon Dec 15 21:39:31 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 15:39:31 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Emanuel Goldstein has been captured!
In-Reply-To: <20031215194551.29479.qmail@web41302.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031215194551.29479.qmail@web41302.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <bgastvsmc972unde3t4e2pmgtmtv921f7u@4ax.com>

After eluding Oceanian forces for months and vowing never to be
taken alive, a disheveled Emmanuel Goldstein was found hiding in a
hidden "rathole" near a farmhouse and was captured without firing a
shot, even though he was armed with a pistol, bloc authorities
announced Sunday. Learn more from the <a
href="http://protempore.net/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/calvins/goodspeak.py?
url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/index.htm
l">Ministry of Truth here:
 http://protempore.net/cgi-
bin/cgiwrap/calvins/goodspeak.py?
url=http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/12/14/sprj.irq.main/index.htm
l

In other news, the chocolate ration will be increased!



-------------



From bjk at imminst.org  Mon Dec 15 21:54:37 2003
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 15:54:37 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mike Perry - ImmInst Chat Successful 
Message-ID: <3FDE2D9D.6030409@imminst.org>


ImmInst members enjoyed discussion by
talented author Mike Perry this past Sunday - Dec 14.

Chat Topic = Alcor Patient Care Assistant and author
of "Forever for All", Mike Perry chats will ImmInst about
his current work and the future of Cryonics.

Archive of the discussion found here:
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=2385&st=0&#entry20724

Thanks Mike!

Bruce Klein
Chairman, ImmInst.org





From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 15 22:26:18 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:26:18 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
Message-ID: <269620-2200312115222618225@M2W059.mail2web.com>

From: Jose Cordeiro 

>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=570&ncid=753&e=7&u=/nm/2003
1209/sc_nm/un_population_dc

Excellent article.

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From jcorb at iol.ie  Mon Dec 15 22:43:20 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 22:43:20 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] WAR: Still want peace??? 
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031215224224.03329200@pop.iol.ie>


>Message: 26
>Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:05:12 -0800 (PST)
> >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] WAR: Still want peace???
>To: extropy-chat at extropy.org
>Message-ID: <20031214230512.99635.qmail at web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>For those who still want peace, now that the war is over and Saddam is
>in jail.....
>http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
>Top 10 Reasons to Masturbate for Peace
>10. It's too cold to go outside and demonstrate
>9. If I go blind they can't draft me
>8. The walls need painting white anyway
>7. This is my weapon...this is my gun...this one's for shootin....oh,
>never mind.
>6. If you want it done right you have to do it yourself
>5. All the lube will give me a baby-soft dork
>4. It may be the only "peace" I'll be getting for a while
>3. If I use my left hand, it feels like someone else has joined my
>cause
>2. What else am I going to do with the 80 GB of porn on my PC?
>1. Because I can't give myself a peace blowjob
>Now that I think of it, I think this was Saddam's to-do list in that
>hole in Tikrit....
Real men don't use lube....

;->


James...



From jcorb at iol.ie  Mon Dec 15 22:50:59 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 22:50:59 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums 
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031215224702.0332aec0@pop.iol.ie>


>Message: 5
>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 01:00:34 -0600
> >From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <00e901c3c2d9$24d5f7c0$84994a43 at texas.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
>Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:43 AM
> > How exquisitely embarrassing
>It seems I'm very much not in a minority with this opinion. See Michael
>Shermer's preliminary empirical study:
>http://www.skeptic.com/BIG%20BRIGHT%20BROUHAHA4.htm

This from the "rational" man who couldn't build a rational argument against 
cryonics.

>It will be interesting to see if the very bright founders are modest enough
>to pay heed and change it.

It's not looking like they will.  Can't say that I blame them, I don't 
think it's that bad a term.

Also on the upside, many familiar faces (including myself) are fighting the 
good fight there are spreadin' those LE memes.  Overall, the Brights are 
seemingly quite "bright" with regards to indefinite lifespans.



James...



>------------------------------




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 15 22:59:36 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:59:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
In-Reply-To: <20031215202431.71887.qmail@web41314.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031215225936.89156.qmail@web80403.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Jose Cordeiro <jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=570&ncid=753&e=7&u=/nm/20031209/sc_nm/un_population_dc

<rolls eyes>  Ye-awn.  Those predictions aren't worth
the pixels they're printed on.  Even if one ignored
the potential for 300+ year life spans (as they seem
to), what would it matter to anyone presently alive
what the state of the world will be in 2300 years?
And if one does not ignore that (that is, assumes we
will be around to care), but does set aside for the
moment the major skew that gives their figures, how
about fertility treatments, declining child birth
rates for the modernizing world...and how about
genemodded kids or other not-entirely-human-as-we-know
it "people", such as AIs (possibly including uploaded
folk)?

Also, even if human population does go by their red
exponential curve, would that necessarily be a bad
thing?  Humanity is almost guaranteed to have started
seriously colonizing off of Earth by 2300 - by
necessity to support the growing population if for no
other reason first.  (Or are they just tracking
Earth's population, with permanent emigrants counted
equivalent to deaths for this purpose?  That could be
used to justify the blue or the green curve.)


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 15 23:15:17 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:15:17 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
References: <269620-2200312115222618225@M2W059.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE23uXm9UaF2f0000d11d@hotmail.com>

I was just running some numbers. Feel free to correct me if I did it wrong.
If the world population is will be 9 billion and we put everyone in the
state of Texas (268,601 square miles), everyone would have 832 square feet
to themselves. Am I missing something here? Where's the crisis?
Kevin Freels
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <natashavita at earthlink.net>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 4:26 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300


> From: Jose Cordeiro
>
>
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=570&ncid=753&e=7&u=/nm/2003
> 1209/sc_nm/un_population_dc
>
> Excellent article.
>
> Natasha
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 16 00:09:32 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:09:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <20031214230220.61554.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031216000932.71024.qmail@web80409.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote
> > Schuchat commented:
> > 
> > "For me it's a question of values, it's not a
> question of 
> > science," said commissioner Sam Schuchat. "I think
> selling 
> > genetically modified fish as pets is wrong."
> 
> AHAHAAAAAAA! This means that selling them to *stock*
> wilderness areas
> must be okay!!! Go for it , Spike!!! You just can't
> keep them as
> pets.... ;) Thing is that they will wind up in the
> wild pretty soon
> anyways when people flush them down the toilet.

Pity that's not what the directive says...is it?  Are
there any streams that flow into California - say,
could someone release a bunch in the melting snow of
the Sierras, then wait for them to wash up downstream
(dead or alive, preferably alive) then cite that to
show they are an "established" species?  (It might be
illegal to import 'em, but if they're already here,
they can be caught in the wild...)  Especially if
they're tagged with some internal label, easily
recoverable upon autopsy, saying something like,
"Deliberately introduced into the wilderness to make
the laws moot.  Fuck you, Schuchat.  -Citizens Against
Religious Ecoluddism"

Of course, these days, one would just have to make up
a press release saying that someone had found 'em like
that.  (The fish bodies themselves were, of course,
incinerated after the investigation, and the
investigators doubt the fish would sucecssfully
colonize the rivers - neatly explaining why no one
else will be finding any.)


From xllb at rogers.com  Tue Dec 16 03:26:45 2003
From: xllb at rogers.com (xllb at rogers.com)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 22:26:45 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
Message-ID: <20031216032645.NESL132452.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost>

At what point in the process does Saddam become entitled to legal representation, or more specifically a mouth?  Who is likely to represent him?  Is he entitled to represent himself?

xllb

"Dogma blinds."
"Hell is overkill."



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec 16 04:01:57 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:01:57 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <20031216000932.71024.qmail@web80409.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3c389$59f32a30$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> > --- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote
> > > Schuchat commented:
> > > 
> > > "For me it's a question of values, it's not a question of 
> > > science," said commissioner Sam Schuchat. "I think selling 
> > > genetically modified fish as pets is wrong."
...

What if you bought a bunch of these, bred them in
your home aquarium, then released or sold the offspring?
Could you claim that they were not genetically
engineered?  I don't see why not: they were, after
all, conceived and born the old-fashioned way.  Of
course, their parents may have been a bit unusual...

If these glo-fish can be procluded from sale, then
they must be considered a unique species.  So if
some of these escaped into the wild, could not
one argue that this is a rare and endangered species?  
And therefore all building within 10 miles must halt
forthwith.  Merely point to the building project you
would like to see stopped.

spike



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 16 04:14:39 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:14:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
In-Reply-To: <20031216032645.NESL132452.fep01-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost>
Message-ID: <20031216041439.95130.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- xllb at rogers.com wrote:
> At what point in the process does Saddam become entitled to legal
> representation, or more specifically a mouth?  Who is likely to
> represent him?  Is he entitled to represent himself?

You will have to determine what measures the Iraqis have set up for
their special tribunal.

Now, I find it really, really, really odd that the French and Germans,
and the lefties here in the US, who whine that the US throws its weight
around and doesn't let indigenous people make their own decisions, are
now pissed that the US government wants the Iraqi people to try Saddam
in their own court system for his crimes against the Iraqi people.

What is the real issue involved? Of course, it is the death penalty,
which has been part of the Iraqi legal system for over 40 years, long
before Saddam came to power, and which he will theoretically be facing
in an Iraqi tribunal, where he will most certainly be afforded legal
protections that he never afforded any of his own victims.

I also find it odd that the goverments that are the most protectionist
of their own industries, especially with offering government contracts
only to their own industries, are now ticked off that they won't be
able to compete for American tax dollars in reconstruction contracts.

On a funnier note, apparently, when the soldiers coaxed him out of his
rat hole in Tikrit, the first thing he said with his hands in the air
was "I am willing to negotiate..." HAHAHAA, classic Saddam.....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 16 04:17:23 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:17:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c389$59f32a30$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031216041723.35223.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > > --- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote
> > > > Schuchat commented:
> > > > 
> > > > "For me it's a question of values, it's not a question of 
> > > > science," said commissioner Sam Schuchat. "I think selling 
> > > > genetically modified fish as pets is wrong."
> ...
> 
> What if you bought a bunch of these, bred them in
> your home aquarium, then released or sold the offspring?
> Could you claim that they were not genetically
> engineered?  I don't see why not: they were, after
> all, conceived and born the old-fashioned way.  Of
> course, their parents may have been a bit unusual...

I've GOT it: raise them as farm animals.... ;)

> 
> If these glo-fish can be procluded from sale, then
> they must be considered a unique species.  So if
> some of these escaped into the wild, could not
> one argue that this is a rare and endangered species?  
> And therefore all building within 10 miles must halt
> forthwith.  Merely point to the building project you
> would like to see stopped.

Dump em in the Bay and they'll have to stop scuba diving for more
evidence in the Lacey Peterson case...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 16 04:25:13 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 23:25:13 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] glo-fish
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c389$59f32a30$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000901c3c38c$9c934200$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> What if you bought a bunch of these, bred them in
> your home aquarium, then released or sold the offspring?
> Could you claim that they were not genetically
> engineered?  I don't see why not: they were, after
> all, conceived and born the old-fashioned way.

The term "engineered" describes how they were designed, not how they were
conceived and born.  It doesn't matter if your offspring fish were conceived
or born the old-fashioned way.  They still follow the engineered design.  If
that design is patented, your offspring fish would be covered by that
patent.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec 16 04:33:07 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:33:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215120823.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <000001c3c38d$b45302d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> On 12/14/2003, Spike wrote:
...
> >
> >... The profitability of a worker goes up
> >as that worker spends more time at the office, for a lot of
> >reasons....Its goooood for you, its good for
> >all of us...
> 
> This is a confused description of labor economics... Robin Hanson


Robin, clearly I am no professor of economics.  {8-]

This has caused me to ponder on what a job does for
us, and it is far more than just a paycheck.  A good
9 to 5 provides us with a social network, contact 
with interesting people, a place to go and focus our
energies, Newtonmas parties once a year, a sense of 
accomplishment the rest of the time, which is a
wonderful morale booster, a sense of pride when you
see your company's products perform, a number of good 
consequences in addition to just the means to make 
the mortgage.  We *need* to work at something.  For 
all its disadvantages, an ordinary job provides 
these needs.  Dr. Hanson, I really *like* my job.
My company is a really cool place to work.

Of course I fully recognize how pathetic this is, 
but that realization does not mean it doesn't 
still work that way.  {8-]

spike




From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec 16 04:35:17 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:35:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c38d$b45302d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312152034470.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> For all its disadvantages, an ordinary job provides these needs.  Dr.
> Hanson, I really *like* my job. My company is a really cool place to
> work.

Wow.  Put in a good word for me?  ;)



From etheric at comcast.net  Tue Dec 16 05:13:07 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 21:13:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312152034470.12761-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <011701c3c393$4ac81020$0200a8c0@etheric>

Obviously your not working hard enough!


----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:35 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,and
automation


> On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
>
> > For all its disadvantages, an ordinary job provides these needs.  Dr.
> > Hanson, I really *like* my job. My company is a really cool place to
> > work.
>
> Wow.  Put in a good word for me?  ;)
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From avatar at renegadeclothing.com.au  Tue Dec 16 00:52:21 2003
From: avatar at renegadeclothing.com.au (Avatar Polymorph)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:52:21 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline
References: <200312040251.hB42pw420688@finney.org>
Message-ID: <000901c3c433$92dae0e0$47ee17cb@renegade>

Sub-quantum engineering on Proto-Earth: 2027
General end of Quarantine in this universe (nodal stem): c. 115 billion post
Big Bang
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 6:51 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy #15 Timeline


> Max More wrote:
> > It would be
> > interesting to dig out the issue of Extropy that featured a range of
> > predicted dates for various events. I recall that Eric Drexler had
highly
> > optimistic projections, but others looked to 100+ years for many of the
> > items listed. I think I was somewhere in the middle. If anyone has the
> > issue at hand along with an OCR scanner, it would provide some
interesting
> > data points.
>
> Coincidentally, someone posted this URL on the FX (idea futures game)
> discussion list:
http://web.archive.org/web/20030212092807/www.lucifer.com/~sean/N-FX/.
> This is a Wayback Machine archive of an article on nanotech timelines,
> and it includes a link to the Extropy issue which had that article.
> Unfortunately, the archive failed to capture that issue, but the link
> does identify it as Extropy #15, which I happen to have, and I can go
> ahead and type in the data.
>
> The predictors are Gregory Benford; Steve Bridge; Eric Drexler; FM-2030;
> Mark Miller; Max More; and Nick Szabo.  These predictions are from 1995.
> Explanatory notes include:
>
> Szabo - "The first number is when something might be possible under ideal
> engineering, economic, and politilcal conditions.  'now' means we could
> have done it already.  The second number is the practical prediction,
> based primarily on the viewpoint of starting a business..."
>
> Bridge - "My answers are based on when something will 'actually happen'
> rather than on when it will be possible."
>
> Miller - "I will use the following variables: N = Now, 1995; S =
> Singularity; DAF = Design Ahead Factor....  I predict Singularity as
> occuring between N+10 and N+40.... I introduce a Design Ahead Factor
> which I define as 10/(S-N).  If Singularity occurs in 10 years, DAF is 1.
> If Singularity occurs in 40 years, DAF is 1/4."
>
> Here is the table, modulo possible typos.  You will need to use a
monospace
> font to get the columns to line up:
>
>     Benford             Drexler                 Miller
Szabo
>             Bridge                  FM-2030                         More
>
> Frozen Organ Transplant Is Routine
>     2020    2010        never       1990s+      N+20 if (S>N+30)
1999-2008   2020-2030
> Two Century Biological Lifespans
>     2150    2050/2140   never       2010-2020   never
2015-2040   2040/2100
> Indefinite Biological Lifespans
>     2300    2080        1967                    S+50
2020-2045   2090/2150
> Reanimation for Last Cryonics Suspendee
>     2100    2060        2006-2021               S+6*DAF
2025-2055   2050/2200
> Reanimation for Current Cryonics Suspendees
>     2200    2090        2006-2021   2020        S+10*DAF
2030-2100   2400/2410
> Biotech Cures for Most Heart Disease, Cancer & Aging
>     2030    2030        never       1990s+      S+10*DAF
2015-2040   2090/2130
> Fine-Tuned Mood/Motivation Transformation Drugs
>     2010    2020        ?-2021      1990s+      N+10
1998-2010   2040/2050
> Genius Drugs (>20 pts permanent IQ increase for most people)
>     2030    2020        ?-2021                  S-10 to S+10*DAF
2020-2060   2010/2050
>
>     Benford             Drexler                 Miller
Szabo
>             Bridge                  FM-2030                         More
>
> Human Germ-Line Gene Therapy
>     2040    2007/2025               1990s       N+20                2010
now/2010
> Human Child Gestated Completely in Artificial Womb
>     2020    2050                    2010-2020   S-5 to S-2*DAF
2015-2035   2100/2120
> Cloning of a Human Being
>     2050    2020                    2010        S-5 to S+4*DAF      2010
now/2010
> Completely Genetically Composed Children
>     2060    2050
2015-2020   2060/2100
> Extinct Species Reanimation (from preserved DNA)
>     2100    2025        ?-2021                  N+5 to S+1
2010/2020
>
>     Benford             Drexler                 Miller
Szabo
>             Bridge                  FM-2030                         More
>
> Cryonics Industry Revenues $1 billion/year
>     2035    2015                    2010-2020   N+30 (if S>N+30)
2015-2020   now/2020
> Nanotech Factories
>     2100    2030/2050   2006-2021   2010-2020   S-3 to S+1
2015-2030   2070/2080
> Atomically Detailed Design for Self-Reproducing Drexler-style Assembler
>     2070    2015        1998-2010               N+7
2000-2015   2100/2100
> High-Degree of Freedom Cell Repair Nanomachines
>     2075    2040/2060   2006/2021   2010        S+2*DAF
2160/2180
> Reproducing Nanotech Assemblers
>     2080    2025        2004-2019               S-3 to S+1
2020-2030   2120/2140
> Really Cheap Fusion Power
>     2100    2040                    2010-2020
2010-2020   2200/2210
> Nukes as Cheap as Tanks
>     2105    2015
2040-2050   2100/2150
> Nukes as Cheap as Handguns
>     never   never
2200/2250
>
>     Benford             Drexler                 Miller
Szabo
>             Bridge                  FM-2030                         More
>
> Most Publications are Electronic
>     2015    2015                    1990s+      N+10 to N+30        1999
2000/2005
> Most Intellectual Publications are on Web
>     2001    2008                    late 1990s  N+5 to N+30
1999-2002   2000/2005
> Information Storage $0.01 per Megabyte
>     2010    2020                                N+1 to N+10         2015
2010/2010
> Computer Implanted in Brain
>     2015    2045                    2010        N+1 to N+10
2020-2050   2010/2020
> Human-Brain Equivalent Computers on a Desk
>     2030    2030        2004-2019   2010        S-3*DAF             2030
2040/2050
> Human-Level A.I.
>     2030    2050        2004-2019   2010
2040-2150   2150/2200
> Uploaded Minds
>     2060    2125        2006-2021               S+7*DAF
2040-2100   2300/2400
> Uploads Running 1000x Faster than Humans
>     2080    2125        2006-2021               S-3*DAF
2045-2100   2450/2450
>
>     Benford             Drexler                 Miller
Szabo
>             Bridge                  FM-2030                         More
>
> Big Fraction of Economy Off Earth
>     2200    2100        2006-2021               S+20*DAF+20
2100-2200   2150/2200
> Big Fraction of Economy out of Solar System
>     2800    3000        2011-2026               S+20*DAF+(50-200)   3000
2400/2500
> Comet Mining, Javelins, Drugs, etc. (robotic space industry)
>     2080    2075        2006-2021                                   2050
2040/2060
> First Person on Mars
>     2050    2025        2006-2021   2010-2020   N+15 to S+2*DAF     2025
2040/2060
> First Person in Another Solar System
>     2400    2085        2011-2026   2030-2050   S+10*DAF+20
2150-2400   2200/2400
> Reproducing Comet Eaters
>             2070
> Reproducing Asteroid Eaters
>     2150    2045        2006-2021
2050-2070   2140/2180
> Reproducing Starships
>     2300    2200        2006-2021               S+2*DAF
2350/2400
>
>     Benford             Drexler                 Miller
Szabo
>             Bridge                  FM-2030                         More
>
> 1,000,000+ People Using Anon. Electronic Cash
>     2010    2020                    1990s       N+10toN+30 to never
1999-2006   1997/1999
> 30%+ of Labor Telecommutes
>     2015    2030                    1990s       never               never
2000/2050
> Untaxable Economy Using Electronic Cash $100b/year
>     2020                                        N+20 to never
2010-2115   1997/2005
> Ocean Colonization
>     20020   2020/2045                           never
2010-2050   now/2040
> Most Education Privatized
>     2005    2050                                N+10 to S+50
now/2040
> Most Law Enforcement Privatized
>     2010    2095                                S+50 to never
now/2150
> Most Law Choice Privatized
>     2020    never on Earth                      S+20*DAF+20tonever
now/2150
> National Defense Privatized
>     never   never on Earth                      never
now/2200
> Betting Markets a Big Policy Influence
>     never    never                              S+20*DAF+20
2000/2100
>
>
> Lots of figures here, and it's pretty hard to see the logic behind some
> of them.  Benford and Szabo put Reproducing Starships out in the 24th
> century, while Drexler could have them coming out the year after next.
> Actually, Drexler is kind of a one-note-Charlie here, putting almost
> everything in the 2006-2026 time frame, even Big Fraction of Economy out
> of Solar System.  I guess he assumes a nanotech singularity scenario.
> The interstellar economy would presumably be self-reproducing space probes
> zooming away from Earth in all directions and furiously converting nearby
> star systems into computronium or some such.
>
> I see Benford and Szabo as the most conservative, with Bridge and More
> taking a middle ground, and Drexler and FM-2030 being the most aggressive.
> FM's predictions don't make much sense to me but maybe they should be
> thought of as somewhat metaphorical or poetic, which is how I perceive
> his writing.
>
> Other interesting aspects of the survey include the topic selection,
> which is kind of a snapshot of the items of interest to the Extropian
> community in the 1995 time frame.  I also note the absence of Eliezer
> Yudkowski's influential conception of the Singularity as a sudden
> transition to world whose rules, possibly even whose physics, are
> determined by AIs of virtually infinite intelligence.
>
> Hal
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>




From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec 16 05:47:55 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 06:47:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums 
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20031215224702.0332aec0@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGAEJACAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

I agree with you here, the name is not that bad. I hope it will stick.
I am also participating in the debate on life extension. Discussing this in
a more mainstream forum is interesting: there are already 600 members in the
Bright's forums after two days from the announcement.

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of J Corbally
Sent: lunes, 15 de diciembre de 2003 23:51
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Brights Movement's Forums

>It will be interesting to see if the very bright founders are modest enough
>to pay heed and change it.

It's not looking like they will.  Can't say that I blame them, I don't
think it's that bad a term.

Also on the upside, many familiar faces (including myself) are fighting the
good fight there are spreadin' those LE memes.  Overall, the Brights are
seemingly quite "bright" with regards to indefinite lifespans.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec 16 06:37:05 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 22:37:05 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <011701c3c393$4ac81020$0200a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <000001c3c39f$058a6c40$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> 
> > > ... I really *like* my job. My company is a really cool place to
work.
>
> ...R.Coyote:
> 
> Obviously your not working hard enough!


Ja, we have been a fairly well-gruntled lot.  (Somehow, the
term gruntled doesn't *sound* happy, but I suppose it is,
being the opposite of disgruntled.)  For the last several
weeks, many of us have been eager to get to work each morning
to learn of the latest pratfall of our main competitor Booeing.  
This morning it was a big Korean bribery scandal, Last week it 
was the their CEO resignation, before that, shady dealing with
a pentagon brasshat, and before that industrial espianage on the
Europeans.  And of course I needn't mention the biggie before
that scandal broke, the sordid affair being so well known.  

This would all be most entertaining except for two things:
First, I am a US taxpayer, and second, there has been some 
very real and very permanent damage done by their dirty
dealings, from the corporate level, down thru the managers,
the secretaries, the janitors, all the way down to the lowliest 
engineer.

spike








From hugh.crowther at esoterica.pt  Tue Dec 16 07:55:52 2003
From: hugh.crowther at esoterica.pt (Hugh Crowther)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:55:52 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
In-Reply-To: <20031216041439.95130.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BC046B08.1B58%hugh.crowther@esoterica.pt>

GWB said yesterday that SH was classified as a prisoner of war, so that
status determines his legal entitlements. Which (although I'm guessing) are
zip, except for the Geneva Convention stuff?

> From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 20:14:39 -0800 (PST)
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
> 
> 
> --- xllb at rogers.com wrote:
>> At what point in the process does Saddam become entitled to legal
>> representation, or more specifically a mouth?  Who is likely to
>> represent him?  Is he entitled to represent himself?
> 
> You will have to determine what measures the Iraqis have set up for
> their special tribunal.
> 
> Now, I find it really, really, really odd that the French and Germans,
> and the lefties here in the US, who whine that the US throws its weight
> around and doesn't let indigenous people make their own decisions, are
> now pissed that the US government wants the Iraqi people to try Saddam
> in their own court system for his crimes against the Iraqi people.
> 
> What is the real issue involved? Of course, it is the death penalty,
> which has been part of the Iraqi legal system for over 40 years, long
> before Saddam came to power, and which he will theoretically be facing
> in an Iraqi tribunal, where he will most certainly be afforded legal
> protections that he never afforded any of his own victims.
> 
> I also find it odd that the goverments that are the most protectionist
> of their own industries, especially with offering government contracts
> only to their own industries, are now ticked off that they won't be
> able to compete for American tax dollars in reconstruction contracts.
> 
> On a funnier note, apparently, when the soldiers coaxed him out of his
> rat hole in Tikrit, the first thing he said with his hands in the air
> was "I am willing to negotiate..." HAHAHAA, classic Saddam.....
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                      - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                      - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 16 08:33:28 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 03:33:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c39f$058a6c40$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000601c3c3af$4b177ef0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> This would all be most entertaining except for two things: 
> First, I am a US taxpayer, and second, there has been some 
> very real and very permanent damage done by their dirty 
> dealings, from the corporate level, down thru the managers, 
> the secretaries, the janitors, all the way down to the lowliest 
> engineer.

Now you know how I feel when I audit corporations that lie.  It is not just
an example of the market increasing profits or feeling jealous of the
winners.  These frauds do a lot of damage and hurt other people.  They make
their gains at the expense of the company, the workers and the system.
Cheating goes beyond competitiveness.  It actually destroys value, defrauds
the customers (in this case the government), and is criminal behavior.  Such
activities are the antithesis of the free-market system.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From natasha at natasha.cc  Tue Dec 16 15:26:06 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:26:06 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] I'm published!
In-Reply-To: <BAY5-F39UOYFEVMMs2T00038cfe@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031216072340.054ba460@pop.earthlink.net>

At 06:50 PM 12/15/03 -0500, MIKE TREDER wrote:

>The January '04 issue of the Futurist magazine -- at newstands now -- 
>contains a feature article by yours truly. It's titled "Molecular 
>Nanotech: Benefits and Risks", subtitled "Welcome to the nanofactory ... 
>Here's a link to the mag's contents... http://www.wfs.org/futcontjf04.htm

Congratulations my friend.  Well done!

Natasha


Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc
----------
President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.transhuman.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031216/e0a5bbe7/attachment.html>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Tue Dec 16 13:47:59 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 08:47:59 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The end of work, the leisure society,
	and automation
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c38d$b45302d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215120823.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031216084437.01e347f8@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/15/2003 -0800, Spike wrote:
> > >... The profitability of a worker goes up
> > >as that worker spends more time at the office,
> > >for a lot of reasons....Its goooood for you,
> > >its good for all of us...
> >
> > This is a confused description of labor economics...
>
>Robin, clearly I am no professor of economics.  {8-]
>This has caused me to ponder on what a job does for
>us, and it is far more than just a paycheck.  A good
>9 to 5 provides us with a social network, contact
>with interesting people, ... We *need* to work at
>something. ... I really *like* my job. ...

I don't disagree with this.  And in the spirit of the
season let us think for a moment of the many people
who don't have jobs they love - they really are poor.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 16 15:24:36 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:24:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: They got him!
In-Reply-To: <BC046B08.1B58%hugh.crowther@esoterica.pt>
Message-ID: <20031216152436.26749.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>

This isn't quite accurate. Don Rumsfeld said Saddam was a prisoner of
war. The war in Iraq is over, so anyone in custody to date is so
because of Geneva Conventions violations AND/OR crimes against
humanity, which are not simply GC issues.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Dec 16 22:07:45 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 09:07:45 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] [Exi-chat] Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo 
Message-ID: <010901c3c421$0bc79560$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Just FYI
----
"Boston Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo For Therapuetic Use, 
WIRED Magazine Reports

NEW YORK, Dec. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Researchers at a small Boston 
area biotech company have created the most developed human clone
embryo yet. The cloned embryo grew to at least 16 cells, a stage of 
development where it becomes useful for stem cell research, WIRED
magazine reports in its January issue.  The magazine will be on 
newsstands on Tuesday, December 23, and is online now at
www.wired.com ."
----




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 16 22:46:17 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:46:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [Exi-chat] Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo 
In-Reply-To: <010901c3c421$0bc79560$11262dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <20031216224617.59279.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Just FYI
> ----
> "Boston Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo For Therapuetic Use, 
> WIRED Magazine Reports
> 
> NEW YORK, Dec. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Researchers at a small Boston 
> area biotech company have created the most developed human clone
> embryo yet. The cloned embryo grew to at least 16 cells, a stage of 
> development where it becomes useful for stem cell research, WIRED
> magazine reports in its January issue.  The magazine will be on 
> newsstands on Tuesday, December 23, and is online now at
> www.wired.com ."

As I predicted, government bans on government funded research won't
prevent it from happening.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 16 23:34:40 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 17:34:40 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] [Exi-chat] Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo
References: <20031216224617.59279.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE44bJBRlGv1n0000e34e@hotmail.com>

This is sure to outrage the religious right!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:46 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] [Exi-chat] Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo


>
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > Just FYI
> > ----
> > "Boston Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo For Therapuetic Use,
> > WIRED Magazine Reports
> >
> > NEW YORK, Dec. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Researchers at a small Boston
> > area biotech company have created the most developed human clone
> > embryo yet. The cloned embryo grew to at least 16 cells, a stage of
> > development where it becomes useful for stem cell research, WIRED
> > magazine reports in its January issue.  The magazine will be on
> > newsstands on Tuesday, December 23, and is online now at
> > www.wired.com ."
>
> As I predicted, government bans on government funded research won't
> prevent it from happening.
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Dec 17 00:14:15 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:14:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: missing dark energy...
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312161610350.25267-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Science Daily is commenting on how new results from the
XMM-Newton suggest there may not be as much Dark Energy
in the Universe as astronomers would currently like there
to be... (ooops...).

Has European Space Agency's XMM-Newton Cast Doubt Over Dark Energy?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031216075428.htm

(Wasn't it so much easier when the answer was green cheese???)

R.




From reason at exratio.com  Wed Dec 17 06:29:17 2003
From: reason at exratio.com (Reason)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:29:17 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] [Exi-chat] Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo 
In-Reply-To: <20031216224617.59279.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEKODOAA.reason@exratio.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey
> Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 2:46 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] [Exi-chat] Researchers Create Human Clone
> Embryo
>
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > Just FYI
> > ----
> > "Boston Researchers Create Human Clone Embryo For Therapuetic Use,
> > WIRED Magazine Reports
> >
> > NEW YORK, Dec. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Researchers at a small Boston
> > area biotech company have created the most developed human clone
> > embryo yet. The cloned embryo grew to at least 16 cells, a stage of
> > development where it becomes useful for stem cell research, WIRED
> > magazine reports in its January issue.  The magazine will be on
> > newsstands on Tuesday, December 23, and is online now at
> > www.wired.com ."
>
> As I predicted, government bans on government funded research won't
> prevent it from happening.

That hasn't been the major issue; the issue is that the (very real) threat
of legislation banning all such research is scaring off venture and
philanthropic funding. There's an example of that in the article; ACT had a
round of funding evaporate for precisely this reason.

Reason
http://www.exratio.com



From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 17 18:30:40 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 10:30:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Ray Kurzweil in World Future Society 2004 Washington
	Conference
Message-ID: <20031217183040.92613.qmail@web41312.mail.yahoo.com>

RAY KURZWEIL TO SPEAK AT WORLDFUTURE 2004

Visionary inventor and author Ray Kurzweil will lend his insights at
the Society's annual meeting in Washington, D.C., this summer, along
with some 100 other speakers confirmed so far. Kurzweil is scheduled to
speak at the opening plenary session and at a special event the
following evening.

"WorldFuture 2004: Creating the Future Now!" will be held July 31
through August 2 at the Grand Hyatt Washington; the Professional
Members' Forum follows on August 3.

DETAILS: http://www.wfs.org/2004main.htm




La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031217/97817791/attachment.html>

From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 17 20:13:35 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:13:35 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEKODOAA.reason@exratio.com>
Message-ID: <004801c3c4da$43896be0$bf994a43@texas.net>

While all those ethicists are struggling with the terrible torment of stem
cells from embryos, spare a thought for the agonies of Iraqi clerics:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/17/1071337033787.html

A bloody Koran has the Muslim faithful in turmoil
December 18, 2003
Paul McGeough reports from Baghdad.
[...]

there is something grotesque about the burnished brown ink in the
calligrapher's exquisite text - it is the blood of Saddam Hussein.

[...]

this is no ordinary publication - it is the holy Koran, the word of Allah as
dictated to the Prophet.


[...]

Ironically, much of Iraq's treasured literary and spiritual manuscripts and
the archives of a turbulent 7000-year history were reduced to smouldering
ash when the National Library was torched back in April. Scholars weep at
the loss, but now a committee of 25 Muslim thinkers has been appointed to
decide if this lonely survivor should also have gone on the bonfire.

Their task is not easy because of an appalling contradiction - for Muslims,
it is heretical to render the Koran in blood, an impurity that should be
washed away. On the other hand, the Koran defines absolutely their religious
beliefs and culture - it cannot be destroyed.

[etc]



From reason at exratio.com  Wed Dec 17 22:20:49 2003
From: reason at exratio.com (Reason)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 14:20:49 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Methuselah Mouse fund Hits $40k
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEMODOAA.reason@exratio.com>

The Methuselah Mouse Prize fund has passed $40,000, I'm happy to report.

http://www.methuselahmouse.org

For those who haven't been following, it has garnered some important donors
and endorsements in recent weeks, including $1000 from both Ray Kurzweil and
William Haseltine (CEO of Human Genome Sciences). The latest challenge grant
is almost matched completely, so now would be a good time to finishing it
off by making a donation if you haven't already, or offering contributions
to a new challenge grant for 2004.

Reason
http://www.exratio.com



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Dec 18 00:31:19 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 16:31:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
In-Reply-To: <004801c3c4da$43896be0$bf994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031218003119.77345.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Their task is not easy because of an appalling
> contradiction - for Muslims,
> it is heretical to render the Koran in blood, an
> impurity that should be
> washed away. On the other hand, the Koran defines
> absolutely their religious
> beliefs and culture - it cannot be destroyed.

Pfft.  *The* Koran, yes.  *A* Koran, no.  To take a
quasi-secular equivalent, the USA has rules about when
and where one of its flags may be "respectfully"
destroyed, but it does allow instances of this
sacred-equivalent object to be destroyed when
necessary.  I could cite similar examples from various
religions.

Now, if this were the last remaining Koran in
existance, that might be another story - and hopefully
serve as a lesson about backing up one's content.  But
there are other copies, and apparently this instance
isn't even 15 years old.  To say it is beyond
destruction just because it's a copy of a religious
text, written in ways that everyone agrees was
sacreligious to said religion anyway, is just another
example of the sad state that results when people
confuse the embodiment of ideals for the ideals
themselves.  (Even certain religious *try* to address
this; witness a certain recent Ten Commandments issue,
which ignored one of said commandments.)


From thespike at earthlink.net  Thu Dec 18 00:46:13 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:46:13 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
References: <20031218003119.77345.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00ef01c3c500$57e80080$bf994a43@texas.net>

> just another example of the sad state 

Well, yes.



From oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au  Thu Dec 18 01:47:01 2003
From: oregan.emlyn at healthsolve.com.au (Emlyn O'regan)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:17:01 +1030
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
Message-ID: <7A2B25F8EB070940996FA543A70A217B017868ED@adlexsv02.protech.com.au>

Idle musing... what would the official position be on a gene modified
critter which had the full text of the Koran encoded into its DNA? Would
it be sacriligeous to destroy it?

Whoops, a bit of googling shows this is not an original idea...
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~claw/noframe/written.htm

Emlyn


-----Original Message-----
From: Damien Broderick
To: ExI chat list
Sent: 18/12/2003 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem

> just another example of the sad state 

Well, yes.

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From gpmap at runbox.com  Thu Dec 18 07:16:36 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:16:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mathematics could stabilize peace treaties
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGOEJACAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Game theory might help draw up war settlements, from Nature: A political
scientist at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico has devised a mathematical
method that could help civil-war negotiators to find the most stable peace
treaties. Elisabeth Wood calculates that a settlement will be stronger and
more likely to last if it finds the ideal way to apportion the stakes. For
example, if two warring factions each want control of some part of a
disputed region, negotiators need to divide the territory in a way that
comes closest to satisfying them both. This doesn't guarantee that neither
party will fight on in the hope of gaining more. But it may lead them to
decide that further fighting will not substantially improve the eventual
outcome. Wood hopes that her technique could provide a general framework for
resolving civil conflicts over power, land or other resources fairly and
transparently. At present, dispute is addressed ad hoc. She reckons that her
mathematical model offers a way to make progress even if the stakes of the
conflict are less obviously divisible.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031218/2d125006/attachment.html>

From bjk at imminst.org  Thu Dec 18 09:26:32 2003
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 03:26:32 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Martin Reese - ImmInst Interview
Message-ID: <3FE172C8.6050406@imminst.org>

- Martin Reese - ImmInst.org Interview
Author of "Our Final Hour", Professor of Astronomy and Cosmology
and (from 2004) Master of Trinity College at the University of Cambridge,
Martin Reese answers questions about the prospect of physical
immortality.
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=2699&hl=&s=

Sadly, Martin is not an immortalist.
- Bruce Klein*
*



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Dec 18 14:06:49 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 09:06:49 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mathematics could stabilize peace treaties
In-Reply-To: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGOEJACAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <005a01c3c570$2e0f9cd0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote,
> Game theory might help draw up war settlements, from Nature: A political
> scientist at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico has devised a
> mathematical method that could help civil-war negotiators to find the
> most stable peace treaties.

<http://www.nature.com/nsu/031215/031215-1.html>

Very interesting stuff, Giu1i0!  Keep 'em coming!
(How do you pronounce "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" anyway?)  

Great as this seems to be, I am not sure warring factions will listen to
reason.  They never seem to, so even improved reason may not help.  I
perceive the following problems that this solution does not address.

1.  Even the author admits that most people fight because they perceive the
opposing side as unwilling to stop.  This mathematical theory does not solve
that problem.

2.  It also calculates the best possible outcome for stopping now.  But what
if the fighters still believe they can get more by continuing the fight?
Most war supporters seem to think right makes might, and that their side
will eventually win.  Why would they want to stop now and negotiate a
compromise when they can keep fighting and get more spoils later?

3.  Many wars, such as in the Middle East, are based on religion.  This
theory is not very applicable in religious disputes where any compromise or
apportionment is deemed unacceptable.  For example, will either side in
Jerusalem allow some percentage of their holy sites to be blasphemed by a
false religion?  If not, then an apportionment will not work.  To such
religion fanatics, only 100% is not an affront to their religious beliefs.
Or in this country, will pro-lifers agree to a compromise where abortions
are reduced by 50%?  Probably not.  To them every abortion is a murder, and
even one is not acceptable.

This sounds like a wonder advance in game theory or apportionment
mathematics.  But it is a bit of a stretch to apply it to the monkey
psychology of war.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>





From fauxever at sprynet.com  Thu Dec 18 15:12:57 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:12:57 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extended Weapons of Math Instruction
Message-ID: <007801c3c579$6ba18cd0$6400a8c0@brainiac>

I ordinarily don't forward such things to this list, but it's time for a little levity.  Also, this will delight all of you persnickity (or is it "pernickity"?) wordsmiths.  Ta ta, Olga



MATH


At New York's Kennedy Airport the other day, an individual later
discovered to be a public school teacher was arrested trying to board a
flight while in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a setsquare, a
slide rule, and a calculator.

At a morning press conference, Attorney general John Ashcroft said he
believes the man is a member of the notorious al-gebra movement. He is
being charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.

"Al-gebra is a fearsome cult," Ashcroft said. "They desire average
solutions by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a
search of absolute value. They use secret code names like "x"and "y"
and refer to themselves as "unknowns", but we have determined they
belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates
in every country.

"As the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, there are 3 sides to
every triangle," Ashcroft declared. When asked to comment on the
arrest, President Bush said, "If God had wanted us to have better
weapons of math instruction, He would have given us more fingers and
toes.

"I am gratified that our government has given us a sine that it is
intent on protracting us from these math-dogs who are willing to
disintegrate us with calculus disregard. Murky statisticians love to
inflict plane on every sphere of influence," the President said,
adding: "Under the circumferences, we must differentiate their root,
make our point,and draw the line."

President Bush warned, "These weapons of math instruction have the
potential to decimal everything in their math on a scalene never before
seen unless we become exponents of a Higher Power and begin to
factor-in random facts of vertex."

Attorney General Ashcroft said, "As our Great Leader would say, read my
ellipse. Here is one principle he is uncertainty of: though they
continue to multiply, their days are numbered as the hypotenuse
tightens around their necks."





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031218/ed0f420b/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 18 17:37:59 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 09:37:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] TECH: Force field open air displays
Message-ID: <20031218173759.18945.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/18/technology/circuits/18disp.html?th

This new technology of creating finger manipulable open air displays
seems to depend on ionization to alter the optical properties of air,
such that a sheet of blown ionized air will act as a projection screen.
The screen can also offer 'touch screen' image control capabilities, I
suppose through some mechanism similar to the electrostatic field used
in the theramin musical instrument. The Future is here!

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From samantha at objectent.com  Thu Dec 18 20:46:59 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 12:46:59 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: missing dark energy...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312161610350.25267-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312161610350.25267-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031218124659.234673fb.samantha@objectent.com>

Hmmm.  Any chance dark matter/energy is something artificial created by and inhabited by those missing post-Singularity civilizations?  It is a far-fetched explanation of why there appears to be less of it in the young universe.  

- s

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:14:15 -0800 (PST)
"Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

> 
> Science Daily is commenting on how new results from the
> XMM-Newton suggest there may not be as much Dark Energy
> in the Universe as astronomers would currently like there
> to be... (ooops...).
> 
> Has European Space Agency's XMM-Newton Cast Doubt Over Dark Energy?
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031216075428.htm
> 
> (Wasn't it so much easier when the answer was green cheese???)
> 
> R.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 18 21:47:32 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:47:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Any extropians in Miami?
Message-ID: <20031218214732.92508.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com>

Dear friends,
 
     I will be in Miami next December 22nd and 23rd. Are there any
extropians in Miami to meet?
 
     Chris Phoenix (yes, the same person from the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology with Mike Treder:-) and I will have breakfast on the 23rd. Is there any other Miami extropian available for lunch that day? Please, answer in private to: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com

     Extropianily yours,



La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031218/956e47f8/attachment.html>

From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 18 22:26:43 2003
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:26:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SONY makes first humanoid running robot: QRIO
Message-ID: <20031218222643.89019.qmail@web41307.mail.yahoo.com>

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=581&e=2&u=/nm/20031218/tc_nm/tech_sony_robot_dc
 
Sony Unveils World's First 'Running' Humanoid Robot
 Thu Dec 18,12:20 PM ET
Add Technology - Reuters to My Yahoo!
By Edwina Gibbs 
TOKYO (Reuters) - He may not be able to give you a run for your money but one quick step for Sony Corp (NYSE:SNE - news) (news - web sites).'s Qrio humanoid robot is one big step for robots in general. 

Reuters Photo 

AP Photo Slideshow: Sony Unveils Running Robot
Related Quotes SNE
DJIA
NASDAQ
^SPC
33.75
10248.08
1956.18
1089.18
+0.40
+102.82
+34.85
+12.69
 [input]   [input]   [input]  
delayed 20 mins - disclaimer 
Quote Data provided by ReutersRelated Links?QRIO Robot (Sony)
Missed Tech Tuesday?
Get great gifts under $100 for your gadget lover, plus high-dollar tech toys and the best computer games. 

 
Electronics and entertainment giant Sony said on Thursday that it had developed the world's first running -- okay, jogging -- robot. 

"All around the world, universities and think tanks have been researching how to make robots run but we are pleased to announce that we have done it first," Toshi Doi, an executive vice president at Sony told a news conference. 

The sleek and diminutive Qrio, which until recently had been known as Sony's SDR robot entertaining crowds with fluid and funky dance motions, can now trot at a speed of 15 yards per minute. 

If 23-inch, 15-pound Qrio were average human-size, that would translate into 1.5 miles an hour. 

The big technological breakthrough, says Sony, was in getting both the robot's feet to lose contact with the ground at once. Up until now humanoid or two-legged robots have needed to have one foot on the floor to move stably. 

"The hardest part was theoretical. Humanoid robots like Sony's older Qrios and Honda's Asimo have been based on a theory which dictates that there must be contact with the floor. We had to develop a new theory," said Doi. 

Other enhancements for the latest version of Qrio include more advanced finger control that allows him, swiveling like a baseball pitcher, to throw a light ball some three to four yards, and hold fans while dancing. 

Sony's robot developers admit however that Qrio's running prowess has some way to go. 

Its running distance is still short and it is not yet ready to join older models that entertain at Sony's promotional events because the technology that allows those models to get up when they fall needs to be enhanced for the new Qrio. 

The next challenge, said Doi, is to make Qrio's running motion less jogging-like and more like an athlete's. 

At the moment, Qrio's time with both feet off the ground is only 40 milliseconds, compared with around one second managed by athletes, he said. 

Sony, which also makes the Aibo (news - web sites) robot dog, a sell-out success when it debuted in 1999, said it still doesn't have a timetable for commercializing Qrio, whose name is short for "quest for curiosity." 

And Doi admits a running Qrio is not necessarily a helpful product. 

"It's not useful. Sony doesn't make useful robots. Sony makes robots that entertain," he said. 








La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031218/49fe28ea/attachment.html>

From aperick at centurytel.net  Thu Dec 18 23:00:19 2003
From: aperick at centurytel.net (aperick at centurytel.net)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:00:19 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
In-Reply-To: <200312130747.hBD7lxH01396@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <4715119.1071788704320.JavaMail.teamon@b111.teamon.com>

Kevin Freels wrote:
>I was just running some numbers. Feel free to correct me if I did it wrong.
If the world population is will be 9 billion and we put everyone in the
state of Texas (268,601 square miles), everyone would have 832 square feet
to themselves. Am I missing something here? Where's the crisis?
/>

Ooooo, fun with numbers. But why assume the continued existence of Homo
sapiens three hundred years from now? Such an idea seems soooo provincial.
All one needs is a splash of optimism, a measure of creativity and an
overdose of foresight to generate much juicier numbers. After uploading
eight billion brains, the open pit copper mine in Utah (Kennecott's Bingham
Canyon Mine) is just the right size to neatly accommodate the resulting mass
of useless human flesh. And, if each man rubbed one out as a farewell to
reality their combined "product" could fill a cube measuring sixty feet on
each edge. If the last burning man festival could be held in Antarctica (and
be renamed melting man) I should like to hereby call dibs on the
aforementioned jiz - I have an "ice" sculpture in mind: a pair of life-sized
whales perhaps (guess what species). But what to call it? Maybe Onan's
revenge? Or just the equally obvious "all that jiz"?



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 18 23:42:34 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 15:42:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
In-Reply-To: <4715119.1071788704320.JavaMail.teamon@b111.teamon.com>
Message-ID: <20031218234234.59291.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- aperick at centurytel.net wrote:
> Kevin Freels wrote:
> >I was just running some numbers. Feel free to correct me if I did it
> wrong. If the world population is will be 9 billion and we put
> everyone in the state of Texas (268,601 square miles), everyone
> would have 832 square feet to themselves. Am I missing something
> here? Where's the crisis?
> />
> 
> Ooooo, fun with numbers. But why assume the continued existence of
> Homo sapiens three hundred years from now? 

If everyone is living in Texas, then it will be homo texasiens.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Thu Dec 18 23:43:24 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:43:24 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
References: <4715119.1071788704320.JavaMail.teamon@b111.teamon.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE28gRb7nUDoq0000d854@hotmail.com>

lol! You just crack me up!
But why did you stop? If we all uploaded to a quantum computer we could all
exist with infinite processing capability in a single atom.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <aperick at centurytel.net>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 5:00 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300


> Kevin Freels wrote:
> >I was just running some numbers. Feel free to correct me if I did it
wrong.
> If the world population is will be 9 billion and we put everyone in the
> state of Texas (268,601 square miles), everyone would have 832 square feet
> to themselves. Am I missing something here? Where's the crisis?
> />
>
> Ooooo, fun with numbers. But why assume the continued existence of Homo
> sapiens three hundred years from now? Such an idea seems soooo provincial.
> All one needs is a splash of optimism, a measure of creativity and an
> overdose of foresight to generate much juicier numbers. After uploading
> eight billion brains, the open pit copper mine in Utah (Kennecott's
Bingham
> Canyon Mine) is just the right size to neatly accommodate the resulting
mass
> of useless human flesh. And, if each man rubbed one out as a farewell to
> reality their combined "product" could fill a cube measuring sixty feet on
> each edge. If the last burning man festival could be held in Antarctica
(and
> be renamed melting man) I should like to hereby call dibs on the
> aforementioned jiz - I have an "ice" sculpture in mind: a pair of
life-sized
> whales perhaps (guess what species). But what to call it? Maybe Onan's
> revenge? Or just the equally obvious "all that jiz"?
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 19 02:08:25 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:08:25 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
References: <20031218234234.59291.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE24GTOlFE1w20001094c@hotmail.com>

Hey buddy! Whoose yoos a'callin' "homo"?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300


> 
> --- aperick at centurytel.net wrote:
> > Kevin Freels wrote:
> > >I was just running some numbers. Feel free to correct me if I did it
> > wrong. If the world population is will be 9 billion and we put
> > everyone in the state of Texas (268,601 square miles), everyone
> > would have 832 square feet to themselves. Am I missing something
> > here? Where's the crisis?
> > />
> > 
> > Ooooo, fun with numbers. But why assume the continued existence of
> > Homo sapiens three hundred years from now? 
> 
> If everyone is living in Texas, then it will be homo texasiens.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 19 04:45:25 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:45:25 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
In-Reply-To: <4715119.1071788704320.JavaMail.teamon@b111.teamon.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c3c5ea$ebada230$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

>I have an "ice" sculpture in mind: a pair of life-sized
> whales perhaps (guess what species). But what to call it? Maybe Onan's
> revenge? Or just the equally obvious "all that jiz"?...

and

...Hey Onan!  Are you a specialist, or are you more of a
jack-off-all-trades?

spike



From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec 19 04:56:11 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:56:11 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The unselfish gene
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGEEJICAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From the Guardian Unlimited: The origin of altruism goes to the heart of the
gene/culture debate that was launched in 1975 with the publication of EO
Wilson's Sociobiology and, a year later, Richard Dawkins's The Selfish Gene.
Sociobiology claims that human nature - and by extension human society - is
rooted in our genes: we are, according to Dawkins, "lumbering robots"
created "body and mind" by selfish genes.
At the same time kindness and cooperation underpin much of human society.
>From the Kyoto agreement to arms controls or the state of public toilets,
they all depend on individual willingness to commit resources to a common
good. But no one has come up with a satisfactory evolutionary explanation of
why we do it. In a recent Nature paper, Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher of
the University of Zurich claim that the key to promote what they call strong
reciprocity is rewarding generosity with kindness but punishing cheaters,
even at the expense of the punisher. Strong reciprocity promotes kindness
and discourages cheats, but is it a product of our genes or in our culture?
It can't be entirely genetic, since different human societies (with very
similar genes) vary greatly in their tolerance of cheating. Fehr and
Fischbacher argue for gene-culture co-evolution: cultural and institutional
environments promote social norms that favour the selection of genes that
promote cooperati! on.
Making strong reciprocity work at both a local level (discouraging
anti-social behaviour) and international level (persuading the Americans to
sign the Kyoto agreement) would be beneficial to society and the world.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/e467e5c5/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec 19 04:57:15 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:57:15 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fighting Cancer With The Common Cold?
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEJICAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Slashdot: After 30 years of work, Saint Louis University researchers
have genetically engineered a common cold virus to fight cancerous cells
while leaving unaffected healthy ones. They received a patent for this
research and clinical tests on humans will start soon, according to this
news release. Dr. William Wold, chair of the department of molecular
microbiology and immunology, received a patent for his work. Preclinical
testing has already been done so clinical trials should start soon. We can
only hope they will be successful. This overview contains many more details
and references about this potential cure for all kinds of cancer.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/063d59d4/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec 19 04:58:06 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:58:06 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] SETI@Home Expanding Goals With Sun's Help
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGMEJICAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Slashdot: The Register is reporting that the SETI at home project is going
to be expanding the scope of their project with the help of Sun. Sun is
donating a fleet of servers to the SETI at home project for use in its new
BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing) project. This
project will use Sun's new JXTA peer-to-peer protocol for distributed
computing, and will add other functions to the project other than looking
for little green men. Users will now be able to dedicate slices of their
idle time to projects other than SETI, like cancer research and climate
mapping.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/e4b9e045/attachment.html>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Fri Dec 19 04:58:59 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:58:59 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Cable Science Network
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGAEJJCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Imagine turning on your television - any time of day or night - and watching
a heated debate about the impact of science on your life, from stem-cell
research and cloning to the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in
your food; from the biology of violence to the chemistry of addiction; from
the puzzles of depression to the latest breakthroughs on aging; from the
evolution of morality to the complexities of consciousness; from the
exploration of space to the discovery of life beyond Earth. The Cable
Science Network follows the model of C-SPAN: live, unedited, balanced access
to the major forums where public policy is discussed. Production values are
largely irrelevant. What counts is simple, unvarnished information. In the
same way, the CSN can encourage, and enlarge, the national conversation
about science. The CSN has been recently covered by Wired and Slashdot: it
would be wonderful to have things like talks and plenary sessions accessible
to the public. There are a lot of C-SPAN junkies, and I think there would be
a similar interest (in science TV) from the American public.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/201c8ee0/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 19 05:25:40 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:25:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] World population in the year 2300
In-Reply-To: <002c01c3c5ea$ebada230$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031219052540.20778.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >I have an "ice" sculpture in mind: a pair of life-sized
> > whales perhaps (guess what species). But what to call it? Maybe
> Onan's
> > revenge? Or just the equally obvious "all that jiz"?...
> 
> and
> 
> ...Hey Onan!  Are you a specialist, or are you more of a
> jack-off-all-trades?

Onan is an arborean... he does it in the trees.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 19 06:00:12 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:00:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
Message-ID: <20031219060012.3114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/New_Index/news/Paul%20G%20%20Allen%20and%20SpaceShipOne.pdf

This release from Scaled Composites confirms rumors that Microsoft
co-founder Paul Allen is the financial backer of the SpaceShipOne
project. If Scaled succeeds in winning the x-prize, this will make Paul
Allen the fourth economic power in the world to gain independent manned
space launch capability. IMHO this absolves Microsoft of all, or maybe
just most, of all the evil things it has done...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From etheric at comcast.net  Fri Dec 19 06:49:36 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:49:36 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Influenza tip: Coconut  Oil, heads up
References: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEJICAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <001501c3c5fc$44d4c0d0$0200a8c0@etheric>

Hey all
Im using raw coconut oil (Lauric acid ..) as well as your typical things
(vitamin C ...) to beat this Flu.
check out the info you can find on google : Influenza "lauric acid" "lipid
coated"

All the best



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 19 07:36:25 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 23:36:25 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
In-Reply-To: <20031219060012.3114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003b01c3c602$cec53210$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> ...If Scaled succeeds in winning the x-prize, this will make Paul
> Allen the fourth economic power in the world to gain 
> independent manned space launch capability. IMHO this absolves
Microsoft of all, or maybe
> just most, of all the evil things it has done...
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey


But only if they manage to win the prize.  {8-]  spike




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 19 13:24:19 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:24:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312190519190.31985-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


NASA has released the first set of images from the Spitzer Space
Telescope (formerly SIRTF), the 4th of the great observatories.

And you folks are in for a treat...
   http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/
esp.
   http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/mediaimages/data.shtml

It is worth keeping in mind, particularly as the image of
Comet Schwassmann-Wachmann 1 picked up a couple of asteroids
by accident, that SIRTF may be the best shot we currently have
at seeing a Jupiter Brain or Matrioshka Brain.

Am I an optimist or what???
Robert




From scerir at libero.it  Fri Dec 19 14:12:55 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:12:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] time, age
References: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEJICAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
	<001501c3c5fc$44d4c0d0$0200a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <001501c3c63a$33078700$e5b41b97@administxl09yj>

Someone wrote about biological ageing and physical time(s)
http://www.phys.uu.nl/~wwwgrnsl/jos/publications/aging.htm

The arguments (above) seem, perhaps, interesting, but there
are still, in this III millennium, many problems in defining
a more proper 'time', at the quantum level 
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000368/
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/uncertainty.html
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/jono/thesis.html
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9906030
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0110004
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0211047
http://ilja-schmelzer.de/GET/timeIsham.html

"Another claim which frequently appears in the literature
is the following: If dt is the duration of the measurement
of an energy, the result is uncertain by DE >/= 1/2 hbar/dt.
This claim is absurd. It is analogous to saying that if we
measure a momentum with an apparatus of size dx, the momentum
uncertainty is Dp >/= 1/2 hbar/dx. This is manifestly wrong:
a mundane radio receiver whose size is only a few centimeters
can determine the wavelength of a radio station with an accuracy
Dlambda/lambda << 1. In other words, it measures the momentum
of the photons emitted by that station with an accuracy
            Dp << hbar/lambda << hbar/dx.
Still another claim [....] is that the time (registered by
a clock) at which an energy is measured with an accuracy
DE, is uncertain by at least hbar/DE. This already sounds
better, because we have defined a clock-time operator T_c,
and we can therefore investigate the possible existence of
an uncertainty relation between DT_c and DH. However there is
no reason to expect that there actually is such an uncertainty
relation, because the operator T_c refers to the clock, and
the operator H to the observed system. These two operators
commute, and quantum theory allows us, in principle, to
measure both of them simultaneously with arbitrary accuracy.
                      [short snip]
These issues were not understood in the early days of quantum
theory. It is only at much later stage that they were throughly
analyzed by Aharonov and Bohm, who came to the conclusion that
<there is no reason inherent in the principles of quantum theory
why the energy of a system cannot be measured in as short a time
as we please>." 

- Asher Peres, 'Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods', Kluwer,
Academic P., 1998, page 414-etc. 







From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 19 15:45:11 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:45:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
In-Reply-To: <20031219060012.3114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000e01c3c647$19c64df0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> This release from Scaled Composites confirms rumors that 
> Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen is the financial backer of 
> the SpaceShipOne project. If Scaled succeeds in winning the 
> x-prize, this will make Paul Allen the fourth economic power 
> in the world to gain independent manned space launch 
> capability. IMHO this absolves Microsoft of all, or maybe 
> just most, of all the evil things it has done...

I hope it crashes less than Windows....  :-)

But seriously, I told my partner about the SpaceShipOne project.  He thought
it sounded exciting.  He said he regretted not being younger and having a
healthy ticker so he could actually become involved with something like
this.  This was the first interest he has shown in anything extropian I have
been interested in.  This is real pioneering in his mind.  He has little
interest in cryonics, immortality, uploading, AIs, etc.  But getting into
space by private citizens (non-government) sounded interesting and plausible
to him.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Fri Dec 19 15:49:40 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:49:40 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Influenza tip: Coconut  Oil, heads up
In-Reply-To: <001501c3c5fc$44d4c0d0$0200a8c0@etheric>
References: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGIEJICAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
	<001501c3c5fc$44d4c0d0$0200a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <3FE31E14.5050700@mail.tele.dk>

R.Coyote wrote:

> Im using raw coconut oil (Lauric acid ..) as well as your typical things
> (vitamin C ...) to beat this Flu.


I am doing something similar... Lot's of coconut oil, anti oxidants and 
a little alcohol. All good stuff.

http://cocktails.about.com/library/recipes/blpinacolada.htm

Frankly I don't know if the flu gets any better, and I no longer care.

;-)


regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark



From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 19 16:03:11 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:03:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Influenza tip: Coconut  Oil, heads up
Message-ID: <4910-220031251916311100@M2W052.mail2web.com>


From: Max M maxm at mail.tele.dk

>I am doing something similar... Lot's of coconut oil, anti oxidants and 
>a little alcohol. All good stuff.

My father use to give us a shot of whisky with a freshly squeesed lemon and
a tablespoon of honey.  All good stuff. :-) 

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Fri Dec 19 16:02:52 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:02:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312190519190.31985-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <001101c3c649$919f3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote,
> It is worth keeping in mind, particularly as the image of
> Comet Schwassmann-Wachmann 1 picked up a couple of asteroids
> by accident, that SIRTF may be the best shot we currently 
> have at seeing a Jupiter Brain or Matrioshka Brain.
> 
> Am I an optimist or what???

What???  I mean, yes!  :-)

Asteroids are easy to detect in our solar system because they are so close.
The fact that SIRTF sees asteroids doesn't indicate any great feat.  Amateur
photographers used to detect these with backyard cameras.  The real question
is whether SIRTF can see Jupiter-sized objects around other stars.  The
answer from
<http://coolcosmos.ipac.caltech.edu/cosmic_kids/learn_sirtf/dwarf.html> is
that SIRTF cannot.  SIRTF can see objects as small as "super-planets", which
they define as bigger than 100 Jupiters.

So it seems that it would be impossible for SIRTF to see a Jupiter brain.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 19 17:16:26 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 09:16:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
In-Reply-To: <000e01c3c647$19c64df0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031219171626.50422.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > This release from Scaled Composites confirms rumors that 
> > Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen is the financial backer of 
> > the SpaceShipOne project. If Scaled succeeds in winning the 
> > x-prize, this will make Paul Allen the fourth economic power 
> > in the world to gain independent manned space launch 
> > capability. IMHO this absolves Microsoft of all, or maybe 
> > just most, of all the evil things it has done...
> 
> I hope it crashes less than Windows....  :-)

Good one. In fact, as of the 17th, SpaceShipOne has logged over ten
test flights, both captive carry with its mothership, air drops for
glide landings, and full in flight engine tests with increasing amounts
of fuel. The last was an engine test that took SpaceShipOne to 68,000
feet and 930 mph (its first supersonic flight). This gradually
expanding flight test regime is in keeping with standard commercial,
military, and civil aircraft development intended for regular flight
operations, allowing extensive engineering analysis of each test flight
as conditions gradually grow more severe. No high risk all or nothing flights.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 19 17:19:47 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 09:19:47 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
In-Reply-To: <001101c3c649$919f3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031219171947.37885.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

Harvey said:
> 
> So it seems that it would be impossible for SIRTF to see a Jupiter
> brain.

Well, maybe not. If you look at the results of SIRTF's observations of
Fomalhaut, its observations indicate that the lopsided dust patterns
indicate the possibility of either a recent asteroid collision or that
jupiter sized planets are shepherding dust.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Dec 19 18:02:31 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:02:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
In-Reply-To: <001101c3c649$919f3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031219180231.12532.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>

Harvey said:
> 
> So it seems that it would be impossible for SIRTF to see a Jupiter
> brain.

Well, maybe not. If you look at the results of SIRTF's observations of
Fomalhaut, its observations indicate that the lopsided dust patterns
indicate the possibility of either a recent asteroid collision or that
jupiter sized planets are shepherding dust.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 19 19:30:57 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:30:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
In-Reply-To: <20031219060012.3114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031219193058.28535.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> If Scaled succeeds in winning the x-prize,
> this will make Paul
> Allen the fourth economic power in the world to gain
> independent manned
> space launch capability.

That's going a bit far, until Scaled can achieve
orbit or escape velocity.  A sounding rocket does not
a space launch vehicle make.

> IMHO this absolves
> Microsoft of all, or maybe
> just most, of all the evil things it has done...

I disagree.  Paul got out of Microsoft before it
became evil.  (There's a good reason it was able to
achieve the dominance which corrupted it.)


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 19 19:40:20 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:40:20 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
In-Reply-To: <20031219171947.37885.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3c667$f0d492a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Harvey said:
> > 
> > So it seems that it would be impossible for SIRTF to see a Jupiter
> > brain.
> 
> Well, maybe not. If you look at the results of SIRTF's observations of
> Fomalhaut, its observations indicate that the lopsided dust patterns
> indicate the possibility of either a recent asteroid collision or that
> jupiter sized planets are shepherding dust.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey


Fortunately we have our own on-board expert in interplanetary
dust, Dr. Graps.  I might speculate that a JBrain would somehow 
figure a way to use that dust by making it into computronium?  
Perhaps a JBrain might have little or no solid core, having 
dissembled itself into dust in order to maximize its surface 
area, so that its actual size is enormous, perhaps much larger 
in volume than the star that it orbits.  

Aside: This is a variation on Robert's MBrain notion: instead 
of the MBrain nodes forming a enormous shell surrounding the 
star, they would form a sphere orbitting the star, perhaps to 
reduce the distance between and thus latency between nodes.  Call 
it an SMBrain, SM for Spherical-Matrioshka?  No wait, that makes 
it sound like it uses all that brainpower thinking about
kinky sex games involving chains and whips.  SBrain?

If a light-minute diameter spherical cloud of computronium
particles each a picogram (about 50 billion C atoms, or a 
sphere about a micron diameter if I calculate it in my head) 
were to orbit a sunlike star, with a total mass of the cloud 
about one Jupiter, lets calculate the expected temperature 
gradient of the particles near the center and near the edge.
Then we can estimate the chances of SIRTF (a Lockheeed Martin
product btw) seeing it, or rather the maximum distance at
which SIRTF could see it.

Hold on, this is going to take some calculations and thinking.
More later.  spike



From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 19 19:51:52 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:51:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interview with a Luddite - Kevin Kelly's US$1,
	000 Bet
Message-ID: <184670-2200312519195152459@M2W061.mail2web.com>

While doing a little luddite-mining today, I came upon Kevin Kelly's
"Interview with a Luddite" in the Jun3 1995 "Wired" Issue 3.06.

"Kirkpatrick Sale is a leader of the Neo-Luddites. Wired's Kevin Kelly
wrote the book on neo-biological technology. Food fight, anyone?"

By Kevin Kelly 

...
Kelly: You get very specific in the closing pages of your book, where you
say that if industrial civilization does not crumble because of the
resistance from, say, Neo-Luddites or others, then it will crumble of its
own accumulative excesses, specifically "within not more than a few
decades." Now, if somebody two decades hence wanted to decide inarguably if
you were right or wrong about that forecast, what would be the evidence of
that? How would someone know whether you were right? 

Sale: I would say that you can measure it in three ways. The first would be
an economic collapse. The dollar would be worthless, the yen would be
worthless, the mark would be worthless - the dislocation we saw in the
Depression of 1930, magnified many times over. A second would be the
distention within various societies of the rich and the poor, in which the
poor, who comprise, let's say, a fifth of society, are no longer content to
be bought off with alcohol and television and drugs, and rises up in
rebellion. And at the same time, there would be the same kind of distention
within nations, in which the poor nations are no longer content to take the
crumbs from our table, and rise up in either a military or some other form
against the richer societies. And then the third is accumulating
environmental problems, such that Australia, for example, becomes unlivable
because of the ozone hole there, and Africa, from the Sahara to South
Africa, becomes unlivable because of new diseases that have been uncovered
through deforestation. At any rate, environmental catastrophes on a
significant scale. 


Kelly: So you have multinational global currency collapse, social friction
and warfare both between the rich and the poor and within nations, and you
have continentwide environmental disasters causing death and great
migrations of people. All by the year 2020, yes? How certain are you about
all this, what you call your optimism? 

Sale: Well, I have spent the last 20 years looking into these problems, and
I have suggested to my daughters, who are in their 20s, that it would be a
mistake to have children. 


Kelly: Would you be willing to bet on your view? 

Sale: Sure. 


Kelly: OK. [Pulls out a check.] Here's a check for a thousand dollars, made
out to Bill Patrick, our mutual book editor. I bet you US$1,000 that in the
year 2020, we're not even close to the kind of disaster you describe - a
convergence of three disasters: global currency collapse, significant
warfare between rich and poor, and environmental disasters of some
significant size. We won't even be close. I'll bet on my optimism. 

Sale: [Pauses. Then smiles.] OK. 

[Sales reaches over to checkbook on his desk and writes out a check. They
shake hands.] 

Kelly: Oh, boy, this is easy money! But you know, besides the money, I
really hope I am right. 

Sale: I hope you are right, too. 

______________

Natasha


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Dec 19 19:54:20 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:54:20 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c667$f0d492a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000101c3c669$e4ba0d90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> 
> Aside: This is a variation on Robert's MBrain notion: instead 
> of the MBrain nodes forming a enormous shell surrounding the 
> star, they would form a sphere orbitting the star, perhaps to 
> reduce the distance between and thus latency between nodes.  Call 
> it an SMBrain, SM for Spherical-Matrioshka?  No wait, that makes 
> it sound like it uses all that brainpower thinking about
> kinky sex games involving chains and whips.  SBrain?


SBrain sounds rather dull.  Lets see, how about Matrioshka-
Spherical: MSBrain?  No, that sounds like a brain ravaged by
multiple sclerosis, or an AI by Bill Gates and company.  How 
about Bradburian Spherical: BSBrain?  Clearly that will not work.
We may be stuck with SBrain, but be sure the S has nothing to
do with spike.  {8-]  spike 



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 19 19:59:10 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:59:10 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>

I am sick and tired of my computer crashing because I have too many things going on at once. With 1 GB memory, I am still stuck with this archaic 64k limit in resources. 
I am using windows98SE because I can;t seem to get myself to pay $200 for the most recent upgrade to a crappy OS. I can;t use anyhting but Windows because the software for my business isn;t availablee for anything else. 
My biggest problem is the stupid 64k maximum allowable system, user, and GDI resources. 
Is this built into the current computer standard (IBM clones), or is it a Windows issue? If it is a problem with the design of computers, then at some point we are going to have to trash the current IBM base computer model with the 640k base memory workaround and the 64k maximum allowable system, user, and GDI resources. If it is Windows, then when are they going to fix it?
Also, is this a problem with Macs?
I guess I'm just getting very annoyed, looking for alternatives, and not finding what I would like to see. Why is it that the most popular computer system is rife with so many archaic vestiges which are useless? When will this change?
OK. I'm done venting now. I feel much better. Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/3135232a/attachment.html>

From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Fri Dec 19 20:18:32 2003
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:18:32 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>
References: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0312192114160.5406@hercules>

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:

>I am using windows98SE because I can;t seem to get myself to pay $200
> for the most recent upgrade to a crappy OS. I can;t use anyhting but
>Windows because the software for my business isn;t availablee for
>anything else.

How complex is that software? If it's simple, there's a good chance that
will run under Wine (a windows emulator for Linux), or some other
emulator/Virtual PC.

>My biggest problem is the stupid 64k maximum allowable system, user, and GDI resources.
>Is this built into the current computer standard (IBM clones), or is it a Windows issue?

It's a windows problem. Actually, I wans't aware that win98 still had it.
It is sure fixed from win2000 on.

>Also, is this a problem with Macs?

No, just a bill gates thing.

Ciao,
Alfio


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 19 20:48:29 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191238330.7406-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Kevin, Kevin, Kevin -- get a real OS! You could get an
old copy of Windows 4.0 but Windows 2000 is *much* better
(though be sure to apply the service packs).

You might even be able to pick up a version second hand
or at some discount computer outlet cheaply.

I've been using it for 3 years an I've rarely had a crash
(usually when I lose the fan on one of my CPUs).

It may have a very rare memory leak (reboot it every couple
of months) and *does* still have internal OS memory limits
(that Microsloth doesn't disclose unless you lean on the
tech support people) -- but they are *WAY* larger -- I can
run something like 75-100 windows before I start running
into problems -- even then it usually doesn't crash -- it
just gets slow and sometimes doesn't like to start new
processes.

The hardware has been able to manage this since the mid-'90s.
The problem was that Microsoft wanted to remain backwards
compatible with the new software on the 286 machines so their
end-user OSs never took advantage of the capabilities of the
386, 486, etc.  Only the high end server OSs were real 32-bit
OSs with real memory protection.

My experience with Windows 2000 is that it is almost as stable
as Linux and UnixWare.  On the other hand Windows 95 and 98 are
very insecure because there is no memory protection and they
are basically kludged 16 bit systems while Windows XP from
what I have heard is simply buggy.

If you look around you might even be able to find people selling
Win2K as an upgrade CD that allows you to migrate up from 98
to 2K without having to pay the full 2K price.

Good luck
Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 19 21:19:36 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:19:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
In-Reply-To: <000e01c3c647$19c64df0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191257220.7845-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> But seriously, I told my partner about the SpaceShipOne project.  He thought
> it sounded exciting.  He said he regretted not being younger and having a
> healthy ticker so he could actually become involved with something like
> this.

Tell him the ticker problem may not be permanent -- there was a recent
report -- perhaps in Science Daily that they have recently had success
growing sheep-human heart chimeras (that's going to make some people
nuts I know) but given the normal organ shortage and how good they
are getting at suppressing rejection its something to think seriously
about.  Alternatively stem cell amplifcation and repair seems to be
moving along.  Not to mention claims of retrodifferentiation.  If he
can make it through this decade he is going to have lots of options.

Now with respect to getting him excited about space -- get him a copy
of "Mining the Sky" by John Lewis.  There's gold in that there sky...

If he has kids/family "Rain of Iron and Ice" is also good to force
people into a future thinking mode.  Individuals may not have a
strong desire with respect to their personal longevity (I think
this has to do with personal life history) -- but you will rarely
find an individual that goes "ho-hum" when they start thinking
about their grandchildren or other people they care about getting
turned into toast by falling rocks.  Its a totally different kind
of hazard -- driving a car I have some control over, choosing to
fly or not to fly I have some control over -- volcanos we may have
some warning about but earthquakes and particularly rocks falling from
the sky, not to mention nearby gamma ray bursts we do *not* currently
have any control over.  [For a nearby gamma ray burst probably one
of the safest places to be is in a living space at the center
of a reasonably large asteroid.]

And then point out -- that you probably haven't lived until you
have observed close up and personal the collision of a couple
of neutron stars (one every couple if years someplace in the
galaxy according to current estimates).

Finally -- for those of you who haven't seen it -- the TV show
"Threat Matrix" may be worth watching for people inclined to
think about their personal hazard function.  I'm torn between
shows where the writers are providing shows that will prompt
us to think about threats and their developing ideas that may give
terrorists strategies that they would not otherwise have thought
of.  The show last night involved a bribe to obtain an Airbus 310
which was then loaded with radioactive waste that had been dumped
in Africa that was then flown to the U.S. with an altered transponder
signal so it confused air traffic control with the intent of crashing
the plane into a tanker carrying pressurized LPG in Baltimore harbor
which would result in a large explosion and the distribution of a
radioactive cloud over much of the surrounding 5 state region.
Not a pretty picture.

Robert




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 19 21:47:42 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:47:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ExI:  Chapters vs./and/or Affiliates
Message-ID: <114780-2200312519214742803@M2W094.mail2web.com>

Question:

Extropy Institute has local groups and affiliates.  It has been our intent
to foster a sense of individuality among transhumanists, rather than
pursuing chapters of ExI.  My question to you all is: Do you think this is
the best way to build our community?  Elaine Walker, ExI?s Groups Team
Leader, has been developing our transhumanist resource network.  We have a
broad base from which to develop and encourage transhumanism and extropy. 
Do you, as ExI members, want to start ExI Chapters, or further develop our
Affiliates.

Thanks,
Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Dec 19 22:21:39 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:21:39 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191238330.7406-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191238330.7406-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031219222139.GN21411@leitl.org>

On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 12:48:29PM -0800, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> 
> Kevin, Kevin, Kevin -- get a real OS! You could get an
> old copy of Windows 4.0 but Windows 2000 is *much* better
> (though be sure to apply the service packs).

Robert, OS advocacy, here?
 
> You might even be able to pick up a version second hand
> or at some discount computer outlet cheaply.

You can get leg irons and a yoke even cheaper. Why do I have to pay for an OS
that doesn't even have a programming environment included? Life's too short
to click away those requesters, and enter those product codes. Frankly, these
product codes and online activation are just completely knock-out criterion,
nevermind the price and lack of any bundled tools. 
 
> I've been using it for 3 years an I've rarely had a crash
> (usually when I lose the fan on one of my CPUs).

NT 5.0 is pretty stable, but for that pesky memory leak in the GUI, which
makes me reboot it every two weeks. Unless you want a secure OS, then,
Redmond is just not for you.
 
> It may have a very rare memory leak (reboot it every couple
> of months) and *does* still have internal OS memory limits

It depends on the use. If you exercise it heavily, you may have to reboot
every few days. This doesn't including development and testing. If you're
unluckly, you just lock up at about every test.

> (that Microsloth doesn't disclose unless you lean on the
> tech support people) -- but they are *WAY* larger -- I can
> run something like 75-100 windows before I start running
> into problems -- even then it usually doesn't crash -- it
> just gets slow and sometimes doesn't like to start new
> processes.

It's remarkably pathetic we still have these problems with GUIs in 2003. I
can't think of a single OS that gets the GUI problem right.
 
> The hardware has been able to manage this since the mid-'90s.

The hardware has been able to manage GUIs since early 70s, and certainly
since early 80s. Arguably, current hardware has a far higher latency overhead
than mid-80s hardware did.

> The problem was that Microsoft wanted to remain backwards
> compatible with the new software on the 286 machines so their

Actually, not. Redmond used to have an innovation cycle, periodically forcing users to
abandon previous investments. Right now they're moving to a subscription
model to assure continuous flow of revenue, but it's not succeeding very
well.

> end-user OSs never took advantage of the capabilities of the
> 386, 486, etc.  Only the high end server OSs were real 32-bit
> OSs with real memory protection.

32 bit reentrant multitasking with memory protection predates even UNIX.
 
> My experience with Windows 2000 is that it is almost as stable
> as Linux and UnixWare.  On the other hand Windows 95 and 98 are

OS stability analysis needs context. Which Linux, which hardware base, how
administered? For a server OS, you'd do much better with a *BSD. For a
desktop OS, with properly administered Debian (I use RedHat/Fedora, but it
frankly sucks rocks).

> very insecure because there is no memory protection and they
> are basically kludged 16 bit systems while Windows XP from
> what I have heard is simply buggy.

XP Professional is arguably more stable than 2000, though your uptime will be
short, very short.
 
> If you look around you might even be able to find people selling
> Win2K as an upgrade CD that allows you to migrate up from 98
> to 2K without having to pay the full 2K price.

If you need a desktop OS, get a Mac. Whether Jaguar, or Panther, if you can't
handle a russian truck, get OS X.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/2ee683e9/attachment.bin>

From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 19 22:58:00 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:58:00 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <Law9-F106onkhhid3fB0002ffdd@hotmail.com>

I've run windows2000 Pro and xp pro boxen for months without reboots. I do 
fairly resource intensive development that regularly has 2-5 server apps 
running consuming 1 gig physical and 2 gig paged memory. XP has bogged down, 
but never crashed and I have experienced no memory leaks with the gui.

Of course there are other problems native to XP like constant security 
updates. I would like to use a nice macosx or unix-like machine, but a lot 
of the software (java,oracle,weblogic,etc) is only supported on windows or 
solaris. Of course it's possible to run some of my apps on linux or bsd but 
then there's no support and no support sucks when you have anticipating 
clients.

I just wanted to mention this as the "Windows has to be rebooted once every 
n units of time" FUD hasn't been applicable since windows2000 (or maybe even 
NT4sp3).

BAL

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>>To: ExI chat list 
><extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
>Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:21:39 +0100
>
>On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 12:48:29PM -0800, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> >
> > Kevin, Kevin, Kevin -- get a real OS! You could get an
> > old copy of Windows 4.0 but Windows 2000 is *much* better
> > (though be sure to apply the service packs).
>
>Robert, OS advocacy, here?
>
> > You might even be able to pick up a version second hand
> > or at some discount computer outlet cheaply.
>
>You can get leg irons and a yoke even cheaper. Why do I have to pay for an 
>OS
>that doesn't even have a programming environment included? Life's too short
>to click away those requesters, and enter those product codes. Frankly, 
>these
>product codes and online activation are just completely knock-out 
>criterion,
>nevermind the price and lack of any bundled tools.
>
> > I've been using it for 3 years an I've rarely had a crash
> > (usually when I lose the fan on one of my CPUs).
>
>NT 5.0 is pretty stable, but for that pesky memory leak in the GUI, which
>makes me reboot it every two weeks. Unless you want a secure OS, then,
>Redmond is just not for you.
>
> > It may have a very rare memory leak (reboot it every couple
> > of months) and *does* still have internal OS memory limits
>
>It depends on the use. If you exercise it heavily, you may have to reboot
>every few days. This doesn't including development and testing. If you're
>unluckly, you just lock up at about every test.
>
> > (that Microsloth doesn't disclose unless you lean on the
> > tech support people) -- but they are *WAY* larger -- I can
> > run something like 75-100 windows before I start running
> > into problems -- even then it usually doesn't crash -- it
> > just gets slow and sometimes doesn't like to start new
> > processes.
>
>It's remarkably pathetic we still have these problems with GUIs in 2003. I
>can't think of a single OS that gets the GUI problem right.
>
> > The hardware has been able to manage this since the mid-'90s.
>
>The hardware has been able to manage GUIs since early 70s, and certainly
>since early 80s. Arguably, current hardware has a far higher latency 
>overhead
>than mid-80s hardware did.
>
> > The problem was that Microsoft wanted to remain backwards
> > compatible with the new software on the 286 machines so their
>
>Actually, not. Redmond used to have an innovation cycle, periodically 
>forcing users to
>abandon previous investments. Right now they're moving to a subscription
>model to assure continuous flow of revenue, but it's not succeeding very
>well.
>
> > end-user OSs never took advantage of the capabilities of the
> > 386, 486, etc.  Only the high end server OSs were real 32-bit
> > OSs with real memory protection.
>
>32 bit reentrant multitasking with memory protection predates even UNIX.
>
> > My experience with Windows 2000 is that it is almost as stable
> > as Linux and UnixWare.  On the other hand Windows 95 and 98 are
>
>OS stability analysis needs context. Which Linux, which hardware base, how
>administered? For a server OS, you'd do much better with a *BSD. For a
>desktop OS, with properly administered Debian (I use RedHat/Fedora, but it
>frankly sucks rocks).
>
> > very insecure because there is no memory protection and they
> > are basically kludged 16 bit systems while Windows XP from
> > what I have heard is simply buggy.
>
>XP Professional is arguably more stable than 2000, though your uptime will 
>be
>short, very short.
>
> > If you look around you might even be able to find people selling
> > Win2K as an upgrade CD that allows you to migrate up from 98
> > to 2K without having to pay the full 2K price.
>
>If you need a desktop OS, get a Mac. Whether Jaguar, or Panther, if you 
>can't
>handle a russian truck, get OS X.
>
>-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
>______________________________________________________________
>ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
>8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
>http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
><< attach4 >>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

_________________________________________________________________
It?s our best dial-up Internet access offer: 6 months @$9.95/month. Get it 
now!  http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Dec 19 23:11:09 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:11:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031219231109.97318.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I can;t use anyhting but Windows because
> the software for my business isn;t availablee for
> anything else. 

WINE.  You know, the Linux-native Windows emulator.

Or so I've heard, but I haven't had any personal
experience with it (besides trying, and failing, to
find out what all was needed to set it up some time
ago).


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Fri Dec 19 23:54:12 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:54:12 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191238330.7406-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE55wfURqO7d2000119f3@hotmail.com>



> My experience with Windows 2000 is that it is almost as stable
> as Linux and UnixWare.  On the other hand Windows 95 and 98 are
> very insecure because there is no memory protection and they
> are basically kludged 16 bit systems while Windows XP from
> what I have heard is simply buggy.

This is what I heard and is why I have chosen (so far) to stay with the
KNOWN evil rather than jump to a new one. As much as I love technology,
something inside me as afraid to give up the command prompt ability! lol
Win2K though? I can recall fleeting moments when the word went through my
head and I promptly discarded the idea. I can;t think of any good reason
than to say that I just haven;t read that much about it. Maybe I was
thinking you could only use it to upgrade NT. If I remember correctly, it
was available in 3 or 4 versions... Professional, server, advanced server,
and maybe something else. Which one are you running?
>
> If you look around you might even be able to find people selling
> Win2K as an upgrade CD that allows you to migrate up from 98
> to 2K without having to pay the full 2K price.
>
Thanks for the tip. I'm looking on ebay now!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 00:00:28 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:00:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTC: Prediction confirmed...
Message-ID: <20031220000028.63276.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

A long while back, maybe a year, year and a half, when discussions were
floating about cutesy parks on the location of the WTC, I proposed and
predicted that what a "real" New York City response would be: to build
a single new tower, twice as high as the original twin towers, jutting
up into the sky like one humongous middle finger to those in the rest
of the world who hate or despise us.

My prediction has come true:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031219/ap_on_re_us/attacks_freedom_tower_12

NEW YORK - The signature skyscraper at the World Trade Center site will
be a 1,776-foot glass tower that twists into the sky, topped by
energy-generating windmills and a spire that evokes the Statue of
Liberty, new plans revealed Friday. 

Saying it will "dramatically reclaim" the Manhattan skyline on the plot
where the twin towers once stood, Mayor Michael Bloomberg joined the
architects and Gov. George E. Pataki in unveiling the plans for the
Freedom Tower. Pataki said the building "will show the world that
freedom will always triumph over terror." 
-- end quote --

Somebody hire me, quick, I am getting positively precognitive these
days...  Now, it's not exactly twice as high as the original towers
(the original one with the beacon was 1150 feet high) but it is a
decent attempt...




=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From hal at finney.org  Sat Dec 20 00:29:26 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:29:26 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interview with a Luddite - Kevin Kelly's US$1,
	000 Bet
Message-ID: <200312200029.hBK0TQx01857@finney.org>

Natasha writes:

> Kelly: OK. [Pulls out a check.] Here's a check for a thousand dollars, made
> out to Bill Patrick, our mutual book editor. I bet you US$1,000 that in the
> year 2020, we're not even close to the kind of disaster you describe - a
> convergence of three disasters: global currency collapse, significant
> warfare between rich and poor, and environmental disasters of some
> significant size. We won't even be close. I'll bet on my optimism. 
>
> Sale: [Pauses. Then smiles.] OK. 

Shortly after this issue of Wired came out in 1995, the Idea Futures
game (now called FX) created a claim about who would win the bet,
http://www.ideosphere.com/fx-bin/Claim?claim=NLud

The price chart at the bottom of the page can be interpreted as the
percentage likelihood that the players estimate for Sale to win his bet.
in the first couple of years, it ran about 10-20%; then from about 1998
to mid 2000 it was in the 30-40% range; and since then it has been 20-30%.

Looking at the three issues now, 8 years or about 1/3 of the way along,
it's harder in some ways to be optimistic than back in 1995 in the
heady days of the internet boom.  Global currency collapse still doesn't
look in the cards, and if it happens it seems more plausibly caused by
some unexpected and disruptive technology than economic mismanagement.
Environmental disaster in the next 16 years also doesn't seem likely, even
if the more aggressive global warming scenarios come true.  But widespread
warfare between rich and poor nations is harder to rule out in today's
contentious international environment.

I'm a little unclear on the terms of the bet if just one or two of Sale's
predictions comes close to being right.  I guess that will be a judgement
call; maybe the judge will award partial points to one side or the other.

Hal


From artillo at comcast.net  Sat Dec 20 00:05:56 2003
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:05:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <20031219222139.GN21411@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <001001c3c68d$0a62a070$9865fea9@bjsmain2>


:: sighs :: and longs for the days of Atari cartridges that ALWAYS
worked! :)

Hmm ask Santa Gates for a WindowsXP "Atari" Cartridge? NAAA NEVER
HAPPEN! LOL

Yea I'm wondering myself when computers are going to be as functional as
toasters... In the sense that when I switch it on, it's ON... No waiting
for cumbersome code to load, patches, bug-fixes, waa waa waaa etc etc
etc...

 Ok I'm done ranting too, happy holidays people!

Arti



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 20 00:29:11 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:29:11 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Law10-OE34wa5aZ7cjM0001174a@hotmail.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.58.0312192114160.5406@hercules>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE55mokGjFcZS00011a24@hotmail.com>


>
> How complex is that software? If it's simple, there's a good chance that
> will run under Wine (a windows emulator for Linux), or some other
> emulator/Virtual PC.
It's pretty complex. It uses the SQL server thingy to do part of it's job,
some other kinds of microsoft datasources whatever they are, and it just
gets worse from there. It's supposedly designed for Win98SE but it just
kills my system. Once I have my soundcard driver, mouse driver, video card
driver, ZoneAlarm, DSL (EnterNet 300 which sucks all by itself), and Norton
AV running, I get resources available of 68%. Then I load this and I have
about 50%! Then IE6.0 and  Outlook express both have to be running as well
while I am working because I spend my day moving digital paper around. If I
have a credit bureau order in from the website, an appraisal up in Acrobat
reader, copying information into a third browser from the loan software, the
appraisal and the credit bureau, I am now at less than 30%!
What is worse, when I free up those resources by closing the programs, I
don;t get it all back!
Most people in my line of work don;t have the ability to do 20 things at
once on their compter, or they work for a large company that has the
resources not only to have big servers, but to also have custom designed
software. My loan origination software alone was $895. That's more than I
spent building this system!

Robert mentioned Windows 2000. I hadn;t really thought about that one, but I
am checking into it. It sounds like s decent compromise.


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 20 00:36:17 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:36:17 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <001001c3c68d$0a62a070$9865fea9@bjsmain2>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE52oHlxBqrrz00011b4b@hotmail.com>

I read something about that recently. I looked for the article but couldn;t
find it. It was about having systems with embedded OSs that didn;t need to
boot at all.

On a side note, there's a really neat new video game out. It has about 8-10
old Atari games on it, all pre-programmed and fit neatly into a device that
looks just like the old Atari joystick!
There is a cord coming directly off the joystick that plugs directly into
the TV. No console. You choose your game and play it!

I know it's not an incredible leap in technology or anything. Just a novel
idea that I have purchased for my kids this Newtonmas for $10.00 at
Wal-Mart. I think they'll enjoy Asteroids, Missile Command, and some of the
other games I used to play as a kid. :-)


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Shores" <artillo at comcast.net>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


>
> :: sighs :: and longs for the days of Atari cartridges that ALWAYS
> worked! :)
>
> Hmm ask Santa Gates for a WindowsXP "Atari" Cartridge? NAAA NEVER
> HAPPEN! LOL
>
> Yea I'm wondering myself when computers are going to be as functional as
> toasters... In the sense that when I switch it on, it's ON... No waiting
> for cumbersome code to load, patches, bug-fixes, waa waa waaa etc etc
> etc...
>
>  Ok I'm done ranting too, happy holidays people!
>
> Arti
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sat Dec 20 00:58:08 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 00:58:08 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <3FE39EA0.3040303@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Fri Dec 19, 2003 05:29 pm Kevin Freels wrote:
> Once I have my soundcard driver, mouse driver, video card
> driver, ZoneAlarm, DSL (EnterNet 300 which sucks all by itself), and
> Norton AV running, I get resources available of 68%.
>

Sounds excessive to me.
I have Win98, 256MB memory, and when I load all the drivers, plus Nvidia
graphics drivers plus Cable Internet, Sygate Personal firewall, AVG
antivirus and Mozilla Mail and Browser, I have resources available of
about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.

I usually have lots more than this running quite happily.

Try different software?

BillK





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 01:06:26 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:06:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FE39EA0.3040303@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031220010626.60187.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

Keep an eye on all those TSRs that run down on the right hand end of
the task bar. They tend to pile up a lot. I have also noticed, at least
in XP, that many such programs that you install that should display an
icon down there don't, though the programs are running if you bring up
the task list in task manager.
Another thing that east resources are fonts. If you are not a graphic
designer, you really don't need a thousand and one fonts. Minimizing
your fonts down to a few dozen saves tons of resources.
Still another thing is a funky desktop image and lots of sounds and
animations on your icons and cursor actions. Get rid of em.

--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri Dec 19, 2003 05:29 pm Kevin Freels wrote:
> > Once I have my soundcard driver, mouse driver, video card
> > driver, ZoneAlarm, DSL (EnterNet 300 which sucks all by itself),
> and
> > Norton AV running, I get resources available of 68%.
> >
> 
> Sounds excessive to me.
> I have Win98, 256MB memory, and when I load all the drivers, plus
> Nvidia
> graphics drivers plus Cable Internet, Sygate Personal firewall, AVG
> antivirus and Mozilla Mail and Browser, I have resources available of
> about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.
> 
> I usually have lots more than this running quite happily.
> 
> Try different software?
> 
> BillK
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 20 02:17:07 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:17:07 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE55wfURqO7d2000119f3@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:

> If I remember correctly, it
> was available in 3 or 4 versions... Professional, server, advanced server,
> and maybe something else. Which one are you running?

Don't get the server version unless you need something
like an FTP server or you really want to run a network.
At one point you could get NFS clients and servers for W2K
though they were a bit pricey after Msft bought them from
the CAD company that I think developed them (can't remember
the name right now).

You can get a command.com (MSDOS) prompt under Win2K.
I also use a very old set of UNIX utilities (MKS) so
I can get a UNIX shell and lots of other goodies.
I think the standard now for a UNIX toolkit is CYGWIN
which is free.

You can do peer-to-peer drive sharing in Win2K networks
as well as older & newer versions of WinXX I believe.
So it isn't necessary to get the more expensive server
versions (which are also more prone to security problems).

Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 20 02:32:45 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:32:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FE39EA0.3040303@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191822160.14269-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, BillK wrote:

> I have Win98, 256MB memory,
[snip]
> I have resources available of about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.

> Try different software?

That isn't it Bill -- I used to run into similar problems on 95 and 98
running a very different set of software.  Part of it simply has to
do with how many windows you have open.  Microsoft didn't design those
OSs so they could handle lots of windows.  Mike is also right that it
depends to some extent on how many processes you are running.  It isn't
entirely fixed in Win2K but it is a *lot* better.  I can generally get up
to 4-5 full task bar lines of the smallest window icons before things
start to go south.  And then it doesn't really crash -- the stupid
Msft scheduler keeps going round-robin between all of the windows
giving them each little time slices (I've never been able to get
them to confess how one could tweek this to lower the amount of
CPU time that non-active windows get).  So your response time goes
through the floor essentially forcing you to cleanup your tasks.
(I'll admit I'm only on a 200Mhz machine -- but still...).

I've got 256MB of main memory and 384MB of paging file space and
I can have occasions where Netscape goes into some infinite loop
allocating memory.  If I wait long enough the system will give
me a very nice error message -- and recover's nicely once I kill
the Netscape (though sometimes it will kill Netscape for me...).

But 2K is much more stable for a much longer period.  NT 4.0
is pretty good as well.  I've got the server version and it
will run fine for months.

I will openly admit that I probably don't push the systems as
hard as someone like Eugen does so I may not be stressing them
enough to make the flaws show up.

Robert





From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 03:03:53 2003
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 19:03:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
In-Reply-To: <20031218003119.77345.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031220030353.71905.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>

Yeah, if just any copy of the Koran is that sacred and absolute, all people in the US and Israel would have to do to protect themselves against terrorist bombings would be to put copies of the Koran in planes, buildings, and on busses. Of course this assumes that terrorism is an islamic religious phenomenon, which despite the claims of its practitioners, it isn't.  

Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:--- Damien Broderick wrote:
> Their task is not easy because of an appalling
> contradiction - for Muslims,
> it is heretical to render the Koran in blood, an
> impurity that should be
> washed away. On the other hand, the Koran defines
> absolutely their religious
> beliefs and culture - it cannot be destroyed.

Pfft. *The* Koran, yes. *A* Koran, no. To take a
quasi-secular equivalent, the USA has rules about when
and where one of its flags may be "respectfully"
destroyed, but it does allow instances of this
sacred-equivalent object to be destroyed when
necessary. I could cite similar examples from various
religions.

Now, if this were the last remaining Koran in
existance, that might be another story - and hopefully
serve as a lesson about backing up one's content. But
there are other copies, and apparently this instance
isn't even 15 years old. To say it is beyond
destruction just because it's a copy of a religious
text, written in ways that everyone agrees was
sacreligious to said religion anyway, is just another
example of the sad state that results when people
confuse the embodiment of ideals for the ideals
themselves. (Even certain religious *try* to address
this; witness a certain recent Ten Commandments issue,
which ignored one of said commandments.)
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031219/1971d262/attachment.html>

From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 20 03:13:01 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:13:01 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <20031220010626.60187.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE24FcqvUD5Fo00011a49@hotmail.com>

Thanks, but I've been there and done that. I have a program called process
explorer that actually shows me all the process going on. Nothing there but
my drivers, etc as described and stuff that needs to be there. I did just
reduce my fonts from some 50 or so to about 25. We'll see how that goes.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


> Keep an eye on all those TSRs that run down on the right hand end of
> the task bar. They tend to pile up a lot. I have also noticed, at least
> in XP, that many such programs that you install that should display an
> icon down there don't, though the programs are running if you bring up
> the task list in task manager.
> Another thing that east resources are fonts. If you are not a graphic
> designer, you really don't need a thousand and one fonts. Minimizing
> your fonts down to a few dozen saves tons of resources.
> Still another thing is a funky desktop image and lots of sounds and
> animations on your icons and cursor actions. Get rid of em.
>
> --- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri Dec 19, 2003 05:29 pm Kevin Freels wrote:
> > > Once I have my soundcard driver, mouse driver, video card
> > > driver, ZoneAlarm, DSL (EnterNet 300 which sucks all by itself),
> > and
> > > Norton AV running, I get resources available of 68%.
> > >
> >
> > Sounds excessive to me.
> > I have Win98, 256MB memory, and when I load all the drivers, plus
> > Nvidia
> > graphics drivers plus Cable Internet, Sygate Personal firewall, AVG
> > antivirus and Mozilla Mail and Browser, I have resources available of
> > about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.
> >
> > I usually have lots more than this running quite happily.
> >
> > Try different software?
> >
> > BillK
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 20 03:25:30 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:25:30 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191822160.14269-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE43vRyiaI4kZ00011876@hotmail.com>

A 200 mhz machine? I didn;t know any of those were still running!
I am all ready to buy Win 2k just to see if it helps. It looks like I can
get the full version on ebay for about $100. I'd rather have the full
version than the upgrade because my Win98 disk has about had it. (remember
when cds first came out and they talked of how rugged they were?...HA!) If
it is a drastic improvement, I'll take it. Here's some questions:
1.) Will it run all software designed for Win98?

2.) Do I have to call, login, or send any information to Microsoft to
register it, or is it like Win98...just punch in the key code and go?

3.) Are the service packs free, or do I have to pay for SP4? (Just making
sure, I don;t have to get SP1, 2, 3, and 4 do I? I wouldn;t think so, but
you never know with Microsoft!)

4.) Can I use NTFS partitions? I always wanted to. If so, is it trouble
converting FAT32 partitions to NTFS without losing data?

5.) Am I shopping for Win2k pro?

I am having this trouble with a Machspeed motherboard with a 266 FSB, 512 MB
PC2100 DDR 266 mhz memory, an XP Athlon 2200+ processor and 8x AGP video
card with 128MB memory. I thought the problem was the basic build behind the
computer design. If Win2k will help, I'll try it.

Thanks for the help.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


>
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, BillK wrote:
>
> > I have Win98, 256MB memory,
> [snip]
> > I have resources available of about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.
>
> > Try different software?
>
> That isn't it Bill -- I used to run into similar problems on 95 and 98
> running a very different set of software.  Part of it simply has to
> do with how many windows you have open.  Microsoft didn't design those
> OSs so they could handle lots of windows.  Mike is also right that it
> depends to some extent on how many processes you are running.  It isn't
> entirely fixed in Win2K but it is a *lot* better.  I can generally get up
> to 4-5 full task bar lines of the smallest window icons before things
> start to go south.  And then it doesn't really crash -- the stupid
> Msft scheduler keeps going round-robin between all of the windows
> giving them each little time slices (I've never been able to get
> them to confess how one could tweek this to lower the amount of
> CPU time that non-active windows get).  So your response time goes
> through the floor essentially forcing you to cleanup your tasks.
> (I'll admit I'm only on a 200Mhz machine -- but still...).
>
> I've got 256MB of main memory and 384MB of paging file space and
> I can have occasions where Netscape goes into some infinite loop
> allocating memory.  If I wait long enough the system will give
> me a very nice error message -- and recover's nicely once I kill
> the Netscape (though sometimes it will kill Netscape for me...).
>
> But 2K is much more stable for a much longer period.  NT 4.0
> is pretty good as well.  I've got the server version and it
> will run fine for months.
>
> I will openly admit that I probably don't push the systems as
> hard as someone like Eugen does so I may not be stressing them
> enough to make the flaws show up.
>
> Robert
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Dec 20 04:02:41 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:02:41 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE43vRyiaI4kZ00011876@hotmail.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191822160.14269-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031219223852.035c6e90@mail.comcast.net>

At 09:25 PM 12/19/2003 -0600, Kevin Freels wrote:

>A 200 mhz machine? I didn;t know any of those were still running!

I'm writing this on a 200 MHz P-2 machine and am happy.  I have a faster 
laptop, too, but I only find it helpful when I'm editing 1200 dpi 
images.  This box is running Win 2K Professional, with 128 MB memory, a 22" 
screen, and 500 GB of disk.  I routinely have a few dozen windows open, and 
it has no problem running SQL Server, Visual Studio, Office, and a few 
other products simultaneously.

So your problem is not obsolete hardware....

Two things I did do to improve the system -- I'd had thousands of fonts 
installed; it's down to a few hundred now.  And I got rid of a lot of the 
processes I don't want that were lurking in the background.  See 
http://www.answersthatwork.com/Tasklist_pages/tasklist.htm.

>I am all ready to buy Win 2k just to see if it helps. It looks like I can
>get the full version on ebay for about $100. I'd rather have the full
>version than the upgrade because my Win98 disk has about had it. (remember
>when cds first came out and they talked of how rugged they were?...HA!) If
>it is a drastic improvement, I'll take it. Here's some questions:

The upgrade does not require your Win98 disk.

>1.) Will it run all software designed for Win98?

No!  It's mostly games and educational software that won't work.  I keep a 
clunker around for that, or use VMware, which is excellent for running 
multiple operating systems simultaneously.  I used to use System Commander 
to switch between multiple OS's at boot time, but it's a messier solution.

>2.) Do I have to call, login, or send any information to Microsoft to
>register it, or is it like Win98...just punch in the key code and go?

No.  It's only XP that does that.  One of many reasons I won't upgrade to it.

>3.) Are the service packs free, or do I have to pay for SP4? (Just making
>sure, I don;t have to get SP1, 2, 3, and 4 do I? I wouldn;t think so, but
>you never know with Microsoft!)

AFAIK, all service packs are free for download from Microsoft, but they are 
often over 100 MB, so annoying without a high-speed connection.  You can 
also have them send you a CD for a modest sum.  But when I'm ready to 
upgrade, I want to do it today, not wait for a disk.

I've found it pays to be very conservative in installing MS service 
packs.  I generally only do so when I want to install a product that 
insists on it.  Problem is that Microsoft often breaks things in their 
service packs.  They may be approaching the equilibrium point IBM 
established with IBM 360/370 -- where each new release introduced as many 
bugs as it fixed.

>4.) Can I use NTFS partitions? I always wanted to. If so, is it trouble
>converting FAT32 partitions to NTFS without losing data?

You can use NTFS.  You can also use FAT or FAT32 on other partitions.  For 
converting, I'd rely on a third-party tool, from Symantec or equiv.

>5.) Am I shopping for Win2k pro?

Yes.

>I am having this trouble with a Machspeed motherboard with a 266 FSB, 512 MB
>PC2100 DDR 266 mhz memory, an XP Athlon 2200+ processor and 8x AGP video
>card with 128MB memory. I thought the problem was the basic build behind the
>computer design. If Win2k will help, I'll try it.

I doubt that your problem has anything to do with how powerful your system 
is but 2000 is better than 98 in virtually all respects.


-- David Lubkin.
  




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 04:33:18 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:33:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE24FcqvUD5Fo00011a49@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031220043318.53944.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

Something else I have noticed: when you have one browser window on a
YABB SE supported forum, and another browser window on Friendster,
images will fail to load and eventually the browser will crash.

Other things:
I used to have lots of problems with Corel applications, especially
Ventura. Comes from running large documents that are several versions
old and have been compiling edit relics for quite a while, at least in
part (Doing a "Save As" to a new name rather than just saving cleans
this up handily). I've found spell checkers that would crash the whole
machine if you asked them to spell check a certain 12 character text
segment (this one really entertained the techs at Corel for a while),
and I've found image frames that decide to take a hike and you can only
herd them in if you expand your page size to 36" width, and when you
try to delete them, your system crashes...

I am also convinced that lots of OS crashes are not the fault of the OS
or any programs installed. They are the fault of the particular
combination of hardware you have installed on the motherboard,
particularly the video card. Companies like Dell and Gateway are able
to minimize their support costs because they limit the different models
of hardware components they sell, and they do extensive R&D to find out
what combinations are most stable. Mom & Pop PC maker down the street
typically doesn't have the resources, unless they just clone what the
big boys are doing.

Home builders are in similar circumstances. They want the best of this,
that, and the other, but don't have a knowledgebase of testing to
demonstrate what works well together.

--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, but I've been there and done that. I have a program called
> process
> explorer that actually shows me all the process going on. Nothing
> there but
> my drivers, etc as described and stuff that needs to be there. I did
> just
> reduce my fonts from some 50 or so to about 25. We'll see how that
> goes.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 7:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
> 
> 
> > Keep an eye on all those TSRs that run down on the right hand end
> of
> > the task bar. They tend to pile up a lot. I have also noticed, at
> least
> > in XP, that many such programs that you install that should display
> an
> > icon down there don't, though the programs are running if you bring
> up
> > the task list in task manager.
> > Another thing that east resources are fonts. If you are not a
> graphic
> > designer, you really don't need a thousand and one fonts.
> Minimizing
> > your fonts down to a few dozen saves tons of resources.
> > Still another thing is a funky desktop image and lots of sounds and
> > animations on your icons and cursor actions. Get rid of em.
> >
> > --- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On Fri Dec 19, 2003 05:29 pm Kevin Freels wrote:
> > > > Once I have my soundcard driver, mouse driver, video card
> > > > driver, ZoneAlarm, DSL (EnterNet 300 which sucks all by
> itself),
> > > and
> > > > Norton AV running, I get resources available of 68%.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sounds excessive to me.
> > > I have Win98, 256MB memory, and when I load all the drivers, plus
> > > Nvidia
> > > graphics drivers plus Cable Internet, Sygate Personal firewall,
> AVG
> > > antivirus and Mozilla Mail and Browser, I have resources
> available of
> > > about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.
> > >
> > > I usually have lots more than this running quite happily.
> > >
> > > Try different software?
> > >
> > > BillK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > extropy-chat mailing list
> > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> >
> > =====
> > Mike Lorrey
> > "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
> >                                        - Gen. John Stark
> > "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
> >                                        - Mike Lorrey
> > Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> > Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> > http://photos.yahoo.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 04:39:49 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:39:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
In-Reply-To: <20031220030353.71905.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031220043949.77720.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yeah, if just any copy of the Koran is that sacred and absolute, all
> people in the US and Israel would have to do to protect themselves
> against terrorist bombings would be to put copies of the Koran in
> planes, buildings, and on busses. Of course this assumes that
> terrorism is an islamic religious phenomenon, which despite the
> claims of its practitioners, it isn't.  

Why do you think that hotels put bibles in their rooms? Cuts down on
the incidence of suicide, it does.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 20 04:55:48 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 20:55:48 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c667$f0d492a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000001c3c6b5$8ac2ac60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> ...  I might speculate that a JBrain would somehow 
> figure a way to use that dust by making it into computronium?  
> Perhaps a JBrain might have little or no solid core, having 
> dissembled itself into dust in order to maximize its surface 
> area, so that its actual size is enormous, perhaps much larger 
> in volume than the star that it orbits...spherical...SBrain?
> 
> If a light-minute diameter spherical cloud of computronium
> particles each a picogram (about 30-50 billion Si-C atoms, or a 
> sphere about a micron diameter if I calculate it in my head) 
> were to orbit a sunlike star, with a total mass of the cloud 
> about one Jupiter...
> 
> Hold on, this is going to take some calculations and thinking.
> More later.  spike...

I did some first order calcs and found my mental figures were not
half bad.  If we assume picogram carbon/silicon particles with 
density about 2 g/cm^2 and a Jupiter mass of them (2E27kg) or about
2e42 particles of computronium orbitting about a light hour from 
a sunlike star in a loosely spherical swarm of about a light 
minute diameter, I get an average density of about 6E11 particles 
per cubic meter, these particles being about a micron diameter.
The average spacing about 100 microns, so that from the point
of view of each particle, an average neighboring particle would 
appear about the size the full moon appears to us on this 
particularly large dust particle we call home.

Clearly this cloud would be completely opaque to all frequencies
emitted from the star, so that all the energy that falls on that
light-minute diameter sphere would be absorbed.  This can allow
us to estimate its temperature while waving our hands furiously
and chanting "to first order."  But before I calculate anything,
I realize that these nodes could turn a dark or light face in or
out, so that the SBrain could adjust its temperature to almost 
anything it wanted.

So look at Jupiter: average surface temperature 130 Kelvin and realize
that the heat loss and heat gain mechanisms are both proportional to
the surface area.  If the SBrain does nothing and has the same albedo
as Jupiter and is about a Jupiter distance from a sunlike star, it
too would be emitting at about 130K.  Right?  So now the question 
becomes how far away can an object be seen which is 130K and diameter 
2E10 meters by Lockheeed produced SIRTF?

The surface temp of a G star like our sun is about 5800 K and its
diameter is about 5 light seconds, so to estimate the amount of 
energy across the entire spectrum reaching us from the SBrain, 
Boltzmann's constant cancels and the rough calculation is 
E = (60/5)^2(130/5800)^4 = 4E-5 times the amount of energy reaching 
us from the star.  So the problem for SIRTF isn't really the *amount* 
of energy reaching us from the star, which is more than adequate, 
but rather *resolving* it from the nearby star which is over 25,000 
times brighter.  

I don't have the specs from the Lockheeed SIRTF, but my intuition 
tells me any instrument of the 1 meter class would not have anywhere 
near the resolution needed to distinguish a Jupiter-like SBrain 
(SJBrain?) from its star, even if the SJBrain-star pair is in the 
immediate neighborhood.  Damn.  {8-[

spike  



From eliasen at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 20 05:00:34 2003
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:00:34 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>


Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> You can get a command.com (MSDOS) prompt under Win2K.
> I also use a very old set of UNIX utilities (MKS) so
> I can get a UNIX shell and lots of other goodies.
> I think the standard now for a UNIX toolkit is CYGWIN
> which is free.

   In Win2K, the shell is actually called cmd.exe.  It's a bit more
advanced than command.com; you can have (brain-dead, but better than
nothing) file completion and some other features.

   By the way, for those who bemoan Windows' lack of any useful
programming utilities, system tools, file manipulation tools, shells,
postscript processors, printing utilities, graphing utilities, text
editors, etc., I've put together a pretty solid, mature CD of tools,
called "The APE" (Alan's Programming Environment).  The nice thing about
the CD is that you can run all of these utilities directly off the CD,
installing nothing on the hard drive.  You can carry it around and have
a pretty useful system anywhere you go.  It's pretty well tested (3+
years of use in the real world.)  It's also quite useful for fiddling
with programs in a lot of different languages without the hassle of
finding and configuring compilers, etc.

   The description of the tools available is here:
http://futureboy.homeip.net/ape/

   Images can be downloaded from here:
http://futureboy.homeip.net/apezip/

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 20 05:19:13 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:19:13 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <20031220043318.53944.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE50kKHFfcbYF0000a6b1@hotmail.com>

Yeah, I've had the same trouble woth Corel applications. Now that you
mention it, my troubles became noticable after installing wordperfect. Hmmm.
Coincidence?

I see what you mean about the hardware combinations. My chipset is SiS and
my video card Nvidia. I wonder if there isn't some kind of rivalry there
since SiS makes a video card and nvidia makes a motherboard chipset. Could
this be causing some of my random crash issues as well?
I've narrowed out all the usual culprits like new hard drive, re-formatted
drive, new video card, new motherboard, new power-supply, new processor, new
fans (3) new ribbons, hell, I've rebuilt my system twice in the last 6
months from the ground up!

I'm down to only two possibilities. Crappy OS, or crappy user...and until
this, I never had a problem I couldn't fix. I'm no expert, but several years
ago I did get A+ certified. Things have changed a lot since then and I
haven't followed them hardly at all, but I never had these problems until I
built this system.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


> Something else I have noticed: when you have one browser window on a
> YABB SE supported forum, and another browser window on Friendster,
> images will fail to load and eventually the browser will crash.
>
> Other things:
> I used to have lots of problems with Corel applications, especially
> Ventura. Comes from running large documents that are several versions
> old and have been compiling edit relics for quite a while, at least in
> part (Doing a "Save As" to a new name rather than just saving cleans
> this up handily). I've found spell checkers that would crash the whole
> machine if you asked them to spell check a certain 12 character text
> segment (this one really entertained the techs at Corel for a while),
> and I've found image frames that decide to take a hike and you can only
> herd them in if you expand your page size to 36" width, and when you
> try to delete them, your system crashes...
>
> I am also convinced that lots of OS crashes are not the fault of the OS
> or any programs installed. They are the fault of the particular
> combination of hardware you have installed on the motherboard,
> particularly the video card. Companies like Dell and Gateway are able
> to minimize their support costs because they limit the different models
> of hardware components they sell, and they do extensive R&D to find out
> what combinations are most stable. Mom & Pop PC maker down the street
> typically doesn't have the resources, unless they just clone what the
> big boys are doing.
>
> Home builders are in similar circumstances. They want the best of this,
> that, and the other, but don't have a knowledgebase of testing to
> demonstrate what works well together.
>
> --- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks, but I've been there and done that. I have a program called
> > process
> > explorer that actually shows me all the process going on. Nothing
> > there but
> > my drivers, etc as described and stuff that needs to be there. I did
> > just
> > reduce my fonts from some 50 or so to about 25. We'll see how that
> > goes.
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> > To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 7:06 PM
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
> >
> >
> > > Keep an eye on all those TSRs that run down on the right hand end
> > of
> > > the task bar. They tend to pile up a lot. I have also noticed, at
> > least
> > > in XP, that many such programs that you install that should display
> > an
> > > icon down there don't, though the programs are running if you bring
> > up
> > > the task list in task manager.
> > > Another thing that east resources are fonts. If you are not a
> > graphic
> > > designer, you really don't need a thousand and one fonts.
> > Minimizing
> > > your fonts down to a few dozen saves tons of resources.
> > > Still another thing is a funky desktop image and lots of sounds and
> > > animations on your icons and cursor actions. Get rid of em.
> > >
> > > --- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > On Fri Dec 19, 2003 05:29 pm Kevin Freels wrote:
> > > > > Once I have my soundcard driver, mouse driver, video card
> > > > > driver, ZoneAlarm, DSL (EnterNet 300 which sucks all by
> > itself),
> > > > and
> > > > > Norton AV running, I get resources available of 68%.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sounds excessive to me.
> > > > I have Win98, 256MB memory, and when I load all the drivers, plus
> > > > Nvidia
> > > > graphics drivers plus Cable Internet, Sygate Personal firewall,
> > AVG
> > > > antivirus and Mozilla Mail and Browser, I have resources
> > available of
> > > > about 83% GDI, 80% USER and 80% SYSTEM.
> > > >
> > > > I usually have lots more than this running quite happily.
> > > >
> > > > Try different software?
> > > >
> > > > BillK
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > extropy-chat mailing list
> > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > >
> > >
> > > =====
> > > Mike Lorrey
> > > "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
> > >                                        - Gen. John Stark
> > > "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
> > >                                        - Mike Lorrey
> > > Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> > > Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> > > http://photos.yahoo.com/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > extropy-chat mailing list
> > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net  Sat Dec 20 05:39:37 2003
From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 23:39:37 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191822160.14269-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031219223852.035c6e90@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <008601c3c6bb$aef0b360$5253fea9@sbcglobal.net>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Lubkin" <extropy at unreasonable.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
> >1.) Will it run all software designed for Win98?
>
> No!  It's mostly games and educational software that won't work.  I keep a
> clunker around for that, or use VMware, which is excellent for running
> multiple operating systems simultaneously.  I used to use System Commander
> to switch between multiple OS's at boot time, but it's a messier solution.

OK. I don't play games or use educational software. I am guessing that you
are referring to the older DOS based stuff and really simple program
leftovers from Win3.x. I remember some games that ran "outside" the Windows
environment. Or am I way off base here. Maybe I shoudl be asking if the
"normal" stuff works on Win2k like PaintShop Pro 6, Norton Anti-virus,
Acrobat Reader, Office 2000, ZoneAlarm, etc. I don;t want to upgrade and
find that I need to buy a bunch of new software.

Also, you mentioned that I wouldn't need the disk for the upgrade. What I
was envisioning was a scenario where my whole system is lost and I have to
reformat the hard drive and re-load Windows. If I buy the upgrade, I would
have to load Win 98, then the Win2k upgrade. Given the age of my Win98
disk(4 years old) and it's condition from being put in and out so many times
when installing drivers and crap, I am probably better off buying the full
version.

The fact that I don;t have to call in to register it really sums it up for
me. I've had a friend who went through 4 hard drives ni 2 months (came to
find out he had the computer sitting right on top of a heating vent!) By the
fourth install, Microsoft started giving him a hard time because each time,
he took the opportunity to change a different part in the computer and the
computer "looked" like a different computer to them.

I appreciate the tips. I guess I know what to ask for for Newtonmas!



From gpmap at runbox.com  Sat Dec 20 05:53:05 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 06:53:05 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reith Lectures 2003: The Emerging Mind
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBCECJCBAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

>From Kuro5hin: The BBC inaugurated the Reith Lectures in 1948. Every year a
leading figure is invited to deliver a series of public lectures informed by
their particular field of expertise. The purpose of the lectures is "to
advance public understanding and debate about significant issues of
contemporary interest". The first Reith Lectures were given by Bertrand
Russell and notable contributors have consented to participate ever since.
Former Reith Lecturers include Robert Oppenheimer, JK Galbraith, John
Searle, Steve Jones and Edward Said. This year's Reith Lecturer was
Professor Vilayanur Ramachandran, Director of the Centre for Brain and
Cognition and professor with the Psychology Department and the Neurosciences
Programme at the University of California, San Diego.
Professor Ramachandran's approach to neuroscience is guided by the principle
that the examination of unusual and rare neurological disorders can yield
fresh insights into the mechanisms of the normal brain. Many of the
disorders he investigates have been known to medicine for some time,
neglected as borderline cases or mere curiosities until now. In a series of
lectures entitled The Emerging Mind, Professor Ramachandran takes the
listener on a tour of unusual psychological phenomena and, through an
examination of the associated neurology, arrives at some startling
conclusions about the human brain. He goes on to consider the possible
implications of these conclusions for subjects as varied as consciousness,
identity, free will, religion, aesthetics, art and the origins of language.
Both the lectures and the discussions can be read in transcript form or
listened to as a RealAudio stream.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/dd58e21c/attachment.html>

From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Dec 20 06:48:43 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:48:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <008601c3c6bb$aef0b360$5253fea9@sbcglobal.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191822160.14269-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031219223852.035c6e90@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031220011841.02875ec8@mail.comcast.net>

At 11:39 PM 12/19/2003 -0600, Kevin Freels wrote:

>OK. I don't play games or use educational software. I am guessing that you
>are referring to the older DOS based stuff and really simple program
>leftovers from Win3.x. I remember some games that ran "outside" the Windows
>environment. Or am I way off base here.

No, I'm talking about 32-bit Windows software like Scrabble, ChessMaster, 
and a lot of foreign language software.  They genuinely require the 
single-user OS variants, usually for graphics.  (Sometimes I've found 
software that doesn't list NT or 2000 but works anyway.  This is the stuff 
that flat doesn't work.)

>Maybe I shoudl be asking if the "normal" stuff works on Win2k like 
>PaintShop Pro 6, Norton Anti-virus, Acrobat Reader, Office 2000, 
>ZoneAlarm, etc. I don;t want to upgrade and find that I need to buy a 
>bunch of new software.

These are all things I use, and they all work fine and won't need to be 
upgraded.  Although I do recommend Norton SystemWorks Professional Edition 
for monitoring your system.  (I'm not 100% happy with it and am open to 
suggestions for alternatives.  I suppose I should check if they've fixed 
what I can't stand.)

>Also, you mentioned that I wouldn't need the disk for the upgrade. What I
>was envisioning was a scenario where my whole system is lost and I have to
>reformat the hard drive and re-load Windows. If I buy the upgrade, I would
>have to load Win 98, then the Win2k upgrade. Given the age of my Win98
>disk(4 years old) and it's condition from being put in and out so many times
>when installing drivers and crap, I am probably better off buying the full
>version.

That is a valid point but I think you should be able to borrow a friend's 
Win 98 disk to reinstall off, or make a copy of if either of you has a CD-R 
drive.  After all, you own a licensed copy.  You are allowed to do this 
under copyright law.  Why pay more?

One thing to watch out for on buying a Windows CD off eBay or equiv.  When 
I was actively tracking what Microsoft was up to, I paid them a couple 
thousand a year for an MSDN (Microsoft Developer's Network) 
subscription.  Which gave me a copy of every OS, every development tool, 
server, database, office product, etc., in every version, in every language 
they sell.  It's very convenient, and is one thing they've done a pretty 
good job on.

The one caveat, which has bitten me, and may bite you, is that you don't 
get a bootable CD with, say, Windows 98 in English.  You get a CD that 
contains every single language version of Windows 98.  This is fine most of 
the time.  But if you have a blank hard drive, you have an awkward time 
installing the OS since you can't boot off the CD.

I've handled this different ways.  On one system, the simplest way was to 
pull out MS-DOS 6.22 on floppies, then install Windows 3.1, and on, 
recapitulating phylogeny.

Don't do this.  Confirm that the CD you buy is bootable.

>The fact that I don;t have to call in to register it really sums it up for
>me. I've had a friend who went through 4 hard drives ni 2 months (came to
>find out he had the computer sitting right on top of a heating vent!)

Interesting.  Years ago I went through two monitors in short order because 
we had a cat who'd curl up on it when she could -- blocking the cooling 
vents and getting cat hair in the innards.


-- David Lubkin.





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Sat Dec 20 08:22:39 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 03:22:39 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE55wfURqO7d2000119f3@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <00a001c3c6d2$72253a20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Kevin Freels wrote,
> This is what I heard and is why I have chosen (so far) to
> stay with the KNOWN evil rather than jump to a new one. As 
> much as I love technology, something inside me as afraid to 
> give up the command prompt ability!

This is why I like the MacOS X.  It has the Macintosh gui for the graphical
interface and a unix command prompt for the command-line interface.  It has
all the same shells to choose from as unix or linux, so the commands are the
same.  Scripts that run on unix or linux will run on the Mac as well.  The
Unix command prompt is much more powerful that DOS.  You can chain a lot of
commands together, with filters and reformatting between the chain links.
The commands actually run simultaneously, so that each line of out put of
one gets processed in the next at the same time.  Unlike DOS which captures
all the output from the first program before inputting it to the second
program.  It also has full job control, where you can run commands in the
background, switch between them, set priorities, etc.

BillK wrote,
> Sounds excessive to me.
> I have Win98, 256MB memory, and when I load all the drivers,
> plus Nvidia graphics drivers plus Cable Internet, Sygate 
> Personal firewall, AVG antivirus and Mozilla Mail and 
> Browser, I have resources available of about 83% GDI, 80% 
> USER and 80% SYSTEM.

Be aware that Win98 reports percentage of virtual memory, not actual memory.
Your 80% free may be using all your available memory and swapping some into
your virtual memory.  Tuning it down to fit only in real memory will greatly
speed up the machine.  You can test this theory by setting your virtual
memory to a static size instead of letting the system do it.  Then if you
double your virtual memory, you can see your resources appear to cut in
half.  Or if you half your virtual memory, you can see your resources appear
to double.
(Be prepared to boot into safe mode to set this back if you cut back too
far.)

Kevin Freels wrote,
> > How complex is that software? If it's simple, there's a good chance
> > that will run under Wine (a windows emulator for Linux), or 
> > some other emulator/Virtual PC.

I have always had good results running WINE under unix or Virtual PC under
Mac.  Everything ran fine, just slower than the native machine would be.
Under Virtual PC on a Mac, I have installed RedHat Linux, DOS, Windows 95,
98, and ME for testing purposes.  All of them loaded from the PC CD's and
couldn't tell the Mac from a PC.

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> Keep an eye on all those TSRs that run down on the right hand
> end of the task bar. They tend to pile up a lot. I have also 
> noticed, at least in XP, that many such programs that you 
> install that should display an icon down there don't, though 
> the programs are running if you bring up the task list in 
> task manager.

If you right-click the task bar and go to Properties, there is a checkbox to
hide inactive icons.  This will hide running programs when you haven't
accessed their taskbar icon menu for a while.  There also are more advanced
options to hide or unhide individual programs.  Also, many XP programs are
starting to have their own preference for whether they should show up in the
task bar or not.  These tend to get reset a lot, and I go in and reset them
back.  Turning them off and back on can also make them reappear, even if the
preferences panel claims they are already turned on.

David Lubkin wrote,
> Two things I did do to improve the system -- I'd had
> thousands of fonts installed; it's down to a few hundred now.
> And I got rid of a lot of the processes I don't want that
> were lurking in the background.  See 
> http://www.answersthatwork.com/Tasklist_pages/tasklist.htm.

This is an excellent resource.  I am amazed at how much junk is installed
with Windows, and gets installed later by all different programs.  There are
usually dozens of invisible programs running in the background that are not
ever needed by most people.  This is useful for plug-and-play or universal
support, but it leaves a lot of opportunity for cleanup as well.

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> Something else I have noticed: when you have one browser
> window on a YABB SE supported forum, and another browser 
> window on Friendster, images will fail to load and eventually 
> the browser will crash.

I have seen this problem with the Extropy BBS.  I debugged it down to YABB
referencing its own page objects incorrectly.  The way they did it did not
refer to the current window, but the topmost window or first window or some
such sloppiness that might not get the right window when more than one
window was open.  If the other window had forms with similar object types in
it, YABB ended up accessing and trying to change windows it didn't own,
causing errors and inconsistencies between what it thought it had set and
what ended up getting set in its own window.

> I am also convinced that lots of OS crashes are not the fault
> of the OS or any programs installed. They are the fault of 
> the particular combination of hardware you have installed on 
> the motherboard, particularly the video card.

This is very true.  I travel around a lot doing consulting, and am often
plugging my laptop into different monitors, networks, printers, etc.  The
stability of my system was dramatically different while I was plugged into
different things.  I quickly learned which devices made my system flakey and
which ones didn't.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From extropy at audry2.com  Sat Dec 20 11:40:45 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:40:45 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interview with a Luddite - Kevin Kelly's US$1,
In-Reply-To: <184670-2200312519195152459@M2W061.mail2web.com>
	(natashavita@earthlink.net)
Message-ID: <200312201140.hBKBejl17980@igor.synonet.com>


> Kelly: OK. [...] I bet you US$1,000 that in the year 2020, we're not
> even close to the kind of disaster you describe - a convergence of
> three disasters: global currency collapse [...]
> 
> Sale: [Pauses. Then smiles.] OK. 

If Sale is wrong about the future, he looses $1k; if Sale is right
about the future, we wins $1k (which by the stated conditions of the
bet is worthless as the currency has collapsed).

He He. Sucker bet.

(I prefer my sucker bets to pay off sooner though 8-)

Major


From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec 20 10:45:01 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:45:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law9-F106onkhhid3fB0002ffdd@hotmail.com>
References: <Law9-F106onkhhid3fB0002ffdd@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031220104501.GQ21411@leitl.org>

On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 05:58:00PM -0500, Brian Lee wrote:

> I just wanted to mention this as the "Windows has to be rebooted once every 
> n units of time" FUD hasn't been applicable since windows2000 (or maybe 
> even NT4sp3).

I guess I'm just a power user. The other people in the office don't reboot
nearly as often. Whatever I'm doing, it's reproducible. The patcheritis is
what all current desktop systems have; *BSD as server somewhat less so.

The instability is hardly a Windows problem, however, you have to design 
a system properly (e.g., if you have a recent ATI an OpenGL screen blanker
can lock up your Linux kernel, etc).

I'm disgusted with the engineering aspect of all modern consumer-grade
systems, whether hardware or software.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/7f723110/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec 20 12:18:22 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 13:18:22 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <00a001c3c6d2$72253a20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <Law10-OE55wfURqO7d2000119f3@hotmail.com>
	<00a001c3c6d2$72253a20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031220121822.GR21411@leitl.org>

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 03:22:39AM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> This is why I like the MacOS X.  It has the Macintosh gui for the graphical

Yeah, I second that encouragement. OS X is lots of work if all you want to do
is to run a UNIX, but it's definitely a good computing experience if you
don't have to run Windows (I use a sacrificial box for that, or run an
emulator -- WINE is a pain, so I use VMware with cracked serials). You can
use OpenOffice (not yet even carbonized), if you install Apple's X Server.

Just get used to those frequent multi-MByte patches, most of them requiring a reboot.
I definitely miss that apt-get dist-upgrade nonintrusiveness.

> interface and a unix command prompt for the command-line interface.  It has
> all the same shells to choose from as unix or linux, so the commands are the
> same.  Scripts that run on unix or linux will run on the Mac as well.  The

Superficially, it's a *nix, but there are lots of maddening, unnecessary
deviations from a standard. If you're an old UNIX hand, get thee to
http://fink.sourceforge.net/

> Unix command prompt is much more powerful that DOS.  You can chain a lot of
> commands together, with filters and reformatting between the chain links.
> The commands actually run simultaneously, so that each line of out put of
> one gets processed in the next at the same time.  Unlike DOS which captures
> all the output from the first program before inputting it to the second
> program.  It also has full job control, where you can run commands in the
> background, switch between them, set priorities, etc.

Notice that you can have a good shell on a Windows machine as well, via
cygwin. And next-generation shell from Redmond has some very interesting
features (largely centered around .Net, but also useful for a *nix person).
(Just don't forget the first-born clause in the EULA).
 
> I have always had good results running WINE under unix or Virtual PC under

Redmond owns Virtual PC now, so start expecting bad surprises.

> Mac.  Everything ran fine, just slower than the native machine would be.
> Under Virtual PC on a Mac, I have installed RedHat Linux, DOS, Windows 95,
> 98, and ME for testing purposes.  All of them loaded from the PC CD's and
> couldn't tell the Mac from a PC.

I've had subtle hardware interfacing issues with VMware, but in the majority
of cases it's a decent workaround. It can be only a migration help, anyway.
 
> I have seen this problem with the Extropy BBS.  I debugged it down to YABB
> referencing its own page objects incorrectly.  The way they did it did not
> refer to the current window, but the topmost window or first window or some
> such sloppiness that might not get the right window when more than one
> window was open.  If the other window had forms with similar object types in
> it, YABB ended up accessing and trying to change windows it didn't own,
> causing errors and inconsistencies between what it thought it had set and
> what ended up getting set in its own window.

Another illustration as to why using a GUI for a pure text exchange is
solving a non-problem.
 
> This is very true.  I travel around a lot doing consulting, and am often
> plugging my laptop into different monitors, networks, printers, etc.  The
> stability of my system was dramatically different while I was plugged into
> different things.  I quickly learned which devices made my system flakey and
> which ones didn't.

Designing a stable system takes an experienced engineer. And this is 2003. Is
that pathetic, or what?

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/57987a7e/attachment.bin>

From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sat Dec 20 12:27:22 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:27:22 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <3FE4402A.8080900@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Sat Dec 20, 2003 01:22 am Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> Be aware that Win98 reports percentage of virtual memory, not actual
> memory. Your 80% free may be using all your available memory and
> swapping some into your virtual memory. Tuning it down to fit only in 
> real memory will greatly speed up the machine. You can test this
> theory by setting your virtual memory to a static size instead of
> letting the system do it. Then if you double your virtual memory, you 
> can see your resources appear to cut in half. Or if you half your
> virtual memory, you can see your resources appear to double.
>

Correct. That's why I use the FreeMeter utility. Download from:
<http://www.tiler.com/freemeter/default.php>

FreeMeter itself uses 1480KB of Physical Memory and about 1% of GDI
and 1% of Sys resources.

Just for interest, I unloaded all the other programs I usually have
running via the Close Program dialogue (Ctrl Alt Del), then closed one
App at a time, to get some numbers out.
The starting position is slightly higher than my previous email as I had
a couple of utilities running that I had forgotten about

Physical Memory 256MB   Page (Swap) File 768MB    Available
% Available   % Used    % Available   % Used    GDI%  User%   Sys%

51.5           48.5        100           0      84      83     83

Unload Mozilla Browser and Email
62.7           37.5        100           0      90      88     88

Unload AVG antivirus
63.4           36.6        100           0      91      90     90

Unload Sygate Personal firewall
67             33          100           0      94      94     94

The only items left in the Close dialogue box now are Explorer and
FreeMeter.

I was quite surprised to see how little resources AVG used. I think
Norton AV will use more than this.
And Sygate also was quite low. Check how much ZoneAlarm uses.

Best wishes, BillK





From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec 20 13:10:58 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:10:58 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>

On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 10:00:34PM -0700, Alan Eliasen wrote:

>    In Win2K, the shell is actually called cmd.exe.  It's a bit more
> advanced than command.com; you can have (brain-dead, but better than
> nothing) file completion and some other features.

Get cygwin, and your pain will go away. 
 
>    By the way, for those who bemoan Windows' lack of any useful
> programming utilities, system tools, file manipulation tools, shells,
> postscript processors, printing utilities, graphing utilities, text

I bemoan one thing primarily: a greedy proprietary vendor. With a track
record of malice and greed, paired with incompetence.

> editors, etc., I've put together a pretty solid, mature CD of tools,
> called "The APE" (Alan's Programming Environment).  The nice thing about
> the CD is that you can run all of these utilities directly off the CD,
> installing nothing on the hard drive.  You can carry it around and have

I'd rather prefer support offered by the Debian team, than you, no offence.
And I do carry a very useful system around everywhere I go: my iBook.

> a pretty useful system anywhere you go.  It's pretty well tested (3+
> years of use in the real world.)  It's also quite useful for fiddling
> with programs in a lot of different languages without the hassle of
> finding and configuring compilers, etc.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/c4fd9a22/attachment.bin>

From neptune at superlink.net  Sat Dec 20 14:04:19 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:04:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Abolishing Government Improves the Roads
Message-ID: <008601c3c702$2b8b0920$b1cd5cd1@neptune>

http://www.lewrockwell.com/edmonds/edmonds164.html

I recall a few weeks ago that one of you brought up how privatizing the
roads would not work.  I cited Daniel Klein's work at the time (which,
naturally, I bet none of you read:) and believed this article would be
of interest as well.  It's not a refutation of the anti-privatization
argument, but just another counterpoint to it.  (On the other hand,
Klein's work is partly a refutation of the anti-privatization
argument.:)

Happy Holidays!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Dec 20 14:21:18 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:21:18 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE24FcqvUD5Fo00011a49@hotmail.com>
References: <20031220010626.60187.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<Law10-OE24FcqvUD5Fo00011a49@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312200919370.-296341@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


I did that and ... found I'd uninstalled a font that Windoze
used.  Bummer. Had to go get it again.  So be careful! I'm
sure if you have that problem, someone here can send you
whatever font you've killed. :)))

Regards,
MB


On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:

> Thanks, but I've been there and done that. I have a program called process
> explorer that actually shows me all the process going on. Nothing there but
> my drivers, etc as described and stuff that needs to be there. I did just
> reduce my fonts from some 50 or so to about 25. We'll see how that goes.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 16:44:18 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 08:44:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE50kKHFfcbYF0000a6b1@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031220164418.49666.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I've had the same trouble woth Corel applications. Now that you
> mention it, my troubles became noticable after installing
> wordperfect. Hmmm.
> Coincidence?

Depends on the version. I was running Ventura 7, which was a major
upgrade of the application, and it came with lots of bugs that needed
patching. Corel's policy at the time was recommend users use a Matrox
G400 video card with their application. At the time this was a
relatively higher end video card, so it took a while to convince my
employers to spend the bucks on it. Upgrading to version 8 wasn't
nearly as painful. But it is interesting that Corel would make
recommendations as to type of video card to use with their
applications.

Corel is programming is applications in XML or a very XML-like
language, or so I've been told.

I was running NT4 at the time, which was way more stable than 98 or ME,
and user colleagues elsewhere said that 2000 pro worked even better.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 20 16:48:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 08:48:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ASTRO: Spitzer/SIRTF images released
In-Reply-To: <001101c3c649$919f3bf0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312190944130.4291-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


[Not sure if I sent this before -- if its a duplicate byegones.]

On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> [snip]  SIRTF can see objects as small as "super-planets", which
> they define as bigger than 100 Jupiters.
>
> So it seems that it would be impossible for SIRTF to see a Jupiter brain.

Yes, Harvey, in a classical sense you are correct.  But I believe the
best description we have for a Jupiter Brain now is the one that Anders
provided and I don't think it discusses power sources or heat signatures.

While I would tend to agree that at near-IR wavelengths a Jupiter Brain
around a star that uses normal solar power would probably not be
detectable -- a free floating Jupiter Brain using internally power
from fusion reactors could be detected.  (I discuss this briefly
as internally powered Matrioshka Brains in some of my papers -- but
the same ideas would apply to Jupiter Brains.)

That is what caused me to point out the asteroids.  And though the
asteroids cited are known, detecting dark asteroids such as carbonaceous
chondrites at visible wavelengths can be quite difficult and is much
easier for a telescope like SIRTF.  And in most cases, whether for
the absorption of visible solar energy or for the radiation of waste
heat energy, the best materials involved are very dark and therefore
difficult to detect at visible wavelengths.

Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 20 17:19:11 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:19:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <008601c3c6bb$aef0b360$5253fea9@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312200903380.29820-100000@server.aeiveos.com>

> If I buy the upgrade, I would
> have to load Win 98, then the Win2k upgrade. Given the age of my Win98
> disk(4 years old) and it's condition from being put in and out so many times
> when installing drivers and crap, I am probably better off buying the full
> version.

Symantec has bought PowerQwest -- get any of "Drive Image", "Partition Magic"
or "Drive Copy" as suit your needs -- they aren't that expensive and will
more than save you the hours of time involved in a system reinstall.  Then
go to one of the hardware vendors (like Insight) and buy yourself a large
cheap drive (Insight has 20gb IDE drives for ~$60).  Buy two if you are
paranoid.  Then install it, use Drive Copy (or one of the other tools)
to partition it and copy partitions or the entire drive to the spare
drive.  Then you can either leave it installed or remove it.  If you
are running Win2K, you can set the drive up so that it powers down
after N minutes of non-use (saves wear and tear and keeps the case
cooler).

You are rarely going to use it so you don't really care about the
performance.  I adopted a policy like this years ago and it makes
me feel much more comfortable about my system reliability.  I've
got duplexed drives on my NT 4.0 server (also in Win2K) -- unfortunately
not in my personal Win2K.  But you can fix that using automated
backups using one of the UNIX toolkits or manually run Drive Copy
or Drive Image.

The nice thing about these big drives is that I now have a huge
partition that does nothing but store the gigabytes of software
that I've downloaded off the net from time to time.

Robert




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 17:25:30 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:25:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312200919370.-296341@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <20031220172530.85659.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>

Yes, windows system fonts should not be messed with. There are only
about a dozen of them, though. They are typically one of the default
fonts, i.e. if you load a document that is formatted in a font you
don't have, and isn't loaded either in the document file or on the
media that document came on, Windows will look at its default font and
use that as a substitute.

--- MB <mbb386 at main.nc.us> wrote:
> 
> I did that and ... found I'd uninstalled a font that Windoze
> used.  Bummer. Had to go get it again.  So be careful! I'm
> sure if you have that problem, someone here can send you
> whatever font you've killed. :)))
> 
> Regards,
> MB
> 
> 
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:
> 
> > Thanks, but I've been there and done that. I have a program called
> process
> > explorer that actually shows me all the process going on. Nothing
> there but
> > my drivers, etc as described and stuff that needs to be there. I
> did just
> > reduce my fonts from some 50 or so to about 25. We'll see how that
> goes.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 20 17:30:55 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:30:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c6b5$8ac2ac60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312200920180.29820-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> I don't have the specs from the Lockheeed SIRTF, but my intuition
> tells me any instrument of the 1 meter class would not have anywhere
> near the resolution needed to distinguish a Jupiter-like SBrain
> (SJBrain?) from its star, even if the SJBrain-star pair is in the
> immediate neighborhood.  Damn.  {8-[

Spike, you have lost me.  Is an SJBrain just a cloud of dust-like
particles in orbit around a star the size of a JBrain?  (Though
Anders JBrain described in his paper is more Earth-sized than
Jupiter-sized so I guess the size of a JBrain depends on who
is designing it...)

If so I don't think you should knock SIRTF too soon.  Both the
Terrestrial Planet Finder and Darwin plan to do most of their
work in the IR frequency range because the signals from planets
are much easier to differentiate from stars because more of the
energy coming off of stars is coming off as visible and UV.

You have to remember that SIRTF has a spectrograph as one of
the instruments -- it remains an open question whether the
IR from a planet (or an SJBrain) will produce enough of
a bump in the IR spectra of the star that it could be noticed.
But if you combine it with a variation of the current planet
finding technique so that one sees regular variations of
the IR spectra as the planet or SJBrain orbits the star
then that is going to have the astronomers scratching
their heads...

Robert




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 17:42:35 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 09:42:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NET: Friendster in Tagalog
Message-ID: <20031220174235.87331.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

To date, a number of people I know are into Friendster or other similar
website. What I've noticed is a growing phenomenon is that the number
of phillipina users, espec phillipina women, has been exploding.
Reminds me of Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon plot that starts off
laying cable into Manila so that migrant workers in the states can stay
in touch with families at home.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Dec 20 18:12:29 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:12:29 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312200920180.29820-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3c724$d4d22dc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
> 
> > ...1 meter class would not have anywhere
> > near the resolution needed to distinguish a Jupiter-like SBrain
> > (SJBrain?) from its star...  {8-[
> 
> Spike, you have lost me.  Is an SJBrain just a cloud of dust-like
> particles in orbit around a star the size of a JBrain?...


The theoretical SJBrain is a roughly spherical Jupiter-mass
cloud of computronium particles about a light-minute in diameter,
with the spherical (or galaxy-style flattened disk orbitting
about a light-hour from the star.  The particles are roughly 
spherical, about a micron diameter, mass of about a picogram,
30 to 50 billion atoms of carbon and silicon, with some other
metals that are sure to be useful to an SJBrain node.

This notion is only a slight variation on the traditional
Bradburian MBrain, except that the nodes bunch together in
a sphere to reduce the distance between them.  

My calculation compared the light-minute sphere against the
5 second diameter G star and estimated the surface temperature
about 130K.  Recall that Jupiter's diameter is a little less
than half a second, so this light minute diameter SJBrain
has a great deal of surface area from which to radiate.  The
total energy coming off the SJBrain in our direction is only
1/25000th as much as is coming off the star, but as you point
out, it is waaaay down there in the spectrum, all the better
for the Lockheeed SIRTF to see it.  Taking the spectral 
argument into account, it is not clear to me that the SIRTF
would not be detectible directly, if it is really close by.

Heres another thought I had last night.  If the SJBrain is
held from gravitational collapse by rotation alone, like a 
galaxy) then of course it cannot be spherical, unless it is
a series of rings like your MBrain.  But the thing could
be held into a spherical shape by having the particles hold
a net electric charge.  Since a Planck mass is about 10^19 GeV, 
that means that gravity is weaker by a factor of roughly 
 1 / (10^19)^2 = 1 / 10^38 than the electromagnetic
force, 38 orders of magnitude.  So if all the particles had
a net positive charge, the cloud could be spherical with no
sidereal rotation, and furthermore if the cloud had a charge 
gradient, with more charge inboard than outboard, it would be 
possible for any given particle to navigate to anyplace it
wanted within the sphere.  COOOL!

Robert see what cool ideas your cool ideas spawn?  {8-]

 
> If so I don't think you should knock SIRTF too soon.  Both the
> Terrestrial Planet Finder and Darwin plan to do most of their
> work in the IR frequency range because the signals from planets
> are much easier to differentiate from stars because more of the
> energy coming off of stars is coming off as visible and UV.

Knock SIRTF?  Im huuuge SIRTF fan.  {8-]  You should see the
LMCNews floating around the plant this week.  It was party
time around there in the astronomy geek crowd, some major
woo-hoo moments for sure.  Our office Newtonmass party was
filled with levity because of the SIRTF images.  On a slightly
more somber note, one of the big SIRTFers and all-around
good-guy who works in my office was carried out on a stretcher 
yesterday.  He was talking and the medics weren't running with 
him like they do on ER, so I suppose he is OK, but we haven't
heard.  He's mid 70s.  {8-|  I sincerely hope the 
life-extention guys score big, and score soon.


> You have to remember that SIRTF has a spectrograph as one of
> the instruments -- it remains an open question whether the
> IR from a planet (or an SJBrain) will produce enough of
> a bump in the IR spectra of the star that it could be noticed...
> 
> Robert



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 18:23:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:23:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c724$d4d22dc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031220182341.11064.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
> > 
> > > ...1 meter class would not have anywhere
> > > near the resolution needed to distinguish a Jupiter-like SBrain
> > > (SJBrain?) from its star...  {8-[
> > 
> > Spike, you have lost me.  Is an SJBrain just a cloud of dust-like
> > particles in orbit around a star the size of a JBrain?...
> 
> 
> The theoretical SJBrain is a roughly spherical Jupiter-mass
> cloud of computronium particles about a light-minute in diameter,
> with the spherical (or galaxy-style flattened disk orbitting
> about a light-hour from the star.  The particles are roughly 
> spherical, about a micron diameter, mass of about a picogram,
> 30 to 50 billion atoms of carbon and silicon, with some other
> metals that are sure to be useful to an SJBrain node.

I am wondering, since we are dealing with micron sized particles,
whether you could actually have a sperical cloud rather than a dust
ring without lots of collisions of particles. I am wondering if
electrostatic repulsion would be sufficient at those scales to prevent
actual collisions and instead replicate a form of brownian motion.
Theoretically, by living off of solar energy, such particles could
avoid loss of momentum that such motion would cause.

This would also create an electrostatic bottle effect on solar wind,
which would help keep the sphere inflated.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 18:27:45 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:27:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE55mokGjFcZS00011a24@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031220182745.98641.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > How complex is that software? If it's simple, there's a good chance
> that
> > will run under Wine (a windows emulator for Linux), or some other
> > emulator/Virtual PC.
> It's pretty complex. It uses the SQL server thingy to do part of it's
> job,
> some other kinds of microsoft datasources whatever they are, and it
> just
> gets worse from there. 

I have also noticed that win98 has difficulty if you are using more
than one ODBC driver at a time. Suggest you look into this.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Dec 20 18:44:50 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 13:44:50 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312200903380.29820-100000@server.aeiveos.co
 m>
References: <008601c3c6bb$aef0b360$5253fea9@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031220132408.038d7008@mail.comcast.net>

Robert Bradbury wrote:

>Symantec has bought PowerQwest -- get any of "Drive Image", "Partition Magic"
>or "Drive Copy" as suit your needs -- they aren't that expensive and will
>more than save you the hours of time involved in a system reinstall.  Then
>go to one of the hardware vendors (like Insight) and buy yourself a large
>cheap drive (Insight has 20gb IDE drives for ~$60).  Buy two if you are
>paranoid.  Then install it, use Drive Copy (or one of the other tools)
>to partition it and copy partitions or the entire drive to the spare
>drive.  Then you can either leave it installed or remove it.  If you
>are running Win2K, you can set the drive up so that it powers down
>after N minutes of non-use (saves wear and tear and keeps the case
>cooler).

Good idea.  I've long been annoyed at how expensive tape or optical backup 
solutions are for anyone with hefty storage needs.  And drives are finally 
getting cheaper faster than I can fill them up.  I'm seeing prices more 
like $1/GB for IDE, though.  CDW has 40 GB for your $60, 80 GB for $80, and 
a few honking big drives for under a buck a gig.

Your answer is less useful for my laptop, since external drives are more 
expensive.  But I suppose I could put the disk in a desktop machine and 
backup over the network.  And it's a little more complicated for me, 
because I'm already running two IDE controllers for four drives, and I 
don't have any free slots.

Has anyone had happy experiences with taking an internal drive, putting it 
in an enclosure, and using it as an external drive?


-- David Lubkin.




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 18:52:33 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:52:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] PROG: Alan's APEX
In-Reply-To: <3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031220185233.49737.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Alan Eliasen <eliasen at mindspring.com> wrote:
> 
>    By the way, for those who bemoan Windows' lack of any useful
> programming utilities, system tools, file manipulation tools, shells,
> postscript processors, printing utilities, graphing utilities, text
> editors, etc., I've put together a pretty solid, mature CD of tools,
> called "The APE" (Alan's Programming Environment).  
snip... 
>    The description of the tools available is here:
> http://futureboy.homeip.net/ape/
> 
>    Images can be downloaded from here:
> http://futureboy.homeip.net/apezip/

Downloaded the large version, APEX, last night and I must say that it
delivers a full selection of very useful free programs, and they are
all virus free, according to my latest updated McAfee. Good work Alan!

One thing I am wondering, though, Alan, can you give a list of what
programs have potential spyware issues, as a form of buyer beware awareness???

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 18:53:04 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:53:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] PROG: Alan's APEX
In-Reply-To: <3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031220185304.49836.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Alan Eliasen <eliasen at mindspring.com> wrote:
> 
>    By the way, for those who bemoan Windows' lack of any useful
> programming utilities, system tools, file manipulation tools, shells,
> postscript processors, printing utilities, graphing utilities, text
> editors, etc., I've put together a pretty solid, mature CD of tools,
> called "The APE" (Alan's Programming Environment).  
snip... 
>    The description of the tools available is here:
> http://futureboy.homeip.net/ape/
> 
>    Images can be downloaded from here:
> http://futureboy.homeip.net/apezip/

Downloaded the large version, APEX, last night and I must say that it
delivers a full selection of very useful free programs, and they are
all virus free, according to my latest updated McAfee. Good work Alan!

One thing I am wondering, though, Alan, can you give a list of what
programs have potential spyware issues, as a form of buyer beware awareness???

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From eliasen at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 20 19:26:33 2003
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:26:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] PROG: Alan's APEX
In-Reply-To: <20031220185304.49836.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031220185304.49836.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FE4A269.2000701@mindspring.com>


Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Downloaded the large version, APEX, last night and I must say that it
> delivers a full selection of very useful free programs, and they are
> all virus free, according to my latest updated McAfee. Good work Alan!

   Just to note, there is a difference between the APEX and the APE.
The APE contains "installed" programs that can be run directly from the
CD.  The APEX contains the *installers* for those programs, (so you have
to run a bunch of install programs yourself if you want to use them) and
installers for programs that, for some reason or another, cannot or
should not run directly off of a CD (e.g. they need to write some
garbage to the registry during installation, or they write temporary
files to their own directory at runtime.)

   Just so ya know.  For drop-in-and-run portability, the APE's the thing.

> One thing I am wondering, though, Alan, can you give a list of what
> programs have potential spyware issues, as a form of buyer beware awareness???

   I know of no spyware or nags in any of the programs.  They wouldn't
be on there if they did (I have to take this to security-paranoid
clients.)  The only thing that I know of is that Java 1.4.2 (and not
previous versions, I believe) can periodically check to see if there's a
new version of Java available.  It may be turned on by default, if you
actually install Java 1.4.2 on your system (as opposed to just running
it off the APE.)

   You can turn this behavior on and off from the Java Plug-in control
panel (available from the Windows Control Panel.)  I believe the process
jusched.exe will be visible in your task list if this is running.

   "On the day 9 of each month at 6:00 AM, Java Update will check for
updates.  An icon will appear in the system tray if an update is
available.  Move the cursor over the icon to see the status of the
update.  You will be notified before the update is downloaded and before
it is installed."

   Since this is new in 1.4.2, the latest version, I've never seen an
update happen.  In my experience, Sun's on the up-and-up, and I don't
consider this spyware at all, but rather a good way to get timely (?!)
bugfixes.

   For those who missed the original message,

   The description of the tools available is here:
 http://futureboy.homeip.net/ape/

  Images can be downloaded from here:
 http://futureboy.homeip.net/apezip/

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 19:38:06 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 11:38:06 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] PROG: Alan's APEX
In-Reply-To: <3FE4A269.2000701@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031220193806.12955.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Alan Eliasen <eliasen at mindspring.com> wrote:
> 
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > Downloaded the large version, APEX, last night and I must say that
> it
> > delivers a full selection of very useful free programs, and they
> are
> > all virus free, according to my latest updated McAfee. Good work
> Alan!
> 
>    Just to note, there is a difference between the APEX and the APE.
> The APE contains "installed" programs that can be run directly from
> the CD.  

Was wondering if you could create multiple CD images so you could offer
the full complement of programs that are in the APEX, so we can burn
them all to, say, a two or three CD set???

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From alito at organicrobot.com  Sat Dec 20 19:59:08 2003
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 05:59:08 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <20031220104501.GQ21411@leitl.org>
References: <Law9-F106onkhhid3fB0002ffdd@hotmail.com>
	<20031220104501.GQ21411@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <1071950348.1015.2362.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 20:45, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 05:58:00PM -0500, Brian Lee wrote:
> 
> > I just wanted to mention this as the "Windows has to be rebooted once every 
> > n units of time" FUD hasn't been applicable since windows2000 (or maybe 
> > even NT4sp3).
> 
> I guess I'm just a power user. The other people in the office don't reboot
> nearly as often. Whatever I'm doing, it's reproducible. The patcheritis is
> what all current desktop systems have; *BSD as server somewhat less so.
> 
> The instability is hardly a Windows problem, however, you have to design 
> a system properly (e.g., if you have a recent ATI an OpenGL screen blanker
> can lock up your Linux kernel, etc).
> 
Yes, any bad driver can crash a monolithic OS's kawasaki.  Got new
hardware, expect problems (and if you got old bits too, crap hardware
doesn't help).  But it doesn't tend to stay in that state for long. Does
it make OS design a trillion times easier though?  I'm sure it does. 
Look at the state of all desktop microkernels.  
On my side, i haven't had a crash in about a year, and that was playing
with probably (not provably) broken hardware (or at least win2000 on
another machine didn't like it either). (btw, this doesn't mean my
uptime is a year. I reboot on average every couple of months after a
power outage, or to upgrade the kernel)
(ah, yes, this is vanilla 2.4.${MAX(x)} linux, with tainted NVidia
drivers).  I don't miss those wasted couple of minutes terribly much. 
Writing this email probably took more time than all of those reboots
combined.

> I'm disgusted with the engineering aspect of all modern consumer-grade
> systems, whether hardware or software.
> 
>From the point of view of a not-yet-calcified member of the younger
generation (which missed the awesomness of the 70s VMS, and the
everything-has-been-done-in lisp machines) it is going quite well.  DOS
4.0 -> linux-2.4.23 and TRS-80 -> duron 1gig have been up all the way
(as well as every single other aspect of either consumer hardware or
software (graphics card, network speed, storage capacity, monitor
size/quality, content viewers, content writers, content organisers,
content distributors, content availability, programming language
compatibility with brain (not by much, i admit), interfaces (mice,
scanners, sound)). I expect (naively perhaps) for these trends to
continue.

alejandro




From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec 20 19:50:17 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:50:17 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031220132408.038d7008@mail.comcast.net>
References: <008601c3c6bb$aef0b360$5253fea9@sbcglobal.net>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031220132408.038d7008@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <20031220195017.GA32264@leitl.org>

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 01:44:50PM -0500, David Lubkin wrote:

> Has anyone had happy experiences with taking an internal drive, putting it 
> in an enclosure, and using it as an external drive?

Yes. There's a large market for external drive enclosures, both 3.5"
and laptop drives, both IEEE 1394 and USB 1.1/2.0. I wonder why anyone would
be buying a drive smaller than 250 GB, these days, though.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/322e936e/attachment.bin>

From eliasen at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 20 19:55:19 2003
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:55:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>


Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 10:00:34PM -0700, Alan Eliasen wrote:
> 
>>   In Win2K, the shell is actually called cmd.exe.  It's a bit more
>>advanced than command.com; you can have (brain-dead, but better than
>>nothing) file completion and some other features.
> 
> Get cygwin, and your pain will go away. 

   Actually, Cygwin is on the APE.  But it's one of the larger causes of
my pain, when you look at its portability issues.  :)  One of the
biggest problems is the way they do symbolic links--they actually set
the "system" file attribute on each file that's a symbolic link and the
operating system has to see that and act appropriately.  Admittedly,
it's half a Windows problem, but their solution doesn't work for anyone
but themselves.

   Needless to say, there ain't no "system" bit on a CD.  To make this
run off a read-only medium, I have to selectively fix thousands of
symbolic links by actually copying the file (if I fix too many, it's
just wasted space as the same program might be called by 10 names.)

   The fact that the cygwin1.dll file isn't well-versioned and
poorly-licensed makes it difficult to coexist with multiple versions of
cygwin or redistribute anything linked with cygwin.

   It also stinks that mountpoints are crammed into the registry (why?)
and aren't on a per-process basis; it makes it impossible to have
different processes using different versions of cygwin or even different
mount points.  It makes it hard to have two versions of the APE running
well at the same time.  (Actually, everything works *but* cygwin.)

   Cygwin corrupts environment variables, too, (notably any paths) so
you can't switch into a bash shell and switch back out to cmd.exe
without that whole session geting hosed.

   But I'll admit, cygwin is outstanding when you're trying to compile
and run a UN*X-only application under windows.  I'm sure you've seen all
of these problems.

> I'd rather prefer support offered by the Debian team, than you, no offence.
> And I do carry a very useful system around everywhere I go: my iBook.

   Good, because I don't offer support, other than the fact that I'm a
nice guy and I'll answer questions if I can.  :)  I prefer the Debian
team too.  They're smarter than me.

   I certainly prefer Linux to running Windows; it's just that I also
choose to ship product for Windows, and some of the tools I have only
run under Windows, (e.g. packagers for some handheld devices) and most
of my work has made me have to touch Windows at least half the time.
And occasionally I have to drive around and steal cars and shoot people
in Grand Theft Auto III.  :)

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From eliasen at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 20 20:06:32 2003
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 13:06:32 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <3FE4ABC8.201@mindspring.com>


Alan Eliasen wrote:
>    Actually, Cygwin is on the APE.  But it's one of the larger causes of
> my pain, when you look at its portability issues.  :)  One of the
> biggest problems is the way they do symbolic links--they actually set
> the "system" file attribute on each file that's a symbolic link and the
> operating system has to see that and act appropriately.

   Clarification--it's not the operating system but *every application*
that has to understand the "system" attribute trick.  That's why other
applications can't even share files in the cygwin tree reliably.

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From joe at barrera.org  Sat Dec 20 20:29:20 2003
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:29:20 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <3FE4B120.4020904@barrera.org>

Alan Eliasen wrote:

>   The fact that the cygwin1.dll file isn't well-versioned and
>poorly-licensed makes it difficult to coexist with multiple versions of
>cygwin or redistribute anything linked with cygwin.
>
>   It also stinks that mountpoints are crammed into the registry (why?)
>and aren't on a per-process basis; it makes it impossible to have
>different processes using different versions of cygwin or even different
>mount points.  It makes it hard to have two versions of the APE running
>well at the same time.  (Actually, everything works *but* cygwin.)
>  
>

God, more cygwin lovers/victims out there!

I maintain a product that uses an embedded postgres database, and which 
allows
side by side installs of different versions, each with its own postgres 
database.
Which means multiple embedded installations of cygwin. What a nightmare.

Can't wait until postgres runs on win32 w/o cygwin... coming RSN
except that the postgres_win32 team is still figuring out how to natively
emulate signals on win32. Aghh.

- Joe



From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec 20 20:39:28 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:39:28 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 12:55:19PM -0700, Alan Eliasen wrote:
> 
>    Actually, Cygwin is on the APE.  But it's one of the larger causes of

Good! It's nice to pull the latest version, though, as it is in more or less
vigorous development.

> my pain, when you look at its portability issues.  :)  One of the
> biggest problems is the way they do symbolic links--they actually set
> the "system" file attribute on each file that's a symbolic link and the
> operating system has to see that and act appropriately.  Admittedly,
> it's half a Windows problem, but their solution doesn't work for anyone

It is a Windows problem. Cygwin can't implement real links on a file system
that doesn't support them.

> but themselves.

I agree, cygwin is an ugly hack. However, the host is an even uglier hack,
and you're just glad to find anything to make that pain go away.
 
>    Needless to say, there ain't no "system" bit on a CD.  To make this
> run off a read-only medium, I have to selectively fix thousands of
> symbolic links by actually copying the file (if I fix too many, it's
> just wasted space as the same program might be called by 10 names.)

I have no idea how Knoppix feels on a FAT32 system.
 
>    The fact that the cygwin1.dll file isn't well-versioned and
> poorly-licensed makes it difficult to coexist with multiple versions of
> cygwin or redistribute anything linked with cygwin.

Yes, a standard case of DLL hell. I deal with it (because people pay me for
this pain, but not nearly enough) by building stuff on a consistent box, and
just package cygwin1.dll with the system.
 
>    It also stinks that mountpoints are crammed into the registry (why?)
> and aren't on a per-process basis; it makes it impossible to have
> different processes using different versions of cygwin or even different
> mount points.  It makes it hard to have two versions of the APE running
> well at the same time.  (Actually, everything works *but* cygwin.)

Aargh! Good thing I don't cygwin very often.
 
>    Cygwin corrupts environment variables, too, (notably any paths) so
> you can't switch into a bash shell and switch back out to cmd.exe
> without that whole session geting hosed.

Aargh^2!
 
>    But I'll admit, cygwin is outstanding when you're trying to compile
> and run a UN*X-only application under windows.  I'm sure you've seen all
> of these problems.

Thankfully, not much of these. I tend to avoid them by avoiding to deal with
Redmondware. Thankfully, this is getting easier and easier these days. Though
some customers have still to see the light.
 
> > I'd rather prefer support offered by the Debian team, than you, no offence.
> > And I do carry a very useful system around everywhere I go: my iBook.
> 
>    Good, because I don't offer support, other than the fact that I'm a
> nice guy and I'll answer questions if I can.  :)  I prefer the Debian
> team too.  They're smarter than me.

It is a classical tradeoff. Lemmingware sucks, but no man is an island. I
tend to stick to the systems I can handle. Redhat/Fedora is a tolerable
tradeoff between support and flakiness on the desktop, Debian does it for the
server. I haven't been touching *BSD because I'm trying to get away from IT
altogether, so it doesn't make sense spending time learning something I won't
have to deal with anyway.
 
>    I certainly prefer Linux to running Windows; it's just that I also
> choose to ship product for Windows, and some of the tools I have only
> run under Windows, (e.g. packagers for some handheld devices) and most

Yeah, sometimes I have to shovel manure, too.

> of my work has made me have to touch Windows at least half the time.
> And occasionally I have to drive around and steal cars and shoot people
> in Grand Theft Auto III.  :)

Luckily, I don't game. There's simply no option to Redmond there.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/2a8fa8df/attachment.bin>

From eliasen at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 20 20:48:59 2003
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 13:48:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] PROG: Alan's APEX
In-Reply-To: <20031220193806.12955.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031220193806.12955.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3FE4B5BB.4070105@mindspring.com>


Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Was wondering if you could create multiple CD images so you could offer
> the full complement of programs that are in the APEX, so we can burn
> them all to, say, a two or three CD set???

   I don't want to sound non-responsive, but as I provide the APE and
APEX as a courtesy to my friends, not as a product, I probably won't
spend too much more time on packaging.  I'm not trying to be a jerk
about it, but it already takes up more time and space and bandwidth than
I really should allocate to it, so what's there probably won't change
too much.

   On the other hand, once you have the full, unabridged APE or the APEX
zipfiles, then you can easily extract the files you want and pare them
down and split them into whatever's appropriate for your 650 MB or 700
MB CD-ROM, or DVD-ROM, or 256 MB USB flash memory device, or
business-card-size CD.  People use it all these ways.  I know
downloading the whole monkey isn't at all efficient if you only want
parts of it, but it's more or less the most efficient in terms of my time.

   Sorry!  My customer service is better for real products, really.  :)

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Dec 20 20:50:05 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:50:05 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <20031220182341.11064.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000001c3c724$d4d22dc0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
	<20031220182341.11064.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031220205005.GE32264@leitl.org>

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 10:23:41AM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> I am wondering, since we are dealing with micron sized particles,
> whether you could actually have a sperical cloud rather than a dust
> ring without lots of collisions of particles. I am wondering if

You can't, of course. Spike, don't you know what happens at the poles, where
all orbits intersect?

> electrostatic repulsion would be sufficient at those scales to prevent
> actual collisions and instead replicate a form of brownian motion.
> Theoretically, by living off of solar energy, such particles could
> avoid loss of momentum that such motion would cause.

I don't see how you can actively control particle orbits without using solar
sails (+PV panels as dual use), and this implies pretty big ones. At least
somethign the size of your palm, depending on how it scales a lot bigger.
 
> This would also create an electrostatic bottle effect on solar wind,
> which would help keep the sphere inflated.

You need a fat flux to keep dust motes (cubic micron is too small to package
anything interesting in there) afloat, so you'll get your stuff cooked.

Sorry, no can do, chief. Monolith clouds is more like it, though certainly
far more gossamer.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/ca72c8a1/attachment.bin>

From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Sat Dec 20 20:51:20 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:51:20 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <008601c3c6bb$aef0b360$5253fea9@sbcglobal.net>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031220132408.038d7008@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE13UHtWKrJ7c000120ee@hotmail.com>


> Has anyone had happy experiences with taking an internal drive, putting it
> in an enclosure, and using it as an external drive?
>
I'm running two seagate 7200 rpm 40GB hard drives, both partitioned to 20
GB. C and E are the first drive and D and F are the second. C is just my
system and software, D is a copy of the entire drive. D is all my data, and
it is backed up to F. I use NovaStor backup to do the backing up daily. This
only backs up files that have changed, new files, and deletes files that no
long exist, so they are pretty much exact copies.

I also backup once a week to a DVD RW and then once per month, I switch to a
new DVD RW and save the previous one as it is. The weekly ones go in a fire
safe and the monthly ones in a safe-deposit box. I guess that's all a bit
anal, but in a worse case scenario, my customer data is irreplaceable.

I used to have a 20GB drive in a box that was portable. It was an SCSI
interface and I had pretty good luck with it. I've heard you can now do this
with USB, but I haven;t seen it in action.


From joe at barrera.org  Sat Dec 20 20:56:07 2003
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:56:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
	<20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <3FE4B767.6070401@barrera.org>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

>  Yeah, sometimes I have to shovel manure, too.

Damn it! Every time the opportunity comes up for me to point
out that I really *have* shoveled manure as a job, I realize that
Eugene is there really to win the "worst job ever" contest by pointing
out that he's shoveled real live dead frozen heads, or something.

Sigh.




From xllb at rogers.com  Sat Dec 20 20:59:40 2003
From: xllb at rogers.com (xllb at rogers.com)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:59:40 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] My dad's gun
Message-ID: <20031220205940.KZKC448782.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost>

My earliest, clear memories include guns.  In the early 1950?s my parents settled about 100 kilometers east of the Iguacu Falls on the border of Brazil and Paraguay.

People got around by horseback.  Men carried guns.

We lived in a relatively lawless, rural area.  Dad built our house out of roughly milled wood.  Through half-inch walls, I couldn?t avoid hearing Mom and Dad discussing gun related deaths. 

?You know Dona Isabella?s husband, Senor Manuel.  He was shot in the head last night.  He?s dead.?

Just after dark the day before, we had all heard the shots from down at the bodega, a country store/bar a kilometer away.  The sound, that somehow manages to be sharp and flat all at once, was common enough to be familiar to a five year old.   The gun murders, suicides, accidents and funerals are clearer.  A cycle of vengeance fed on itself.  Guns were the most efficient way to enact it.

My father kept a revolver ready in the kitchen.  Poisonous snakes, tarantulas and scorpions visited regularly but the gun was kept available to scare meter-long lizards.  They killed our chicks and stole eggs.  They were far too quick to hit with any frequency.  The gun served no other purpose.

Ten years later my family had moved north to a massive leper colony in the center of the Amazon jungle.  Two hours boat ride up river was an inland port called Manaus.  There soldiers with guns blended into the crowds.  Back at our site, most households had rifles and/or shotguns.  I owned fifty percent of a 22-caliber rifle before I turned fifteen.  A younger kid accidentally discharged it one night less than two feet from my head.  The bullet landed on my bed.

Snakes were around but ?serpentine? was named after them.  They were a waste of bullets.  Animals of most kinds avoided us.  Tarantulas and such were squashable and most other pests fell foul of a machete chop.

Some of the older kids hunted for fun.  I tried it once.  As I waited quietly, squatting on the jungle floor, a small bird landed five meters above me.  Without thought I shot it.  The silence was immediate.  Then I wept.

Today, watching live CNN video I cringe when reckless men fire handguns, rifles and machine guns into the air.   Isn?t it ironic that those reckless men are celebrating freedom? 




"Dogma blinds."
"Hell is overkill."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reply
Type: multipart/signed
Size: 4707 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/983bffb1/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From xllb at rogers.com  Sat Dec 20 21:03:39 2003
From: xllb at rogers.com (xllb at rogers.com)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:03:39 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] With Respect
Message-ID: <20031220210339.LABX448782.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost>

With respect

The topic on which I just posted stirs emotions on this list to a singular pitch.  With respect I submit that the topic is currently appropriate for this forum. 
 

"Dogma blinds."
"Hell is overkill."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reply
Type: multipart/signed
Size: 4707 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031220/6c3acfc7/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 20 21:27:03 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 13:27:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <20031220205005.GE32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031220212703.30319.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 10:23:41AM -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > 
> > I am wondering, since we are dealing with micron sized particles,
> > whether you could actually have a sperical cloud rather than a dust
> > ring without lots of collisions of particles. I am wondering if
> 
> You can't, of course. Spike, don't you know what happens at the
> poles, where
> all orbits intersect?
> 
> > electrostatic repulsion would be sufficient at those scales to
> prevent
> > actual collisions and instead replicate a form of brownian motion.
> > Theoretically, by living off of solar energy, such particles could
> > avoid loss of momentum that such motion would cause.
> 
> I don't see how you can actively control particle orbits without
> using solar
> sails (+PV panels as dual use), and this implies pretty big ones. At
> least
> somethign the size of your palm, depending on how it scales a lot
> bigger.

Well, lets look at the inner region of the spherical cloud. You have
particles grazing past each other but repelling all the time. Because
they have been in orbit a long time, they have built up significant
charges in their capacitor reservoirs that their computational and
communications systems bleed potential off of for power. 

The computational structures might even be built into the dielectric
compounds of the capacitor structure. The particles are built so that
they maintain a surface charge that is identical to the charge of the
solar wind. This exterior surface electrode doubles as a radio antenna
to broadcast to other picarticles. And the surface also features
regions of tungsten lattices to extract high quanta from solar flux and
drain heat.

Back to the orbital dynamics: in their pseudo-brownian motion, some
particles will repel other particles in vectors that drops them below
orbital velocity. They drop to lower orbits, pick up more solar flux,
and are able to grab passing protons and hurl them onto new vectors at
higher velocities with some of this flux, and rejoin the greater
spherical community.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Dec 20 21:41:27 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:41:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Worst job
In-Reply-To: <3FE4B767.6070401@barrera.org>
References: <20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
	<20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031220162803.02f65048@mail.comcast.net>

At 12:56 PM 12/20/2003 -0800, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:

>>  Yeah, sometimes I have to shovel manure, too.
>
>Damn it! Every time the opportunity comes up for me to point
>out that I really *have* shoveled manure as a job, I realize that
>Eugene is there really to win the "worst job ever" contest by pointing
>out that he's shoveled real live dead frozen heads, or something.

Of all the worst jobs I've had, shovelling out a chicken coop in 110 degree 
weather is on the short list.  At that temperature, it feels like half the 
manure is in a gaseous state above where you are shovelling.

During the Yom Kippur War and the months afterwards before reservists were 
back at their jobs, I had an assortment of volunteer jobs to help out.

Most profound was as an orderly in the ER of an evac hospital, listening to 
the soldiers discuss which of their wounds they would tell their families 
about.

Most unpleasant was garbage crew, standing in hip-waders inside a dump 
truck on the garbage, as we loaded the biological waste from a maternity 
hospital.

The worst job that comes to mind, though, is being one of the Orthodox Jews 
who go to a battlefield collecting body parts for proper burial.


-- David Lubkin.




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Dec 20 22:03:28 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:03:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Worst job
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031220162803.02f65048@mail.comcast.net>
References: <3FE4B767.6070401@barrera.org> <20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
	<20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031220170234.02bc01e8@mail.comcast.net>

At 04:41 PM 12/20/2003 -0500, David Lubkin wrote:

>The worst job that comes to mind, though, is being one of the Orthodox 
>Jews who go to a battlefield collecting body parts for proper burial.

Clarification:  I haven't had this job; it just sounds pretty awful.


-- David Lubkin.




From etheric at comcast.net  Sat Dec 20 22:09:17 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:09:17 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Worst job
References: <20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org><Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com><3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com><20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org><3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com><20031220203928.GB32264@leitl.org>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031220162803.02f65048@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <02fc01c3c745$e96de4b0$0200a8c0@etheric>

Worst Job I ever had is a tie

1: disemboweling thousands of  freshly killed turkeys on an assembly line by
hand, occasionally some bone spurs would project like jagged needles from
broken ribs, jabbing deeply into the back of my hand thus squirting turkey
abdominal fluids under my skin, right through the rubber gloves, day after
day in sweltering heat and humidity.

2: cleaning a city parks latrine, where a supervisor would show up a bit
earlier than I did every day that I worked, fill the toilet with paper and
defecate copiously upon it then flushing it to overflow, forcing me to clean
it up day after day. ( I HAD to have this job..) some people have a strange
sense of humor (working for that city department caused my first impetus
towards libertarianism)


----- Original Message -----
From: "David Lubkin" <extropy at unreasonable.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 1:41 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Worst job


> At 12:56 PM 12/20/2003 -0800, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
>
> >>  Yeah, sometimes I have to shovel manure, too.
> >
> >Damn it! Every time the opportunity comes up for me to point
> >out that I really *have* shoveled manure as a job, I realize that
> >Eugene is there really to win the "worst job ever" contest by pointing
> >out that he's shoveled real live dead frozen heads, or something.
>
> Of all the worst jobs I've had, shovelling out a chicken coop in 110
degree
> weather is on the short list.  At that temperature, it feels like half the
> manure is in a gaseous state above where you are shovelling.
>
> During the Yom Kippur War and the months afterwards before reservists were
> back at their jobs, I had an assortment of volunteer jobs to help out.
>
> Most profound was as an orderly in the ER of an evac hospital, listening
to
> the soldiers discuss which of their wounds they would tell their families
> about.
>
> Most unpleasant was garbage crew, standing in hip-waders inside a dump
> truck on the garbage, as we loaded the biological waste from a maternity
> hospital.
>
> The worst job that comes to mind, though, is being one of the Orthodox
Jews
> who go to a battlefield collecting body parts for proper burial.
>
>
> -- David Lubkin.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From cryofan at mylinuxisp.com  Sat Dec 20 23:07:44 2003
From: cryofan at mylinuxisp.com (randy)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:07:44 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] My dad's gun
In-Reply-To: <20031220205940.KZKC448782.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost>
References: <20031220205940.KZKC448782.fep02-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com@localhost>
Message-ID: <gtk9uv0jv1e4tovnhv5e01gelvqv94stgf@4ax.com>

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:59:40 -0500, you wrote

>Ten years later my family had moved north to a massive leper colony in the center of the Amazon >jungle.  Two hours boat ride up river was an inland port called Manaus.  


You lived near friggin'  **Manaus**? Holy moly.....that is really the
back end of the Wild Place....



>Snakes were around but ?serpentine? was named after them.  They were a waste of bullets.  Animals of >most kinds avoided us.  Tarantulas and such were squashable and most other pests fell foul of a >machete chop.

Hmm.  Now, as a child, I lived in West Texas. My family were sheep
ranchers from way back, so we had several guns.  My dad used a pistol
occasionally to shot rattlesnakes discovered near the house.

We also had a lot of dogs, whose function was in part to serve as
sacrificial snake detectors.  From time to time one would die from
snakebite.


>Some of the older kids hunted for fun.  I tried it once.  As I waited quietly, squatting on the jungle floor, >a small bird landed five meters above me.  Without thought I shot it.  The silence was immediate.  >Then I wept.
>


We mainly shot deer, feral hogs, and an occasional javelina (they
taste ok, if prepared properly).  Also squirrels and rabbits from time
to time. Turkey, too (wild turkey is excellent). Every now and then we
would get a panther (we did not eat those, though I would like to
taste it).


>Today, watching live CNN video I cringe when reckless men fire handguns, rifles and machine guns >into the air.   Isn?t it ironic that those reckless men are celebrating freedom? 

I also find this ritual bizarre.  Oh well, each culture to its own
idiosyncrasies.




-------------



From hal at finney.org  Sat Dec 20 23:53:40 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:53:40 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] I Robot commercial
Message-ID: <200312202353.hBKNrej06254@finney.org>

During the trailers preceding LOTR they showed a fake "commercial"
for the NS-5, "the world's first fully automated domestic assistant".
At first I wasn't sure it was fake, until they flashed up "3 Laws
Safe!" as a selling point.  I cracked up at that, although I was the
only person in the audience to laugh.

Anyway, they finally show a URL of www.irobotnow.com, and I realized
that this was early marketing for the I, Robot movie.  I think it was
A.I. which had an elaborate web based marketing campaign, with lots
of fake web sites about robotics, so maybe these guys are adopting a
similar strategy (odd, since A.I. was considered a flop).

As I recall, I, Robot was actually a short story collection mostly about
the various ways robots could go wrong despite being "three laws safe".
So I imagine the writers have considerable license to build whatever
story they want as long as they use the character and company names from
Asimov's collection.

Hal


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 21 01:38:33 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:38:33 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <20031220205005.GE32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3c763$25a75980$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Eugen Leitl
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
> 
> 
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > 
> > I am wondering, since we are dealing with micron sized particles,
> > whether you could actually have a sperical cloud rather than a dust
> > ring without lots of collisions of particles. I am wondering if
> 
> You can't, of course. Spike, don't you know what happens at 
> the poles, where all orbits intersect?

The orbits need not have a common intersection point.  In fact
the orbits need not intersect at all.  

As a thought experiment, consider the MBrain scenario Robert B. 
and I calculated last time he was here.  You have a number of nodes
orbitting the sun, flat disks a centimeter across and perhaps
100 microns thick.  These could orbit the sun in a number of 
concentric but not coplanar rings, with no two rings having
exactly the same radius.  Imagine each ring consisting 
of nodes spaced about a meter apart.  Inside that ring is another ring
with 1 meter smaller radius, with the orbit plane tilted a
microradian, inside that another ring tilted another microradian,
etc.  From the point of view of any node, the nodes to her right
or left are stationary, whereas the nodes a meter sunward are
passing south to north at a relative velocity of about 6 cm per
second (if I recall correctly) faster than a snail but slower
than a tortoise.  Any inavertent collision need not be a violent
event.  The nodes one meter anti-sunward would be passing
6 cm north to south, and those 2 meters outboard, 12 cm/sec
and so on.  This is a traditional Bradburian MBrain, since
the orbits envelope the star.  

The SJBrain is a related idea:
a mass of nodes that orbits a common center in about a 
minute-diameter sphere an hour out from the star.  It too
would consist of many concentric rings, noncoplanar and
with no two rings having the same diameter. 

> I don't see how you can actively control particle orbits 
> without using solar sails (+PV panels as dual use), and this implies
pretty big 
> ones. At least somethign the size of your palm, depending on how it
scales a 
> lot bigger.

Not necessarily.  The station-keeping ability of a solar
sailing node is not dependent upon its area but rather upon
its thickness.  For a given thickness of material, the
mass and the area (thrust available from light pressure)
scale directly together, or cancel.  If I can make nodes
1000 atoms thick, it doesn't matter if they are a square 
micron or a square millimeter in area, right?

So I am proposing station-keeping in the SJBrain using 
light pressure from the sun, but now I am going on to 
propose that this same trick still works even if the nodes 
are in a roughly spherical region of space an hour from the 
star.  In fact the station-keeping might be easier out there, 
since the forces involved are much smaller.

I am further suggesting that the common-center orbit speed could
be made fairly low, since the resistance to gravitational
collapse of the nodes could be assisted by electromagnetic
repulsion.  But even if it isn't, consider traditional orbit-
mechanics, not assisted by either light pressure or EM forces.
Jupiter's moon Metis (the closest one) orbits about a quarter
of a light second from the CM of Jupiter and goes around in
about .3 days, so an object orbitting 30 light seconds out
would do it in about .3/(.5/30)^1.5= 140 days.  Then as one
goes inboard toward the SJBrain center of mass, the orbit 
tangential velocity actually goes down linearly, assuming no 
central mass.

So no Brownian motion, Mike, no need for chaos, if we know how 
to manipulate matter at the atomic scale.  Those 30-50 billion
atom nodes will figure out where they want to be, then go
there and stay there.

Then of course if you made use of the available light pressure 
and EM forces, the relative velocities of the nodes could be 
made smaller than they would be otherwise, if one should decide
that large relative velocities are undesireable.  I suppose one
could use light and EM forces to *increase* relative velocities
of the nodes too, should Robert or someone explain a reason
why such a thing would be desireable.

Robert and other nano-groksters, how do we balance the desireability
of more nodes vs larger nodes?  What kinds of energies do you 
suppose we would need to run the kinds of calculation that would
be done on those nodes, and what kinds of distance-related
latencies could we tolerate?  I suppose it depends on what it
is we want the SJBrain to do.  Certain tasks, such as searching
for record primes, would favor fewer, farther spaced nodes, being
highly tolerant of communications delays between nodes.  But
other tasks need faster communications between nodes.

spike




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 21 02:15:39 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 18:15:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c763$25a75980$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031221021539.70533.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:> 
> So no Brownian motion, Mike, no need for chaos, if we know how 
> to manipulate matter at the atomic scale.  Those 30-50 billion
> atom nodes will figure out where they want to be, then go
> there and stay there.

I find it hard to believe that with a particle density of 6E11 per
cubic meter that there would not be rather regular collisions in sphere.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From jcorb at iol.ie  Sun Dec 21 02:27:45 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 02:27:45 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 3, Issue 29
In-Reply-To: <200312200233.hBK2X7E26048@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031221022702.03201a10@pop.iol.ie>

It would put a whole 'nother meaning to the Blue Screen of Death :)



James...

At 07:33 PM 12/19/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Message: 4
>Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 10:45:11 -0500
> >From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Paul Allen to be fourth Space Power
>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <000e01c3c647$19c64df0$cc01a8c0 at DELLBERT>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Mike Lorrey wrote,
> > This release from Scaled Composites confirms rumors that
> > Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen is the financial backer of
> > the SpaceShipOne project. If Scaled succeeds in winning the
> > x-prize, this will make Paul Allen the fourth economic power
> > in the world to gain independent manned space launch
> > capability. IMHO this absolves Microsoft of all, or maybe
> > just most, of all the evil things it has done...
>
>I hope it crashes less than Windows....  :-)
>
>But seriously, I told my partner about the SpaceShipOne project.  He thought
>it sounded exciting.  He said he regretted not being younger and having a
>healthy ticker so he could actually become involved with something like
>this.  This was the first interest he has shown in anything extropian I have
>been interested in.  This is real pioneering in his mind.  He has little
>interest in cryonics, immortality, uploading, AIs, etc.  But getting into
>space by private citizens (non-government) sounded interesting and plausible
>to him.
>
>--
>Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
>Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
>NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
><HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------




From thespike at earthlink.net  Sun Dec 21 02:23:01 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:23:01 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] I Robot commercial
References: <200312202353.hBKNrej06254@finney.org>
Message-ID: <026a01c3c769$5d55bf60$ef994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 5:53 PM

> During the trailers preceding LOTR they showed a fake "commercial"
> for the NS-5, "the world's first fully automated domestic assistant".
> At first I wasn't sure it was fake, until they flashed up "3 Laws
> Safe!" as a selling point. 

> As I recall, I, Robot was actually a short story collection mostly about
> the various ways robots could go wrong despite being "three laws safe".

Quite. That would be irony. (In American cinemas? Strange, I know.)

Damien Broderick



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Dec 21 02:42:07 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:42:07 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] I Robot commercial
References: <200312202353.hBKNrej06254@finney.org>
	<026a01c3c769$5d55bf60$ef994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <00a301c3c76c$07534940$cfcd5cd1@neptune>

On Saturday, December 20, 2003 9:23 PM Damien Broderick
thespike at earthlink.net wrote:
>> As I recall, I, Robot was actually a short story
>> collection mostly about the various ways
>> robots could go wrong despite being "three
>> laws safe".
>
> Quite.

Indeed!  In my opinion, some of the most boring pieces of science
fiction ever written.  But let me not speak badly of the dead!  Asimov
wrote some wonderful nonfiction.

> That would be irony. (In American
> cinemas? Strange, I know.)

It happens, though usually when it's an import.:)

Cheers!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From jcorb at iol.ie  Sun Dec 21 03:31:07 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 03:31:07 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <200312202206.hBKM6LE25048@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031221032647.031d6410@pop.iol.ie>

Personally, my problem is with the stuff I run in the background, such as 
Folding at Home, Think and Prime95.  They seem to suck up quite a bit of 
resources.  I'd move to Win2K, but only if Age of Empires will still work :)

I use Win2K in work on a notebook.  I leave it in Standby at the end of the 
day and rarely need to reboot it.  Plus I can open heaps of items with no 
crashing.

BTW, anyone know a good program that can do scheduled, unsupervised, 
incremental backups from one disk drive to another in Win98/2K?



James...

At 03:06 PM 12/20/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Message: 6
>Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 10:27:45 -0800 (PST)
> >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <20031220182745.98641.qmail at web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > How complex is that software? If it's simple, there's a good chance
> > that
> > > will run under Wine (a windows emulator for Linux), or some other
> > > emulator/Virtual PC.
> > It's pretty complex. It uses the SQL server thingy to do part of it's
> > job,
> > some other kinds of microsoft datasources whatever they are, and it
> > just
> > gets worse from there.
>
>I have also noticed that win98 has difficulty if you are using more
>than one ODBC driver at a time. Suggest you look into this.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
>"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
>Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
>Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com




From jcorb at iol.ie  Sun Dec 21 03:46:09 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 03:46:09 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Worst job
In-Reply-To: <200312202206.hBKM6LE25048@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031221034214.031d9aa0@pop.iol.ie>

At 03:06 PM 12/20/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Message: 27
>Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 14:09:17 -0800
> >From: "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Worst job
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <02fc01c3c745$e96de4b0$0200a8c0 at etheric>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Worst Job I ever had is a tie
>
>1: disemboweling thousands of  freshly killed turkeys on an assembly line by
>hand, occasionally some bone spurs would project like jagged needles from
>broken ribs, jabbing deeply into the back of my hand thus squirting turkey
>abdominal fluids under my skin, right through the rubber gloves, day after
>day in sweltering heat and humidity.
>
>2: cleaning a city parks latrine, where a supervisor would show up a bit
>earlier than I did every day that I worked, fill the toilet with paper and
>defecate copiously upon it then flushing it to overflow, forcing me to clean
>it up day after day. ( I HAD to have this job..) some people have a strange
>sense of humor (working for that city department caused my first impetus
>towards libertarianism)

Sounds nasty, and you didn't even get to meet George Michael.

Can't say that I've had a worst job really, just boring ones.  Some office 
cleaning work.  Worked with my Father, he made driveway gates, aluminium 
castings, security grilles, ornate lamps etc..  Basically anything you 
could fabricate from steel.  Interesting if dirty work, but he's a hard man 
to work for.  Short temper, runs in the family.

BTW, did you ever devise a way to get him out of his little "joke"?  Like 
bagging it all up and dispensing it on the bathroom floor in his home? :)



James...



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 21 03:48:02 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:48:02 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <20031221021539.70533.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000601c3c775$3bfc08e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> --- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:> 
> > So no Brownian motion, Mike, no need for chaos, if we know how 
> > to manipulate matter at the atomic scale.  Those 30-50 billion
> > atom nodes will figure out where they want to be, then go
> > there and stay there.
> 
> I find it hard to believe that with a particle density of 6E11 per
> cubic meter that there would not be rather regular collisions 
> in sphere.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey

Stretch thy imagination young man.  {8-]  If every node had
a slight positive charge, the nodes would repel each other.
The repulsion force would increase as the inverse square of
the distance between em.  spike



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 21 05:13:52 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 21:13:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000601c3c775$3bfc08e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031221051352.11216.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > --- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:> 
> > > So no Brownian motion, Mike, no need for chaos, if we know how 
> > > to manipulate matter at the atomic scale.  Those 30-50 billion
> > > atom nodes will figure out where they want to be, then go
> > > there and stay there.
> > 
> > I find it hard to believe that with a particle density of 6E11 per
> > cubic meter that there would not be rather regular collisions 
> > in sphere.
> > 
> > =====
> > Mike Lorrey
> 
> Stretch thy imagination young man.  {8-]  If every node had
> a slight positive charge, the nodes would repel each other.
> The repulsion force would increase as the inverse square of
> the distance between em.  

Well, that was what I was getting at in my post. I thought you were
saying that this electrostatic repulsion would not be needed???

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 21 08:19:57 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 00:19:57 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <20031221051352.11216.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3c79b$388a4570$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Well, that was what I was getting at in my post. I thought you were
> saying that this electrostatic repulsion would not be needed???
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey

Oh ok I catch.  

It could be the best way is a combination of concentric orbits 
and charge control to avoid collisions and so forth.  Robert's 
original idea does not absolutely require charge control, but 
the idea is growing on me.  If we had an SJBrain, the space in
which the Jupiter mass of nodes resides is much smaller
than the space occupied by a true Jupiter-MBrain, half a
cubic light minute as opposed to Robert's 250,000 cubic
light minutes.  The notion of collision control in an SJBrain
is more difficult.  

I still want to figure out a way to estimate optimal node
size in general.  If we assume von Neumann architecture and
one transistor for every 50 atoms (which includes interconnect),
a total mass of one Jupiter to work with, how do we decide
if we want picogram nodes or big microgram nodes?

The B-man needs to weigh in on this question.

spike



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Dec 21 10:15:25 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:15:25 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000601c3c775$3bfc08e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <20031221021539.70533.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
	<000601c3c775$3bfc08e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031221101525.GL32264@leitl.org>

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 07:48:02PM -0800, Spike wrote:

> Stretch thy imagination young man.  {8-]  If every node had
> a slight positive charge, the nodes would repel each other.
> The repulsion force would increase as the inverse square of
> the distance between em.  spike

Are you trying to prevent polar collisions via electrostatic potential?
At few km/s orbital velocities? This is broken at so many levels I have
troubles to begin.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031221/d50d7c36/attachment.bin>

From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Sun Dec 21 12:59:55 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 13:59:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] I Robot commercial
In-Reply-To: <026a01c3c769$5d55bf60$ef994a43@texas.net>
References: <200312202353.hBKNrej06254@finney.org>
	<026a01c3c769$5d55bf60$ef994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3FE5994B.7060907@mail.tele.dk>

Damien Broderick wrote:


>>During the trailers preceding LOTR they showed a fake "commercial"
>>for the NS-5, "the world's first fully automated domestic assistant".
>>At first I wasn't sure it was fake, until they flashed up "3 Laws
>>Safe!" as a selling point. 
> 
>>As I recall, I, Robot was actually a short story collection mostly about
>>the various ways robots could go wrong despite being "three laws safe".
> 
> Quite. That would be irony. (In American cinemas? Strange, I know.)


I Robot was among my first encounters with Sci-fi. Actually there was 
not a lot of translated sci-fi here in the DK. Asimov was one of the few 
translated authors I could get my hand on.

And I absolutely loved it adn re-read it a bunch of times!

Later on Asimov expanded the storyline with the "Steel Caves" series.

He also had the "Foundation" series, and in the end bothe series got 
connected in a very clever way. I loved that series too.

Well that was before cyberpunk came and changed my view on sci-fi.


R. Daneel Olivaw, the robot from the steel caves lives for a long time, 
and is a good example of a proto Post-human -robot.
http://homepage.mac.com/jhjenkins/Asimov/Books/Book011.html


A few days ago I saw a "sort of" movie adaptation of "I robot" 
Bicentennial Man (1999) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0182789/

It has Robin Williams as the robot, and the first part of it i thorougly 
enjoyed. But in the end he wanted to become human and die togther with 
his human wife. As if being human is the only thing to strive for.

So I couldn't disagree more with the morale of the story. Actually I got 
so disgusted that I stopped watching right there.

A robot that spent the entire movie trying to become more human, get 
stronger feeling, sensations etc., and when he finally does become human 
like, he comits suicide. Doh!

To bad.

I hope that "I Robot" will be better.


regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark



From support at imminst.org  Sun Dec 21 14:28:13 2003
From: support at imminst.org (support at imminst.org)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 08:28:13 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update - Chat: Max More
Message-ID: <3fe5adfd55add@imminst.org>

ImmInst Update


CHAT: Max More, Extropy & Physical Immortality
***********************
Extropy Institute co-founder chats with ImmInst 
about Extropian concepts and the possibly of human 
physical immortality
CHAT TIME: Sunday - Dec 21 @ 8pm Eastern
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=62&t=431&s=



Society of Venturism - David Pizer 
***********************
Former Alcor Vice President, current owner of the 
Creekside Preserve/Ventureville, David Pizer graciously 
grants ImmInst an interview concerning physical 
immortality, cryonics and Venturism. 
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=67&t=2717&st=0#entry21173



Martin Reese - ImmInst Interview
***********************
Author of "Our Final Hour", Professor of Astronomy 
and Cosmology and (from 2004) Master of Trinity 
College at the University of Cambridge, Martin Reese 
answers questions about the prospect of physical 
immortality. 
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=2699&hl=&s=



Support ImmInst - Full Members = 58
***********************
Receive a free copy of ?Physical Immortality?
magazine and a free copy of James Halperin's
best selling book "The First Immortal"

Join Now: http://imminst.org/index_join.php




To be removed from all of our mailing lists, click here:
http://www.imminst.org/archive/mailinglists/mailinglists.php?p=mlist&rem=extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org


From iph1954 at msn.com  Sun Dec 21 15:37:15 2003
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:37:15 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Christians on Nano
Message-ID: <BAY5-F8GNkY5TetpIuP00005091@hotmail.com>

Christianity Today magazine has two new articles involving a look from a 
Christian perspective at the promises and perils of nanotechnology and the 
ethical dimensions of its use with respect to the possibility of enhancing 
our minds and bodies.

One is a short essay ,"The Techno Sapiens Are Coming", by C. Christopher 
Hook, director of bioethics education for the Mayo Graduate School of 
Medicine, and chairman of the Mayo Clinical Ethics Council.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/001/1.36.html

The other is an interview with bioethicist C. Ben Mitchel, a member of The 
Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity and an assistant professor of 
bioethics and contemporary culture at Trinity International University.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/001/2.42.html

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of slow downloads? Compare online deals from your local high-speed 
providers now.  https://broadband.msn.com



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Dec 21 15:37:25 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 07:37:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c763$25a75980$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312210702230.28747-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> Not necessarily.  The station-keeping ability of a solar
> sailing node is not dependent upon its area but rather upon
> its thickness.  For a given thickness of material, the
> mass and the area (thrust available from light pressure)
> scale directly together, or cancel.  If I can make nodes
> 1000 atoms thick, it doesn't matter if they are a square
> micron or a square millimeter in area, right?

Hmmm... this raises some interesting -- are you intending to
harvest the PV energy and use it to power your micronodes?
This raises the questions of whether you can vary the photon
absorption v. reflectivity ratio and whether you can have
directional heat emission out the backside?  If one imagines
an arrangement of TI micromirror like frontside and backside
architectures things get interesting.  On the frontside
you have one side of the micro-planar device(s) be reflective
(functioning as a solar sail) and the other side of the
micro-planar device(s) be absorptive (functioning as a
solar cell).  Obviously if one can vary the angle and
number and location of absorptive v. reflective devices one has
some interesting attitude control v. power consumption
capabilities and tradeoffs.

Then on the back side, the best heat radiator would be
a planar surface that radiates omnidirectionally -- but
with an micro-planar array of radiators one presumably
can tilt them to preferentially radiate in a specific
direction.  Probably isn't as efficient as the reflective
capabilities of the frontside array but you have to dump
the heat someplace anyway -- why not use it for navigational
purposes?

I would guess the optimization of power intake, attitude
control and heat radiation efficiency is going to be
reasonably complex and highly dependent on the computational
and communications architecture (nobody has discussed
what kind of effect inter-node photons for communications
purposes might have...).

However, Spike/Mike/Eugen -- I suspect that to cram this
much hardware into a node (micro-mirror type arrays,
nanocomputer, communicatiosns capabilities) even using
nanotech is going to result in something slightly larger
than "dust".  It may however be much smaller than the
architecture for MBrains.  That assumed 100,000 W
Drexlerian 1 cm^3 nanocomputers for the greatest computational
density per node.  And one needs rather large solar arrays
to collect 100,000 W.  An JBrain on the other hand tended
to be optimized for greatest internode communications
capacity.  An SJBrain seems to fall someplace in between.

In terms of distribution of ones mind/copies in an MBrain
architecture each node has the capacity of perhaps a
million human minds.  In a SJBrain I doubt the nodal
capacity is that high.  You may have to distribute your
mind over a number of nodes within the same orbital
ring.  Its going to make for interesting social structures.
You can of course always talk to your nearest neighbors
within your orbital ring and they can talk to their
neighbors and so forth.  Communications delays go
up depending on the number of hops.  But things
get more interesting if you want to talk to an
individual orbital rings inward or orbital rings
outward from your current position.  The highest
bandwidth/minimal delay time seems only likely to
take place when the individuals have orbited to
within their nearest distance to each other (kind of
like scientists on Earth sending probes to Mars every
few years taking advantage of when the trip will be
fastest).  Otherwise you have to transmit the data
to the nearest inward or outward node, it has
to go around that orbital ring, the reply comes
back around that orbital ring and then probably
gets communicated back to you by a different node
within that orbital ring.  But that is slower because
all of the nodes are handling a certain amount of
non-self traffic.

Obviously ones greatest bandwidth will be to nearby
individuals within ones on ring.  And so it is likely
that they will form the most powerful multi-minds.

Robert




From mark at permanentend.org  Sun Dec 21 17:03:00 2003
From: mark at permanentend.org (Mark Walker)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 12:03:00 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <002d01c3c7e4$4b33e930$2ee4f418@markcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Hanson"
Probably
> the biggest way in which our minds have been misled, relative to the
> ancient problems they were designed to solve, is whatever it is that
causes
> the demographic transition, causing rich societies to have far fewer
> children than evolution could possibly have "intended."  I wish we
> understood this better; it might give us a better clue about the other
> problems.
>
>
I'm not sure I understand the problem you are alluding to here Robin. If I
understand the question then I wonder why the "simple" answer is not
correct. If you'll forgive the teleological talk, evolution "wants" us to
have as many viable offspring as possible. Until very recently evolution was
able to achieve this "desired" end by us wanting to have sex and wanting to
raise our own children. Evolution never had to "worry" about us not wanting
children but now with birth control this is possible. The point then is that
wanting to raise our own children is conceptually and causally distinct from
wanting children. Evolution never had to deal with the midpoint in the
causal chain between having sex and wanting to raise our own children. So if
this is correct then what would be more surprising is if rich societies
never acted on their desire for sex, or if when children were on the way
many parents in rich societies gave them up for adoption. In terms of
maximizing one's viable progeny giving up as many children for adoption
might make the most evolutionary sense. This would allow one to focus one's
energies on reproducing rather than squandering them on breast feeding,
midnight diaper changes and other physically and emotionally draining
activities.


Cheers,

Mark
Mark Walker, PhD
Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
University of Toronto
Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
15 Devonshire Place
Toronto
M5S 1H8
www.permanentend.org





From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 21 17:29:44 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:29:44 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
References: <20031220030353.71905.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <02d801c3c7e8$05dd38b0$9cb26bd5@artemis>


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: The Avantguardian 
  To: ExI chat list 
  Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 3:03 AM
  Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem


  Yeah, if just any copy of the Koran is that sacred and absolute, all people in the US and Israel would have to do to protect themselves against terrorist bombings would be to put copies of the Koran in planes, buildings, and on busses. Of course this assumes that terrorism is an islamic religious phenomenon, which despite the claims of its practitioners, it isn't.  


  Which reminds me of something someone posted in a NG to illustrate what morons Moslems were.
  The poster was laughing at their assertion that the 'final days' will be known to the faithful by several signs. A couple of which is that pots and pans, and even bootlaces, will begin to talk.

  Needless to say, it wasn't a tech forum, but I did point out the irony involved in such ignorance.

  Dirk

  The Consensus:-
  The political party for the new millennium
  http://www.theconsensus.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031221/6da13232/attachment.html>

From naddy at mips.inka.de  Sun Dec 21 17:36:41 2003
From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:36:41 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [extropy-chat] What ever became of Crit?
Message-ID: <bs4ln9$1a35$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>

Speaking of improving computers, what ever became of Ka-Ping Yee
(Foresight)'s Crit?  The remaining references on the Web suggest
that it never arrived in the 21st century.

Are there any other Web annotation system out there?

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy at mips.inka.de


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 21 17:46:43 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 09:46:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
In-Reply-To: <02d801c3c7e8$05dd38b0$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031221174643.59460.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>   Which reminds me of something someone posted in a NG to illustrate
> what morons Moslems were.
>   The poster was laughing at their assertion that the 'final days'
> will be known to the faithful by several signs. A couple of which is
> that pots and pans, and even bootlaces, will begin to talk.
> 
>   Needless to say, it wasn't a tech forum, but I did point out the
> irony involved in such ignorance.

I wouldn't describe it as ignorance, I would describe it as a
characterization of the sorts of communications media that oppressed
political opposition might resort to in a world where all high
technology media, and even mid and low tech like printed words are
compromised by big brother oversight. 

American POWs have, in many conflicts, developed communications systems
using tapping on metal objects: pots, pipes, bars, etc. to spread
information under their guards noses. If every neighborhood has a few
families that are in subversive cells, then they could spread alarms by
morse code type signals on pots and pans, and intelligence could be
shared by knot coding on boot laces.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From rhanson at gmu.edu  Sun Dec 21 17:51:14 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 12:51:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <002d01c3c7e4$4b33e930$2ee4f418@markcomputer>
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031221124459.0207eef0@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/21/2003, Mark Walker wrote:
> > Probably the biggest
> > way in which our minds have been misled, relative to the ancient
> > problems they were designed to solve, is whatever it is that causes
> > the demographic transition, causing rich societies to have far fewer
> > children than evolution could possibly have "intended."  I wish we
> > understood this better; it might give us a better clue about the other
> > problems.
>
>... I wonder why the "simple" answer is not correct. ... evolution "wants"
>us to have as many viable offspring as possible. Until very recently
>evolution was able to achieve this "desired" end by us wanting to have sex
>and wanting to raise our own children. Evolution never had to "worry" about
>us not wanting children but now with birth control this is possible. ...

The demographic transition is the phenomena whereby the birthrate falls
dramatically when nations get richer.  This phenomena is *not* driven
primarily by birth control.  It happened before birth control, and poor
nations now have high birth rates after cheap birth control.  Also any of
you who have ever been around a woman whose biological clock went "bing"
will know that we often have strong desires for children, not just sex.



Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Dec 21 18:05:46 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:05:46 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] What ever became of Crit?
In-Reply-To: <bs4ln9$1a35$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
References: <bs4ln9$1a35$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
Message-ID: <20031221180546.GS32264@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 05:36:41PM +0000, Christian Weisgerber wrote:

> Are there any other Web annotation system out there?

The web is dead, it's just it doesn't know it yet. Unfortunately, it's
successor (a distributed persistent cryptographic storage and publishing
infrastructure) hasn't been invented yet.

We can't take crit there, so we better make sure this coming infrastructure
will support annotation.

What is your suggestion to mapping this into URI namespace? Simply prefixing a
document cryptohash doesn't quite do. An annotated document hashes to some
other value entirely.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031221/dd97d94a/attachment.bin>

From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Dec 21 18:07:40 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:07:40 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
References: <20031221174643.59460.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <03ba01c3c7ed$528d14a0$9cb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 5:46 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem


>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >   Which reminds me of something someone posted in a NG to illustrate
> > what morons Moslems were.
> >   The poster was laughing at their assertion that the 'final days'
> > will be known to the faithful by several signs. A couple of which is
> > that pots and pans, and even bootlaces, will begin to talk.
> >
> >   Needless to say, it wasn't a tech forum, but I did point out the
> > irony involved in such ignorance.
>
> I wouldn't describe it as ignorance, I would describe it as a
> characterization of the sorts of communications media that oppressed
> political opposition might resort to in a world where all high
> technology media, and even mid and low tech like printed words are
> compromised by big brother oversight.
>
> American POWs have, in many conflicts, developed communications systems
> using tapping on metal objects: pots, pipes, bars, etc. to spread
> information under their guards noses. If every neighborhood has a few
> families that are in subversive cells, then they could spread alarms by
> morse code type signals on pots and pans, and intelligence could be
> shared by knot coding on boot laces.

That's not what I was referring to.
I was thinking about intelligence being built into just about every
appliance, including speech o/p.
Not to mention RFID and web enabled kitchenware.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Dec 21 18:18:14 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:18:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] What ever became of Crit?
In-Reply-To: <20031221180546.GS32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031221181814.42432.qmail@web80402.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 05:36:41PM +0000, Christian
> Weisgerber wrote:
> > Are there any other Web annotation system out
> there?
> 
> The web is dead, it's just it doesn't know it yet.
> Unfortunately, it's
> successor (a distributed persistent cryptographic
> storage and publishing
> infrastructure) hasn't been invented yet.

Ha, and ha again.  The Web will remain alive until
something better comes along to replace it.

> We can't take crit there,

If so, Crit is non-viable.

I suspect that Crit-like systems tend to fall prey to
the downside of the network effect.  That is, systems
like these become useful roughly with the square of
the number of users using them - which means that they
are not very useful at all if there are only a few
users!  This is the same thing that doomed a number of
the dot-bombs: the idea might be good and useful if
you have a lot of users, but without a way to get said
many users that does not, as a prerequisite, require
already having a lot of users (and/or the utility that
only comes after you have many users), the dreamt of
value never comes to pass.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Dec 21 18:25:16 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:25:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a frightfully difficult sacred problem
In-Reply-To: <03ba01c3c7ed$528d14a0$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031221182516.95614.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> That's not what I was referring to.
> I was thinking about intelligence being built into
> just about every
> appliance, including speech o/p.
> Not to mention RFID and web enabled kitchenware.

But consider how they will be used.  The more points
of communication there are, the easier it is for
desparate and talented subversives to find one that's
not being monitored - and, some fear, the more those
in power will see this potential and strive ever more
fiercely to clamp down on said communications, with
"unintended" side effects not unlike we are seeing
with the anti-terrorist hysteria among America's
lawmakers over the past two years.

But what this does not take into account is the effect
of an entire culture that preserves freedom as a
fundamental virtue.  Perhaps those who wrote the
sacred texts did not anticipate it, or perhaps they
thought it impossible - those in power would never
allow such a thing to flourish.  Or perhaps they
bought the argument that, left to their own devices,
the unenlightened commoners would bring themselves to
ruin.  They saw widespread enlightenment as a possible
cure for that, and so do we - but a different sort of
enlightenment.  We don't rely on fables and untruths,
nor do we claim to know everything.


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Dec 21 18:48:11 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:48:11 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <20031221101525.GL32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3c7f2$fbf534f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Eugen Leitl

> 
> Are you trying to prevent polar collisions via electrostatic 
> potential? At few km/s orbital velocities? This is broken at so many 
> levels I have troubles to begin.
> 
> -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>

No.  I had in mind prevention of collision between particles
with relative velocities of a few cm/sec.  Actually charge control
is not so much prevention of collision but a useful tool in
maintaining spacing between nodes in the same orbit.   The 
collisions aren't the problem, this being a trivial matter with 
picogram particles.  The problem I am trying to avoid is having 
them stick together because of van der Waal's forces.

The particles with velocity vectors differing by km/sec are
nowhere near each other.  In the previously-mentioned MBrain
example, the nodes are spaced a meter apart in concentric
rings, each ring a meter apart in radius and tilted a microradian.
So if one goes 1,570,000 meters sunward, the ring is tilted
pi/2 from the original ring.  If one goes 3,140,000 meters
sunward or anti-sunward, the ring is coplanar with the particles
travelling in the opposite direction.

In an SBrain, the same trick is used, concentric non-coplanar
rings, but the whole works is a small sphere (a mere 20 billion
meter diamater) orbitting an hour from the star, not enveloping
the star as in the MBrain.  This scheme takes advantage of 
charge control to maintain smaller distances betweeen nodes,
which greatly reduces the amount of energy needed to communicate
between them (recall the inverse square law), as well as reducing 
the time to send signals between nodes.

spike

ps I may need a professional writer such as Damien to explain
what I have in mind.  Damien are you grokking this?  s








From megao at sasktel.net  Sun Dec 21 18:52:43 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 12:52:43 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nature VS Nurture and Cannabis Epigenetics and
 Global Eco/Dietary Epigenomics
Message-ID: <3FE5EBFA.9DA5B20A@sasktel.net>

Q- is it generally agreed that cannabis is particularly responsive to
environmental cues to trigger phenotypic responses.  ex-
male/femal/hermaphroditics VS environmental and chemo stimulation,
phenotypic
size/shape VS region of growth.

Those of you with depth of experience with this pass this around.  Given
the state of science to do marvellous things lately and my interest in
both the plant and human
aspects of this is a relevant topic.

I know that genotypic up-regulation from  the gut is known to happen but
is  very poorly defined in reproducible science work.

Many good examples of genotypic upregulation by dietary influence are on
record.
Ex...........
3: Planta Med. 2003 Aug;69(8):725-32.
Gene expression changes in the human fibroblast induced by Centella
asiatica triterpenoids.

Coldren CD, Hashim P, Ali JM, Oh SK, Sinskey AJ, Rha C.

Malaysia-MIT Biotechnology Partnership Program, Cambridge, MA, USA.

The molecular pathways underlying the diverse biological activity of the
triterpeniod
compounds isolated from the tropical medicinal plant Centella asiatica
were studied with  gene microarrays and real-time reverse transcription
polymerase chain reaction (real-time RT-PCR) to quantify the expression
of 1053 human genes in human fibroblasts.   Fibroblast cells grown in
culture were used as a model system to evaluate the  stimulation of
wound healing by titrated extract from Centella asiatica (TECA) as well
as by the four principal triterpenoid components of Centella. TECA
treatment effects the expression of genes involved in angiogenesis and
the remodeling of extracellular matrix, as well as diverse growth factor
genes. The extent of expression change of TNFAIP6, an extracellular
hyaluronan binding protein, was found to be largely dose-dependent, to
respond most strongly to the free acids asiatic acid and madecassic
acid, and to  increase in expression over 48 hours of treatment. These
results show that Centella triterpenes evoke a gene-expression response
consistent with their prevailing medical uses in the treatment of
connective tissue disorders such as wound healing and  microangiopathy.
The identification of genes modulated by these compounds provides the
basis for a molecular understanding of Centella's bioactivity, and
opportunities for the quantitative correlation of this activity with
clinical effectiveness at a molecular level.

                                              PMID: 14531023 [PubMed -
in process]

********************************************************

Humans are now confronted by "proofs"  that  you are a carefully
balanced combination of genetics and modulation of gene expression by
the  diet and environment starting at the moment of conception or
possibly even  from your ancestors via the transmission of mitochondria
Wholus-bolus  and MHC genes piecemeal  for quite a number of past
generations.

This is fascinating stuff to me , considering my unique chemical
experimentation with nutritional and novel chemicals such as levamisole,
mega Vitamin E (10,000 units/day X 2 years) and DMSO myself between 1973
and the conception of our children in 1981, 84 and 87.

The world with 6+ billion has a massive number of unique
environmental/nutritional  clusters which might someday yield clues as
to how to live longer , healthier lives.
The globalization of diet (McDonald's at every streetcorner worldwide)
might be reducing our global bio-diversity epigenomic pool?

"Pharmer Mo"



From megao at sasktel.net  Sun Dec 21 18:53:56 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 12:53:56 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Epignomics/epigenetics- Nature Vs Nurture re-visited]
Message-ID: <3FE5EC43.607449A9@sasktel.net>


-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." <megao at sasktel.net>
Subject: [MedPot-discuss] Epignomics/epigenetics- Nature Vs Nurture re-visited
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:30:35 -0600
Size: 10315
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031221/9b05a513/attachment.mht>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 21 19:01:25 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:01:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031221124459.0207eef0@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <20031221190125.2436.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Robin Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:
> 
> The demographic transition is the phenomena whereby the birthrate
> falls dramatically when nations get richer.  This phenomena is
> *not* driven primarily by birth control.  It happened before birth
> control, and poor nations now have high birth rates after cheap
> birth control.  Also any of you who have ever been around a woman
> whose biological clock went "bing" will know that we often have
> strong desires for children, not just sex.

The transition is generally a function of women's level of education.
Not literacy, but comprehensive education. A society of women only
literate enough to read the bible or the quran are not educated enough
(or free enough) to appreciate all the choices they should be free to
make, including reproductive choices.
However there is a measurable downturn when enough women understand
that:
a) they are not property
b) god does not make their babies, they make their babies
c) they can choose to not make babies
and the state chooses to back them up.


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From thespike at earthlink.net  Sun Dec 21 21:22:31 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 15:22:31 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution and adoption
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>
	<002d01c3c7e4$4b33e930$2ee4f418@markcomputer>
Message-ID: <00de01c3c808$8d296620$b0994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Walker" <mark at permanentend.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 11:03 AM

> what would be more surprising is if rich societies
> never acted on their desire for sex, or if when children were on the way
> many parents in rich societies gave them up for adoption. In terms of
> maximizing one's viable progeny giving up as many children for adoption
> might make the most evolutionary sense. This would allow one to focus
one's
> energies on reproducing rather than squandering them on breast feeding,
> midnight diaper changes and other physically and emotionally draining
> activities.

I'm not sure how tongue in cheek this is, Mark. What's you've described is,
after all, exactly what wealthy people did in the 19th and early 20th, and
indeed perhaps all the way back to the invention of hierachical power
culture. Wet nurses, nannies, private tutors, boarding schools or their
harsh equivalent; all these allowed the luckless wives of the rich to
produce one child rapidly after another, many of them doomed to perish,
without wasting time and effort on emotional support, bonding, etc--and the
wonderful result was that these warped kids proved just the right stuff for
going out and building empires, thus perpetuating the process. Until it
stopped working. And now nations like the UK struggle to deal with the
legacy bullshit embedded in the culture.

Damien Broderick



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Dec 21 21:42:08 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 13:42:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c79b$388a4570$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211326390.4164-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> If we had an SJBrain, the space in
> which the Jupiter mass of nodes resides is much smaller
> than the space occupied by a true Jupiter-MBrain, half a
> cubic light minute

Either I still don't understand this picture Spike or there is
something wrong with your calculations or Anders.

Anders' Jupiter Brain (Zeus) has a radius of ~9000 km (~1.5
Earth masses) and mass of ~10^25 kg (~1.8 Earth masses).
Its probably going to require much of the carbon (for diamondoid)
that is in the inner planets, the Oort cloud and a good chunk
of Uranus, Neptune and some of the larger moons.  If he makes
the communication fibers out of silicon he may not have enough
Si in the solar system without star lifting.  On top of that
since he wants to run it at 4K he is going to need a good
amount of helium from the gas giants as well.

> as opposed to Robert's 250,000 cubic light minutes.
> The notion of collision control in an SJBrain
> is more difficult.

You must be pulling these numbers out of the air spike.  I don't
think I ever specified the size of an MBrain.  If my calc's are
right 250,000 culm gives you a radius of 39 light-minutes which is around
the asteroid belt someplace.  Actually if you can avoid the people
on Earth screaming you start building an MBrain way inside the
orbit of Mercury using TiC as the primary material.  As you
dismantle the asteroids and planets (smallest first) it continues
to grow an increasing number of outer layers out of lower temperature
nanomaterials to build the very outermost layers you probably need
quantities of material from multiple brown dwarfs (or have star-lifted
it out of the sun) and you end up with a diameter of several light-years.

Robert




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Sun Dec 21 22:22:36 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Alexander Lee)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:22:36 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org><3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
	<3FE4B120.4020904@barrera.org>
Message-ID: <LAW9-OE38vfhaVL7ku300012561@hotmail.com>

> From: "Joseph S. Barrera III" <joe at barrera.org>
> Can't wait until postgres runs on win32 w/o cygwin... coming RSN
> except that the postgres_win32 team is still figuring out how to natively
> emulate signals on win32. Aghh.


dbExperts (http://www.dbexperts.net) offers a native windows port of
postgresql. They charge around $300 or so. There should be some other
windows postgres available through google.

BAL


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Sun Dec 21 22:26:14 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Alexander Lee)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:26:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031221032647.031d6410@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <Law9-OE52ZCHusMjQHt0001265c@hotmail.com>

Age of Empires (and Age of Myth) runs on w2k pro without any major problems.

BAL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J Corbally" <jcorb at iol.ie>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


> Personally, my problem is with the stuff I run in the background, such as
> Folding at Home, Think and Prime95.  They seem to suck up quite a bit of
> resources.  I'd move to Win2K, but only if Age of Empires will still work
:)


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Sun Dec 21 23:51:02 2003
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (nanogirl at halcyon.com)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:51:02 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Shake, Shake, Shake...
Message-ID: <20995753.1072050662450.JavaMail.gamehost@e-tractions.com>

Dear Extropy List,

Message from Gina aka Nanogirl:
"Happy Holidays!"

Your friend Gina aka Nanogirl wants to shake up your holidays. Check out the
interactive holiday Snowglobe at
http://www.e-tractions.com/web_dev/clients/e-tractions/snowglobe/intro.htm

Required: Flash 5, a sense of humor.

Cheers!



From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 22 00:16:25 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:16:25 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
Message-ID: <018301c3c820$d8001aa0$b0994a43@texas.net>

I just obtained Bill McKibben's much praised diatribe ENOUGH from the
library. To my surprise, he quotes THE SPIKE five or six times, always
choosing quite eloquent and non-silly bits, then displays them as if they
are self-refuting. Weird. Speaking of weird, he says of Ettinger and Moravec
and Stock and me and others that we advocate healthy life extension without
understanding how `weird or gross or boring' living forever would be. I've
only just started the book (after glimpses at the index) but look forward
eagerly to learning why allowing women to die painfully in childbirth, the
natural way, isn't even more weird and gross.

(He's amazingly unfair to Max More, whom he cites as boasting that
he's `a stud'--completely untrue, being McKibben's ascription--able to
legpress 710 lbs, when Max's point was precisely to refute the claim that
extropes are all weedy nerdish body-haters.)

Damien Broderick



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 02:20:18 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:20:18 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211326390.4164-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <002001c3c832$251885f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

YEEESSSS!  Robert you are THERE, bud!

> On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:
> 
> > If we had an SJBrain, the space in
> > which the Jupiter mass of nodes resides is much smaller
> > than the space occupied by a true Jupiter-MBrain, half a
> > cubic light minute
> 
> Either I still don't understand this picture Spike or there is
> something wrong with your calculations or Anders.
> Anders' Jupiter Brain (Zeus) has a radius of ~9000 km (~1.5
> Earth radii) and mass of ~10^25 kg (~1.8 Earth masses).

Yes, but this is a Jupiter Brain, not the MBrain.  In Anders'
JBrain, the whole device completely solid, given the numbers you
quote above.  The brilliance of the MBrain is that it does not
have hot material anywhere nor material under enormous pressure 
at all.  It is a stunningly enormous number of individual particles, 
cheerfully orbiting and calculating away in parallel with the 
other nodes.

> Its probably going to require much of the carbon (for diamondoid)
> that is in the inner planets...

Again I agree, and further speculate that any extremely large
node (more than a few kg) would result in material being
wasted, material not available for computation.  If the node
is that large, heat control becomes an issue.  If the node
is a microgram scale, there is plenty of surface area from 
which to radiate heat generated in computation.

> 
> > as opposed to Robert's 250,000 cubic light minutes.
> > The notion of collision control in an SJBrain
> > is more difficult.
> 
> You must be pulling these numbers out of the air spike.  I don't
> think I ever specified the size of an MBrain...

We did, Robert, about 2 years ago when you were here.  I 
still have the green notebook in which we did the calcs.  
OK I have it open before me now.  Tuesday 29 January 2002.  
Were you not in Silicon Valley Taxifornia on the date in 
question, Mr. Bradbury?  {8^D

We theorized a .1 gram node, calculated some orbit mechanics
assuming concentric rings of nodes one meter apart and the
rings nested on one meter intervals (each ring a meter larger
radius than the one immediately inside it) and each ring
tilted a microradian from the next adjacent ring, so no
intersecting orbits anywhere.

This causes me to realize why Gene might be choking on the
concept.  The term rings might cause mental pictures of
Saturn's rings, which are flattened disc thingies.  The rings 
we theorized are thin strings of nodes spaced at one meter 
apart and circling the sun in an enormous precession.  For
instance the ring that is 150,000,000,000 meters from the sun,
(about the earth's orbit distance) would contain 942,477,796,077
nodes.  The ring a meter sunward, 942,477,796,071 nodes and
the ring a meter anti-sunward 942,477,796,083 nodes.  See how
I got those numbers?

>  If my calc's are
> right 250,000 culm gives you a radius of 39 light-minutes 
> which is around the asteroid belt someplace...

Ja, and the reason is because yesterday I was estimating
an MBrain with outer limits around Jupiter, and I recalled 
that Jupiter orbits in about 12 years, so 12^(2/3) is about
5 AU, and an AU is about 8 minutes, so Jupiter is
about 40 minutes out there, so a sphere that size would
occupy about 250,000 cubic minutes.  You can practically
do this stuff in your head, Robert.

An SBrain uses the same amount of material but is packed
much tighter.  Not nearly as tight as an Sandbergian JBrain,
but tighter than a traditional MBrain.  The Jupiter mass
of nodes orbit 5 AU from the central star like an enormous
fluffy planet out there by itself, over 100 times the diameter
of Jupiter.  Think of it as analogous to the guy at the carnival
converting a sugar cube a cm on a side into a big fluffy wad 
of cotton candy.

Do tell me you guys are old enough to have seen cotton
candy some time in your lives. 

>  Actually if you can avoid the people
> on Earth screaming you start building an MBrain way inside the
> orbit of Mercury using TiC as the primary material...

Ja but of course my scenario is post-uploading, so the
only screaming you would hear is the wild cheering of
those already occupying the existing computronium, who
are witnessing the transformation of dull, dead raw material
into vibrant thinking living useful creative matter.

Robert, your MBrain is the greatest idea of the 1990s.  It's
humanity's future home bud, the traditional heavenly kingdom,
except without the deity and the harps.  If one concludes as
I have, that the singularity is inevitable, then the MBrain 
is the logical next step: we would need to grab up all the
available metals in the solar system and get it all THINKING.
Its the ultimate order from chaos.  

I cannot even imagine a long-term future without some form 
of singularity, and *every* singularity scenario I can imagine 
eventually leads to an MBrain, or perhaps the more specific 
form of the MBrain, the SBrain.  So *every* post-singularity
star would have all its available metal in the form of an
MBrain.  So the original question is a profound one indeed: 
can the SIRTF detect an MBrain?

spike




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 02:45:41 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:45:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <002001c3c832$251885f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031222024541.545.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> An SBrain uses the same amount of material but is packed
> much tighter.  Not nearly as tight as an Sandbergian JBrain,
> but tighter than a traditional MBrain.  The Jupiter mass
> of nodes orbit 5 AU from the central star like an enormous
> fluffy planet out there by itself, over 100 times the diameter
> of Jupiter.  Think of it as analogous to the guy at the carnival
> converting a sugar cube a cm on a side into a big fluffy wad 
> of cotton candy.

Ah, so this is a cloud 5 AU out, not a shell around the sun of 5 AU
dia? You had me (and I think Eugen) confused. Ja, in that case you
wouldn't need that much charge to just keep them separated. Don't know
what the point would be though.

I had thought that we were talking stealthing out the sun and so forth,
which is why I was talking the way I was.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 03:29:56 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:29:56 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
Message-ID: <20031222032956.35655.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>

http://europeanfreestate.org/

The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar names.
There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have heard
rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians have
launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
libertarian free state within the European Union.

The only thing that will shock me would be if one got started in
China... ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 03:27:49 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:27:49 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <018301c3c820$d8001aa0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <003001c3c83b$93b7ae60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Please look at this figure for a minute:

file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%2
0Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif

then explain to me how humanity could be doing anything
other than converging towards an inevitable singularity.
Clearly ours is a species in open-loop, with no apparent
equilibrium point that can possibly be re-established.

We think of time travellers going back and doing something
that causes histories to diverge with ever expanding
consequences, like spreading ripples on a pond when a
pebble is cast therein.  But after a while, you again
have a calm surface, do you not?  At the risk of straining
the analogy, could it be that history of life inevitably
converges?  Consider:

Any large star inevitably goes supernova, spewing metals
into the cosmos, which eventually form planets elsewhere,
which will form life, given the right mix of elements and 
conditions.  Life may have long periods of equilibrium,
such as our own 3 billion years of blue-green algal mats,
but something like multicellular life must eventually
happen, or so it would seem.  If there is multicellular
life, there is interspecies competition, and every available
ecological niche is eventually filled.  One obvious ecological
niche is the one humans inhabit: scentient intelligence
sufficient to modify the environment to its own needs.
In that niche exists competition for resources and
competition for mates, which leads to ever more creativeness
and ever greater intelligence.  Societal equilibria may be
reached in many or perhaps most of those cases, but
it only takes one society somewhere to precipitate something 
analogous to the industrial revolution, which makes it
inevitable as all hell, and when that happens, automated 
control of machines is clearly desired, leading
eventually to mechanical computers, then improvements
leading to electronics, then artificial intelligence appears
to me to be absolutely unavoidable in the long run, which
leads to AI and eventually to uploading and the construction 
of MBrains, to use all the available metals in the star system.

So the history of life apparently eventually converges on 
this solution, utterly regardless of the path it takes to 
get there.  

Please, what am I doing wrong in this line of reasoning?  
Where is the stepping off point?

spike






  




From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 22 03:44:05 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 21:44:05 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
References: <018301c3c820$d8001aa0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <01af01c3c83d$dc83eee0$b0994a43@texas.net>

McKibben draws upon the wisdom of the extropian list thus:

`On the bulletin boards of the Web, you can find zealous "transhumanists"
not just explaining how the world will evolve past our species, but also
debating questions like whether it's morally necessary to kill "Luddites"
who stand in the way of such progress: "If we don't establish a transhuman
future, then Planet Earth is doomed to a rather dismal malthusian
extermination from disease, hunger, and lack of resources. If we don't build
a transhuman future, billions of people WILL die... What do you intend to do
about it? To what ends are you willing to [go to] save billions of lives?
What means are you willing to accept to achieve those ends?" [endnote 9]'
(ENOUGH, p. 112)

[9: "The Morality of Extremism," Extropian Web digest, April 18 and 19,
2002. It should be noted that the discussion of violence was a rare
exception on this particular Web forum, which is generally starry-eyed but
peaceful.] p. 240

=========

It's a pity McKibben didn't place this disclaimer in the text proper, rather
than leaving the implied stench to pollute the discourse. On the other hand,
the stench had been produced in the first place by the extropes who wrote
this sort of stuff on the list. I recall pointing out at the time how this
would come back to bite us on the arse.

Damien Broderick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 03:53:15 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:53:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <003001c3c83b$93b7ae60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031222035315.59391.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Please look at this figure for a minute:
> 
>
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%2
> 0Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif

Kinna hard to look at something that ain't there...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 22 03:55:01 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:55:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <002001c3c832$251885f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211953570.10683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> Tuesday 29 January 2002.
> Were you not in Silicon Valley Taxifornia on the date in
> question, Mr. Bradbury?  {8^D

I don't know -- that is an odd day for me to be in San Jose
(doesn't match up with Foresight conf. dates and the business
nano conferences have been in the LA region the last couple
of years -- but its possible)

> We theorized a .1 gram node, calculated some orbit mechanics
> assuming concentric rings of nodes one meter apart and the
> rings nested on one meter intervals (each ring a meter larger
> radius than the one immediately inside it) and each ring
> tilted a microradian from the next adjacent ring, so no
> intersecting orbits anywhere.

Better to say you calculated and I just watched... :-)

> You can practically do this stuff in your head, Robert.

You can -- I can't due in large part probably to lack of
practice -- but that is why I have a handy dandy spreadsheet
(ssmass.xls) which in the Planets worksheet puts Jupiter
at 43.27 light minutes out.  (Big :-))

I think you have this spreadsheet to play with on your hard
drive -- if not I'll be happy to send it to you.

> Do tell me you guys are old enough to have seen cotton
> candy some time in your lives.

Oh yes, and I won my high school girlfriend an extremely
large stuffed animal by climbing a angled rope ladder
(perhaps a 20-30 degree slope) that was suspended by a
swivel at each end.  (An interesting exercise in balance
and a lesson about what men will do for love).

> So the original question is a profound one indeed:
> can the SIRTF detect an MBrain?

A real star enveloping MBrain yes.  A Sandberg style
JBrain, probably yes as well depending on its distance
from us -- though if its external heat radiation temperature
is at 4K its going to be tough for 2 reasons (you probably
can't get 4K within the galaxy [Milan Cirkovic, Amara Graps
and I have been discussing this off-and-on] -- that would mean
that it would have to be outside of the galaxy which is quite
some distance.  If they are operating at a higher temp (say
20-40K within the galaxy) we might have a chance -- but the
detectors on the SIRTF aren't great at those temperature ranges.

The reason that MBrains and JBrains might be detectable
is because the radiation from the star doesn't outshine
the radiation from the MBrain and JBrain and the spectral
signatures are going to look *VERY* unusual.  A SJBrain,
probably has good odds as well -- subject to my constraints
of looking at the spectra at periodic intervals to detect
the fact that it is orbiting the star.  This would be
particularly true if it decides to optimize its energy
availablity by using both stellar energy as well as
energy produced by fusion reactors orbiting within
or around the computational cluster.

Anders' JBrain architecture is powered by external fusion
reactors similar to my comments about externally powered
MBrains.  How one gets from here (star powered civilizations)
to there (fusion reactor powered civilizations) is unclear.
It also isn't clear that one wants to do that -- gravity
is such a good containment mechanism for civilizations that
are short on metals that can be used for computronium,
data storage or other parts of ones energy capture,
heat disposal structure, communication and navigation
structures.

Robert




From twodeel at jornada.org  Mon Dec 22 03:50:34 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:50:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <003001c3c83b$93b7ae60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211949000.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> Please look at this figure for a minute:
> 
> file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%2
> 0Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif

This appears to be the URL of a file in your local hard drive's web cache,
rather than the address of the file where you got it on the Internet.  
Where did it come from?



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 04:03:45 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:03:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <01af01c3c83d$dc83eee0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> McKibben draws upon the wisdom of the extropian list thus:
> 
> `On the bulletin boards of the Web, you can find zealous
> "transhumanists"
> not just explaining how the world will evolve past our species, but
> also debating questions like whether it's morally necessary to kill
> "Luddites" who stand in the way of such progress:

snip a quote of what was probably one of my posts....

> I recall pointing out at the time how this would come back to bite
> us on the arse.

And I seem to recall saying, and if I didn't, I'll say it now: Only a
freakin luddite would consider *saving* billions of human lives to be
'violence'... (of course, because those billions of humans would wind
up doing violence to the pretty trees and fuzzy animals...)

I seem to recall that there have been people killed by luddite violence
and not a one of the perps, I am sure, ever debated the issue, or
thought to think of it as an ethical issue worthy of debate. Nobody
here did public protest against these deaths.

And while I've been trying to raise the warnings, people round these
parts have been mighty complacent while the gummint goes about enacting
the luddite agenda and people like McKibben gain popular renown without
answer from our side.

If any sort of violence is not warranted, then what is the excuse for
the complete and total inaction of the people on this list??? There is
a broad range of possible reponses between apathy and violence. Nobody
here has taken a one.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 04:04:27 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:04:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <01af01c3c83d$dc83eee0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031222040427.15055.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> McKibben draws upon the wisdom of the extropian list thus:
> 
> `On the bulletin boards of the Web, you can find zealous
> "transhumanists"
> not just explaining how the world will evolve past our species, but
> also debating questions like whether it's morally necessary to kill
> "Luddites" who stand in the way of such progress:

snip a quote of what was probably one of my posts.... now I'm pissed he
didn't cite my name....

> I recall pointing out at the time how this would come back to bite
> us on the arse.

And I seem to recall saying, and if I didn't, I'll say it now: Only a
freakin luddite would consider *saving* billions of human lives to be
'violence'... (of course, because those billions of humans would wind
up doing violence to the pretty trees and fuzzy animals...)

I seem to recall that there have been people killed by luddite violence
and not a one of the perps, I am sure, ever debated the issue, or
thought to think of it as an ethical issue worthy of debate. Nobody
here did public protest against these deaths.

And while I've been trying to raise the warnings, people round these
parts have been mighty complacent while the gummint goes about enacting
the luddite agenda and people like McKibben gain popular renown without
answer from our side.

If any sort of violence is not warranted, then what is the excuse for
the complete and total inaction of the people on this list??? There is
a broad range of possible reponses between apathy and violence. Nobody
here has taken a one.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 22 04:18:30 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:18:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <01af01c3c83d$dc83eee0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312212008100.10683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

> [9: "The Morality of Extremism," Extropian Web digest, April 18 and 19,
> 2002. It should be noted that the discussion of violence was a rare
> exception on this particular Web forum, which is generally starry-eyed but
> peaceful.] p. 240

Interestingly -- if you trace this back through the subject switching
and the *MANY* posts by many list members it goes back to a post I
made on April 4, 2002 on the subject of "POLITICS: grim prospects".

I was commenting on a NY Times article and quoted as follows:

> Sheik Yassin said: "The Palestinian people are not the same as they were
> in 1967," when Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza, "or during the first
> intifada," from 1987 to 1991. "At that time nobody knew how to make
> explosives. "But now," he added, "everybody knows, and Israel will never
> be stable again."

Next time I start a discussion about POLITICS remind me that it may
yield very mixed blessings.

Damien -- if you can find an email/snail mail/publisher address for the
author please send it to me offlist.  I'd like to send him a note about
his depth of research and why a hard-core extropian (and a utilitarian
such as myself) would consider minimizing the power of people who
directly or indirectly block the survival of a much greater quantity
of information.  Its a question of *where* to draw the line -- do
you knock the foundation out from underneath a westerner if it allows
you to uplift a dozen or more Indians or Chinese?  That isn't even
the analysis the Palestinians or Al Queda are making -- they are
simply going with "you have the power, we don't and so whatever is
necessary to bring you down to our level we will do".  I think there
are some interesting ethical debates that might be had between the
current classes of terrorists (from Palestinians to Al Queda to radical
Greens) to Extropians (who presumably are trying to save (or produce?)
the greatest quantity of information possible.

R.




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Dec 22 06:05:42 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:05:42 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
References: <20031222032956.35655.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01ab01c3c851$a1841540$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> http://europeanfreestate.org/
> 
> The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar names.
> There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have heard
> rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians have
> launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> libertarian free state within the European Union.
> 
> The only thing that will shock me would be if one got started in
> China... ;)

Or Libya maybe.

How is the original Free State Project going Mike? I think you said you
were/are a New Hampshire native.  

I was getting sick of a few things about life in Australia the other day
and started wondering if life in New Hampshire might be better. My 
understanding of New Hampshire is pretty limited but I realise it only 
has a small population and I don't know what sort of high tech
companies it has. 

My googling on biotech firms in New Hampshire didn't find much but 
could be I was just googling badly.  

Does NH have any good universities? Much of a biotech/infotech/
nanotech presence? Venture capital co's? What sort of laws if any 
on GMO's, therapeutic cloning etc? 

Regards,
Brett







 






From bjk at imminst.org  Mon Dec 22 06:09:49 2003
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 00:09:49 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Chat: Max More | Brights: What is Death?
Message-ID: <3FE68AAD.6080702@imminst.org>



*******************
ImmInst - Successful Chat w/ Extropy Inst. Founder - Max More
Archive: http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=62&t=431&s=

*******************
The Brights Forum - What is Death? (poll)
http://www.the-brights.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=804&st=0#entry4736

Bruce Klein
Chairman - ImmInst.org




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Dec 22 06:11:15 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 01:11:15 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <003001c3c83b$93b7ae60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000901c3c852$6c521ce0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> 
> Please look at this figure for a minute:
> 
> <
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%20Int
ernet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif>

Do you really want me to hack into your PC and take a look at that file?

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 06:59:53 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 22:59:53 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <000901c3c852$6c521ce0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <006a01c3c859$33ba7c90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

I sent the figure as an enclosure to the list, but it
hasta go thru a moderator before it can be posted.  The
figure was the Intel roadmap for future processors.

>Do you really want me to hack into your PC and take a look at that
file? Harvey

Please Harvey do not hack into my computer.  I have no
doubt that you could do it.  {8^D  Perhaps someone
else here knows of a way to get to the site, or an
equivalent roadmap of microprocessors coming in the next
five years.  I was astounded that there is no apparent
slowing to the logarithmic progress in processors that
we have enjoyed for the past 25 years.

No one has commented on the rest of that post: that
humanity has clearly gone open loop and that surely
the singularity is the inevitable result, with no
logical new equilibrium immediately threatening us.  

For most of history, people suffered thru lives just like
their grandparents and their grandchildren.  How similar 
is your life to your that of your grandparents?  How similar 
to yours do you expect your grandchildrens' lives to be? 

spike



From eliasen at mindspring.com  Mon Dec 22 08:06:44 2003
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 01:06:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211953570.10683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211953570.10683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <3FE6A614.4010502@mindspring.com>


   I'm earnestly following this discussions of Brains the Size of a
Planet and all that, and going a bit insane in the membrane trying to
keep the alphabetical procession of different XYZbrains in order.  Neat
stuff, though.

   Can I ask what may be a silly question?  Why would one build so many
little far-flung nodes instead of a more monolithic structure?  So many
things are simpler, faster, and more efficient with a single
structure--communications, energy expenditure, time lag, that I guess I
don't see why the structure wouldn't be made much more compact.

   For example, let's be way overgenerous and assume each tiny node had
the computational power of a human brain (probably not possible with
only 50 billion atoms) and that it switched at a rather conservative 1
THz.  (We'll assume a classical architecture; it gets worse for
smarter/faster quantum computers.)  This is approximately a factor of a
billion times faster than the fastest neurons in the human brain can
switch.  We'll oversimplify and say that each node thus "thinks" a
billion times faster than a human brain.

   Now, I've talked to people on the other side of the world on the
phone, and the satellite lags were very noticeable and confusing.  We'd
pause too long, interpret silences as reticence, or feel we had said
something wrong, and then both people would start talking at the same
time, only to interrupt each other a half-second later, and then stop
and start over again.  And that's a fraction of a second delay.

   Communicating with someone with a one-minute lag would probably be
pretty inefficient and painful.

   Now, when you have a node that's a billion times faster, and you're
communicating over even a light-second distance, that's an infinity.  It
might be like a billion seconds to a human.  A billion seconds is over
31 years.  It might seem that long to a node to ask a question and get
an answer.  It's like carrying on a conversation with

Using Frink notation, ( http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/ ) *

   1 billion seconds -> years
   31.68876

   When communicating over a light-minute radius, a node would grow old
and bored and completely forget the question.  Or at least I would.
It'd have the responsiveness of an IP-via-carrier-pigeon Internet, which
was actually proposed:

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html

Data:   "And for a time, I was tempted by her offer."
Picard: "How long a time?"
Data:   "0.68 seconds sir. For an android, that is nearly an eternity."

   So, my question is, why intentionally make it so hard and painful to
communicate?  I've always thought that future supercomputers would
cluster as close as possible together so that communications lags would
be minimized.  Or, why not?  Robustness?

>>You can practically do this stuff in your head, Robert.

   Well, you can too, sorta, with Frink.  Frink is a calculating
tool/programming language that I've developed to make all sorts of
real-world calculations easier.  For example, the calculation below:

> You can -- I can't due in large part probably to lack of
> practice -- but that is why I have a handy dandy spreadsheet
> (ssmass.xls) which in the Planets worksheet puts Jupiter
> at 43.27 light minutes out.  (Big :-))

   This, in Frink notation, becomes:

   jupiterdist / c -> minutes
   43.27

   It's the tool for people like me who can't do this stuff in their
heads, so we can keep up with you smarties.

   Actually, the best thing to do is go to the bathroom and calculate
this stuff... then come back and *act* like you're figuring it out in
your head.  It'll do unbelievable wonders for your reputation as a savant.

   "Hmmm... let's see... a volume with a diameter of a light-minute...
let's put that into perspective... how many Jupiter volumes is that?
Ummm... 4/3 pi times, say 44 thousand miles cubed... and a light-minute
is... hmmm... it's about two million Jupiter volumes.  That's a big
brain indeed."

   In actuality, you just went in and wrote:
4/3 pi (1/2 light minute)^3 / (4/3 pi jupiterradius^3)

   Don't laugh.  I've *done* stuff like this.  It's not horribly honest,
but it makes you the object of respect, fear, and sex.

   Frink documentation:
http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/

   You'll probably get the best idea of what Frink can do by skipping to
the "Sample Calculations" section:

http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/#SampleCalculations

   You can try it online or install it on most operating systems (it's
written in Java,) including handhelds, HDML- or WML-speaking webphones,
wireless Palms, or try a simple web-based interface or applet-based
interface at:

http://futureboy.homeip.net/frink/

   The long-term goal is to make Frink the obvious first choice for the
software you install into the coprocessor in your head.  ;)

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From reason at exratio.com  Mon Dec 22 11:17:07 2003
From: reason at exratio.com (Reason)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 03:17:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <01ab01c3c851$a1841540$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNMEGCDPAA.reason@exratio.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Brett
> Paatsch
> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2003 10:06 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
>
> I was getting sick of a few things about life in Australia the other day
> and started wondering if life in New Hampshire might be better. My
> understanding of New Hampshire is pretty limited but I realise it only
> has a small population and I don't know what sort of high tech
> companies it has.
>
> My googling on biotech firms in New Hampshire didn't find much but
> could be I was just googling badly.
>
> Does NH have any good universities? Much of a biotech/infotech/
> nanotech presence? Venture capital co's? What sort of laws if any
> on GMO's, therapeutic cloning etc?

I'm planning on a move either in the coming year, or in three years,
depending. It looks that for people in rarified businesses near the top of
the pyramid, the best bet might be to settle in southern NH (Nashua, say)
and commute to work somewhere in the northern suburbs of Boston. NH itself
has a tiny population compared to the metropolitan area just south in MA,
and a correspondingly tiny selection of high tech firms. That said, the
opportunities in Boston look on a par with those in Austin, TX, Los Angeles,
or either of the northern quarters of the Bay Area.

Reason
http://www.exratio.com



From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Dec 22 11:20:03 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:20:03 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <006a01c3c859$33ba7c90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000901c3c852$6c521ce0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<006a01c3c859$33ba7c90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031222112003.GC32264@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 10:59:53PM -0800, Spike wrote:
> 
> Please Harvey do not hack into my computer.  I have no
> doubt that you could do it.  {8^D  Perhaps someone
> else here knows of a way to get to the site, or an
> equivalent roadmap of microprocessors coming in the next
> five years.  I was astounded that there is no apparent
> slowing to the logarithmic progress in processors that
> we have enjoyed for the past 25 years.

Unfortunately, the only kind of progress there fitting 
a linear semi-log plots there is is integration density.

We're increasingly abandoning the pather of all-purpose computing, designing
systems which (kinda, sorta) perform on a specific task set. The gap between
best case and worst case is opening wider and wider with every year.

This can't go on indefinitely, and eventually we will reclaim all those
hidden resources Moore has been racking up, but it is not obvious when
exactly this will happen.

Meanwhile, I remain rather underwhelmed. (Perhaps, I'm just a naturally more
morose type than Spike).

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031222/9423644f/attachment.bin>

From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec 22 11:41:43 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:41:43 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Freeze dryonics anyone?
Message-ID: <3FE6D877.50809@mail.tele.dk>

There's this link on freeze drying stemm cells.

http://www.nature.com/nsu/031215/031215-11.html

"Researchers are honing a technique to create dried stem cells that can 
be revived just by adding water. The 'instant' cells might make mobile 
therapies for remote regions or the battlefield."


So perhaps that was an idea instead of cryonics :-)

No seriously, it is most likely more difficult to pull out the water 
than it is to freeze the cells without damage, but then again, one never 
knows where progress takes us in the long run.


regards Max M



From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec 22 12:27:47 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:27:47 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <20031222032956.35655.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031222032956.35655.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <403623C5-347A-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 22 Dec 2003, at 03:29, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> http://europeanfreestate.org/
>
> The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar names.
> There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have heard
> rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians have
> launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> libertarian free state within the European Union.
>
> The only thing that will shock me would be if one got started in
> China... ;)

China isn't what it used to be, politically _or_ culturally:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1110721,00.html

(That high-pitched whining noise is the sound of Chairman Mao spinning 
-- they hooked him up to the national grid and he's keeping the light 
bulbs burning throughout Hong Kong.)

On a more serious note, what would you describe Hong Kong as?



-- Charlie



From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec 22 12:40:50 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:40:50 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <12DC51CA-347C-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 22 Dec 2003, at 04:03, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> And while I've been trying to raise the warnings, people round these
> parts have been mighty complacent while the gummint goes about enacting
> the luddite agenda and people like McKibben gain popular renown without
> answer from our side.
>
> If any sort of violence is not warranted, then what is the excuse for
> the complete and total inaction of the people on this list??? There is
> a broad range of possible reponses between apathy and violence. Nobody
> here has taken a one.

It's pretty hard to answer their denunciations, because we're in the 
"jam tomorrow" corner. We're saying that the future outcome is going to 
be extremely good, *but* we can't easily deny the potential for 
low-probability bad outcomes, while the luddites can harp on and on 
about grey goo until the cows come home.

(Humans as a species are bad at evaluating probabilities, and this is 
especially true of future probabilities for which there are no prior 
probabilities -- a category into which a singularity falls, by 
definition.)

I submit that, at this stage, *fiction* is a very effective propaganda 
tool for our corner. Fiction provides a vehicle for actual concrete 
scenarios that will allow the people we want to reach (the vast 
majority who've never heard of the concepts we trade in, either for or 
against) to visualize what we're talking about. And it's very important 
to establish our position in fiction before the Frankenstein archetype 
gets pinned on us. A lot of the current headaches the biotech and stem 
cell industries face can be laid at the door of Aldous Huxley ("Brave 
New World") -- who, I believe, would have been horrified if he'd 
learned that the consequences of his skeptical look at reproductive 
cloning (in the 1930's, intended as a metaphor for scientism, eugenics 
and fascist state planning) would result, sixty years later, in people 
dying of curable diseases.

Damien's working on this right now. Ken MacLeod (who some of you might 
remember from this list in the early nineties) also writes about 
transhumanism, from a somewhat more skeptical but overall positive 
viewpoint. My own through-the-singularity novel is due out in mid-2005 
from Ace. (Yes, the publishing industry still moves with glacial 
slowness, geared for quill-and-inkwell writers rather than 
faster-than-realtime uploads.) I look on it as broadcasting the memetic 
foundations for a public debate framed in positive, rather than 
negative, terms.

What are *you* doing to help us establish what the Trotskyites would 
call a Popular Front?



-- Charlie



From mark at permanentend.org  Mon Dec 22 13:22:56 2003
From: mark at permanentend.org (Mark Walker)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 08:22:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution and adoption
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu><002d01c3c7e4$4b33e930$2ee4f418@markcomputer>
	<00de01c3c808$8d296620$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <001301c3c88e$b6c8a5a0$2ee4f418@markcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Damien Broderick"

> I'm not sure how tongue in cheek this is, Mark. What's you've described
is,
> after all, exactly what wealthy people did in the 19th and early 20th, and
> indeed perhaps all the way back to the invention of hierachical power
> culture. Wet nurses, nannies, private tutors, boarding schools or their
> harsh equivalent; all these allowed the luckless wives of the rich to
> produce one child rapidly after another, many of them doomed to perish,
> without wasting time and effort on emotional support, bonding, etc--and
the
> wonderful result was that these warped kids proved just the right stuff
for
> going out and building empires, thus perpetuating the process. Until it
> stopped working. And now nations like the UK struggle to deal with the
> legacy bullshit embedded in the culture.
>
I certainly don't deny that this sort of thing happened, and it didn't
always happen with the rich.  Rousseau (who was not rich) had five children
with his mistress and gave them all up to orphanages, which was to subject
his children to even more appalling conditions that the rich foisted on
their children. My point simply is that since orphanages and adoption give
one's offspring a high probability of survival it seems to make evolutionary
sense to have as many children as possible and give them up to such
agencies. I agree with you that this is not necessarily a good thing, only
that it seems to make sense, evolutionarily speaking.

Mark

Mark Walker, PhD
Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
University of Toronto
Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
15 Devonshire Place
Toronto
M5S 1H8
www.permanentend.org





From mark at permanentend.org  Mon Dec 22 14:13:38 2003
From: mark at permanentend.org (Mark Walker)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:13:38 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031221124459.0207eef0@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <001f01c3c895$ce1e2430$2ee4f418@markcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Hanson"
Mark Walker, PhD
Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
University of Toronto
Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
15 Devonshire Place
Toronto
M5S 1H8
www.permanentend.org


> The demographic transition is the phenomena whereby the birthrate falls
> dramatically when nations get richer.  This phenomena is *not* driven
> primarily by birth control.  It happened before birth control, and poor
> nations now have high birth rates after cheap birth control.

Ok, I see why this is more perplexing. The evolutionary explanation for this
aside, is the causal mechanism known? Given that birthrates drop, and it is
not birth control measures that are responsible,  it seems that either
copulation or fertility rates must have dropped. Do we know if it is one or
the other (or both)? As for the evolutionary explanation, this is an
interesting question. Admittedly it is quite a stretch but I wonder if it is
related to the following evolutionary counter-intuitive result. I've bred a
number of aquarium fish (e.g., Discus, clown fish, etc.) and generally the
birthrate is higher for those that are kept a little hungry rather than
those that are fed until they are satiated. This seems counter-intuitive
since one would think that the fish with the extra calories would have more
offspring rather. The best breeding results occur when they are fed lots for
say a couple of weeks and then fed almost nothing for a few days. I've
observed the similar results with breeding worms. In any event, the
hypothesis based on this flimsy evidence is that human birthrates are
correlated negatively with total calories or the steadiness of food supply.
(Perhaps it goes without saying that the correlation will fail below a
certain level of calories that stress the organisms so much that they cannot
breed). Obviously evidence for this will be hard to come by since in general
the rich nations have a greater calorie consumption and poorer nation fewer.
http://www.fao.org/NEWS/1998/981204-e.htm We would need to find examples
where poor nations have a steady and abundant supply or rich nations have
low calorie consumption or periods of interruption in their food supply to
refute the hypothesis.

Mark

Mark Walker, PhD
Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
University of Toronto
Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
15 Devonshire Place
Toronto
M5S 1H8
www.permanentend.org





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 15:14:43 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:14:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <01ab01c3c851$a1841540$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <20031222151443.42658.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > http://europeanfreestate.org/
> > 
> > The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar
> names.
> > There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have
> heard
> > rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians
> have
> > launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> > libertarian free state within the European Union.
> > 
> > The only thing that will shock me would be if one got started in
> > China... ;)
> 
> Or Libya maybe.
> 
> How is the original Free State Project going Mike? I think you said
> you were/are a New Hampshire native.  

It's going well. After the post-election shakedown, where members that
had opted out of NH as a state they were willing to move to could
choose to opt back in or leave the organization, our membership dropped
initially to 4500 but now is back up to 5,200+.

We are engaging in some creative advertising campaigns, running local
ads in areas of the country where and when egregious violations of
civil rights by federal, state, and local government occur. We had one
this past week in South Carolina where police did an early morning raid
on a junior high school, groping and stripping students, and coming up
totally empty. This ad campaign got national coverage, with AP articles
appearing.

I recently appeared on a radio talk show as the Grafton County
Representative of the organization, and this show has been rebroadcast
several times on both AM and FM frequencies the station operates (don't
have an mp3, sorry).

We are now in the planning stages for a Freedom Fest to be held in
June. Likely this will be located in Plymouth or someplace central in
the state, and is expected to attract 500-1000 attendees. There will be
some libertarian seminars as well as tours of the state for job and
real estate hunting.

> 
> I was getting sick of a few things about life in Australia the other
> day and started wondering if life in New Hampshire might be better.
> My understanding of New Hampshire is pretty limited but I realise it
> only has a small population and I don't know what sort of high tech
> companies it has. 

The FSP website has lots of research on NH that members have done. Here
are a few links to check out...
http://www.freestateproject.org/community/nh_info.jsp
http://www.state.nh.us

Let me know if you have any specific questions. I've lived here since
age 9, outside of several years in the Air Force and developing
business in Seattle.

> 
> My googling on biotech firms in New Hampshire didn't find much but 
> could be I was just googling badly.  

There are a number of biotech firms. In Lebanon there are several that
are offshoots of work done at Dartmouth Medical School and Darthmouth
Hitchcock Medical Center's Norris Cotton Cancer Center.

http://www.nhbiotech.com/

This is a good link to start off with.

> 
> Does NH have any good universities? Much of a biotech/infotech/
> nanotech presence? Venture capital co's? What sort of laws if any 
> on GMO's, therapeutic cloning etc? 

University of New Hampshire is well known for its engineering school,
its political science department, among other things. Dartmouth College
features the Tuck Business School, the Thayer School of Engineering,
and the Kiewit Computer Center. Dartmouth was featured in Wired last
year as having a town-wide Wi-Fi network open to the public. Franklin
Pierce College has a good law school that specializes in IP law.
Plymouth State University is considered to have the best undergrad
business school in the country.

NH is rife with VC for such a rural state, UNH Center for Venture
Research lists seven such firms native to the state. 

http://www.unh.edu/cvr/

There are, so far as I am aware, no state laws against any
technological development.

In 1998 the legislature enacted a law exempting Qualified Investment
Capital Companies from the business profits tax. This exemption also
applies to any investments made in QICC's by other businesses, in that
any monies invested by a business in a QICC is not considered to be
taxable profit monies.

Finding actual nanotech companies is a bit of work, as the word has
become a new buzzword, and I've found a number of companies using the
term only as a term to describe the precision of their laser or other
machining processes. In fact, there are a number of laser machining
companies in NH.

Also:
http://www.camis.unh.edu/
http://www.unh.edu/apl/nprc.htm

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 15:24:45 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:24:45 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <403623C5-347A-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031222152445.68528.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> 
> On 22 Dec 2003, at 03:29, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > http://europeanfreestate.org/
> >
> > The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar
> names.
> > There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have
> heard
> > rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians
> have
> > launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> > libertarian free state within the European Union.
> >
> > The only thing that will shock me would be if one got started in
> > China... ;)
> 
> China isn't what it used to be, politically _or_ culturally:
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1110721,00.html
> (That high-pitched whining noise is the sound of Chairman Mao
> spinning -- they hooked him up to the national grid and he's keeping
> the light bulbs burning throughout Hong Kong.)
> 
> On a more serious note, what would you describe Hong Kong as?

Considering the heavy handed things that have been going on in HK
recently in terms of individual rights, it sure ain't what it used to
be, and even that was lacking in areas. For me, at least. I think that
people outside the US have a hard time grasping what some of us
consider real freedom.

Saw today that China's Communist Party is looking at approving an
amendment to the constitution that protects private property as being
co-equal to public property. So they've come half way. Wake me up when
they finally admit that public property has no legitimacy whatsoever...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 15:29:55 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:29:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <12DC51CA-347C-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031222152955.69686.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> 
> Damien's working on this right now. Ken MacLeod (who some of you
> might 
> remember from this list in the early nineties) also writes about 
> transhumanism, from a somewhat more skeptical but overall positive 
> viewpoint. My own through-the-singularity novel is due out in
> mid-2005 
> from Ace. (Yes, the publishing industry still moves with glacial 
> slowness, geared for quill-and-inkwell writers rather than 
> faster-than-realtime uploads.) I look on it as broadcasting the
> memetic 
> foundations for a public debate framed in positive, rather than 
> negative, terms.

You guys getting published are certainly doing your part on the
propaganda front, no doubt. My ire is reserved more for the armchair
extropians.

> 
> What are *you* doing to help us establish what the Trotskyites would 
> call a Popular Front?

I'm building the Free State. Don't you know that NH is the number one
escape destination for people moving out of both Massachusetts AND the
Bay Area/Silicon Valley??? Revolutionary Theory says no insurgency can
survive without support from a sheltered base. New Hampshire is the
place where transhumanists will be able to get trans'ed without luddite interference.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From extropy at audry2.com  Mon Dec 22 16:56:32 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 00:56:32 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <403623C5-347A-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org> (message from
	Charlie Stross on Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:27:47 +0000)
References: <20031222032956.35655.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
	<403623C5-347A-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <200312221656.hBMGuW812875@igor.synonet.com>


> On a more serious note, what would you describe Hong Kong as?

It used to be my canonical example of the difference between "freedom"
and "democracy", it was a territory where the citizens had a great
deal of freedom and very little political power.

Major


From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec 22 17:02:17 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:02:17 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <20031222152445.68528.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031222152445.68528.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <99359128-34A0-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 22 Dec 2003, at 15:24, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>>
>> On a more serious note, what would you describe Hong Kong as?
>
> Considering the heavy handed things that have been going on in HK
> recently in terms of individual rights, it sure ain't what it used to
> be, and even that was lacking in areas. For me, at least. I think that
> people outside the US have a hard time grasping what some of us
> consider real freedom.

Hmm. Not sure what part of the news you're getting in the USA; when the 
party hacks tried to ram through a law restricting freedom of speech 
the resulting demonstrations were so big that they backed down hastily. 
Meanwhile, the income tax regime is way
lower than in the US (both in terms of the highest rate and the income 
level at which it cuts in), business regulations are less, and so on.

This gives the locals a huge amount of bargaining leverage with the 
Communist Party in Beijing, who are terrified of accidentally killing 
the golden-egg-laying goose, but it's the kind of bargaining that 
mostly goes on behind closed doors because nobody wants to lose face in 
public.

> Saw today that China's Communist Party is looking at approving an
> amendment to the constitution that protects private property as being
> co-equal to public property. So they've come half way. Wake me up when
> they finally admit that public property has no legitimacy whatsoever...

In your dreams. (But then again, that goes for most of the rest of the 
world, doesn't it?) What's most interesting seems to be the way that 
the CP has decided Hong Kong is the way they want the *entire* country 
to go, in the long term, and the way they're converging on the role of 
the former imperial bureaucracy rather than sticking to the ideological 
overlay bequeathed to them by Lenin and Mao.


-- Charlie



From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec 22 17:04:01 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:04:01 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031222152955.69686.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031222152955.69686.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <D6F1BB7A-34A0-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 22 Dec 2003, at 15:29, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> I'm building the Free State. Don't you know that NH is the number one
> escape destination for people moving out of both Massachusetts AND the
> Bay Area/Silicon Valley??? Revolutionary Theory says no insurgency can
> survive without support from a sheltered base. New Hampshire is the
> place where transhumanists will be able to get trans'ed without 
> luddite interference.

Hmm. What do you know about the Transdniester Republic? Any lessons to 
be learned there about how a breakaway region can survive and/or 
coexist with its larger neighbours?



-- Charlie



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 17:07:17 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:07:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031222152955.69686.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031222170717.4217.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

It has come to my attention that both myself and the list moderator,
Spike, exceeded posting limits yesterday in our sjbrain discussions. My
violation was due to accidental double posting of a few posts. Given
that certain snoots are making an issue about it (individuals who got
annoyed about my recent rant about extropic inaction in the face of
luddism, no doubt), I will invite list members who want to discuss
extropic issues in depth, without limitations on topic or number of
posts, to continue extended conversations on the extro-freedom list on
yahoogroups:

Title :  Extropians - Freedom  
Description :  All Extropy, All the Time, til the Singularity. No
posting limits, no censorship outside of limiting fraudulent statements
and personal attacks (by the judgement of the ownership and
management), no topics off-limits, no political correctness.

NOTE: This list is not operated by or approved by the Extropy
Institute. 

Extro-freedom was once known as Exi-freedom, but it's name has been
changed as a result of a polite request by Max that I do so. Strongarm
tactics annoy me, politeness I reward. See how easy it is?
 


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 22 17:29:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:29:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] XYZBrain History [was: sjbrain calcs]
In-Reply-To: <3FE6A614.4010502@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312220821001.26657-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Alan Eliasen wrote:

> I'm earnestly following this discussions of Brains the Size of a
> Planet and all that, and going a bit insane in the membrane trying to
> keep the alphabetical procession of different XYZbrains in order.  Neat
> stuff, though.

I suppose a bit of a history lesson is in order for people who haven't
been on the list for decades.

Sometime in the early '90s Perry Metzger proposed the concept of a
Jupiter Brain (JBrain).  The exact date is lost in the private Extropian
archives.  See:
  http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/JupiterBrains/
Anders Sandberg did some work in the mid-'90s documenting Dyson Spheres
(really Shells):
  http://www.student.nada.kth.se/~nv91-asa/dysonFAQ.html
he also started work writing some detailed theoretical calculations on
what the limits might be which was published in 1999 in the Journal
of Evolution and Technology:
  http://www.jetpress.org/volume5/Brains2.pdf
The appendix

>From 1997 to 2002 I gave talks at several conferences (including Extro3)
and published some papers about Dyson Shells and an extended concept
known as Matrioshka Brains (MBrain):
  http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/MatrioshkaBrains/

During various visits to Spike's house he and I have played around with
various extensions to some of my ideas.

My efforts have at least planted these ideas in the heads of
a few astronomers and SETI researchers (though the mainstream
folks have generally rejected them).  In addition, Damien Broderick
has picked up some of the ideas in his book "The Spike" so they
are slowly filtering out into public awareness.

The quick summary regarding MBrains is that each "node" provides
the approximate computing capacity of 100,000 to a 1,000,000 human
brains and and entire MBrain contains a sufficient number of nodes
that you have the computational capacity of ~10^15 human *species*
(at our current population level) per star.

Spike's sjbrain is an interesting new variant.


> Can I ask what may be a silly question?  Why would one build so many
> little far-flung nodes instead of a more monolithic structure?  So many
> things are simpler, faster, and more efficient with a single
> structure--communications, energy expenditure, time lag, that I guess I
> don't see why the structure wouldn't be made much more compact.

The compact structure is in the MBrain (and to a lesser extent the JBrain).
The problem is that you hit the heat removal limits.  That's in the
MBrain architecture using 1 cm^3 Drexlerian nanocomputers that have
to radiate 100,000 W.  See for example:
  http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/MatrioshkaBrains/MatrioshkaBrains.html#Figure1

The radiator size ultimately is much bigger than the computer size.

>    Communicating with someone with a one-minute lag would probably be
> pretty inefficient and painful.

We are going to have to get used to it.  A really advanced civilization
would probably consist of a number of Matrioshka Brains organized
the same way globular clusters are (a million or so stars within
a few light-years of each other).  But after they get through
star-lifting their lifetimes are in the trillion year range so
they probably don't sweat the inter-brain delay times.

> So, my question is, why intentionally make it so hard and painful to
> communicate?  I've always thought that future supercomputers would
> cluster as close as possible together so that communications lags would
> be minimized.  Or, why not?  Robustness?

They are clustered close together.  That's why the Cray-1 and Cray-2
had circular designs.  See:
  http://futuretech.mirror.vuurwerk.net/cray1.html

IBM was probably as good as Cray at figuring out how to cool things
(you may be too young to remember that some of the early 360's
and 370's were based on ECL logic and had to be water cooled!).
To avoid the problems that heat causes in accelerating failure
rates IBM is producing its high (up to 65K?) processor count
machines like Blue Gene with sharply constrained clock speeds
on the CPUs.  Even the PowerPC's in Univ. of Virgina supercomputer
(currently 2nd fastest in the world) run at clock speeds significantly
below current Intel CPUs.

>    Frink documentation:
> http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/

Interesting Alan, I'll have to take a look at it.

Hope the above brings everyone who hasn't been around the last 6
years up to speed.

Robert




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 17:29:58 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:29:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <D6F1BB7A-34A0-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031222172958.78264.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
>  
> Hmm. What do you know about the Transdniester Republic? Any lessons
> to be learned there about how a breakaway region can survive and/or 
> coexist with its larger neighbours?

Transdniester's problems lay in its adherence to strict socialism, its
banana republic monetary policy, and its guarantee of wages 20% over
Moldavian wages. Can you say economic disaster?

It also appears to be a center of various forms of organized crime:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/transdniester.htm
"Transdniester separatists' have a long-time involvement in
money-laundering and the manufacturing and smuggling of weapons, as
well as trafficking in human beings and drugs. Secessionists in
Russian-speaking Transdniester maintain control over the enclave's
borders with Ukraine, across which most of the smuggling takes place.
The region's leader, Igor Smirnov, and his son, Vladimir, are believed
to have almost exclusive control over the lucrative criminal activities
in the area. 

The dispute between Transdniester and the rest of Moldova remains
unresolved. Decade-long talks supervised by the OSCE, Russia, and
Ukraine have failed repeatedly, attracting criticism that Russia is
unofficially supporting the separatists, although Moscow has not
formally recognized Transdniester's existence. The quagmire remains as
deep as ever in late 2003 after Moldova turned down a Russian plan
proposing de facto independence for Transdniester and a long-term
extension of the presence of Russian forces."

The FSP is not a secessionist movement, contrary to the scare tactics
of some Democrats, though NH does feature constitutional protections of
the right to revolt and secede (protections which were successfully
used once in the 19th century). NH's deepwater port and Canadian border
also serve only to help bolster its ability to withstand economic
isolation by Washington DC if a federal power vs states rights showdown
occurs.



=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 17:42:13 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:42:13 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
References: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00eb01c3c8b2$eebca460$9cb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 4:03 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already


>
> If any sort of violence is not warranted, then what is the excuse for
> the complete and total inaction of the people on this list??? There is
> a broad range of possible reponses between apathy and violence. Nobody
> here has taken a one.

Ahem...

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 17:43:12 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:43:12 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
References: <20031222032956.35655.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00f901c3c8b3$12038e70$9cb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: <extro-freedom at yahoo.com>; <extropy-chat at extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 3:29 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project


> http://europeanfreestate.org/
> 
> The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar names.
> There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have heard
> rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians have
> launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> libertarian free state within the European Union.

With approximately zero probability of success.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 17:44:11 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:44:11 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
References: <018301c3c820$d8001aa0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <010501c3c8b3$35892f30$9cb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 12:16 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already


> I just obtained Bill McKibben's much praised diatribe ENOUGH from the
> library. To my surprise, he quotes THE SPIKE five or six times, always
> choosing quite eloquent and non-silly bits, then displays them as if they
> are self-refuting. Weird. Speaking of weird, he says of Ettinger and
Moravec
> and Stock and me and others that we advocate healthy life extension
without
> understanding how `weird or gross or boring' living forever would be. I've
> only just started the book (after glimpses at the index) but look forward
> eagerly to learning why allowing women to die painfully in childbirth, the
> natural way, isn't even more weird and gross.
>
> (He's amazingly unfair to Max More, whom he cites as boasting that
> he's `a stud'--completely untrue, being McKibben's ascription--able to
> legpress 710 lbs, when Max's point was precisely to refute the claim that
> extropes are all weedy nerdish body-haters.)

Well, put me down as a not-too-weedy 200lb martial arts teacher.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 17:51:54 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:51:54 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
References: <006a01c3c859$33ba7c90$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <013101c3c8b4$495a77c0$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 6:59 AM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] converging history


>
> No one has commented on the rest of that post: that
> humanity has clearly gone open loop and that surely
> the singularity is the inevitable result, with no
> logical new equilibrium immediately threatening us.

A singularity is by no means inevitable.
I rate the chance of extinction somewhat higher.
And if anyone is depending on strong AI I think it likely they may well be
disappointed (as they have been for the past 50yrs).

http://www.astro.sk/~msaniga/curres.html


Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 17:55:02 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <00f901c3c8b3$12038e70$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031222175502.16740.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> To: <extro-freedom at yahoo.com>; <extropy-chat at extropy.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 3:29 AM
> Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
> 
> 
> > http://europeanfreestate.org/
> > 
> > The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar
> names.
> > There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have
> heard
> > rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians
> have
> > launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> > libertarian free state within the European Union.
> 
> With approximately zero probability of success.

Ah, well, now I know it will succeed. The US LP gave us similar odds of
even reaching 5,000 members. We went on to get the endorsements of LP's
of a couple dozen states and NH's governor, and our election occured a
year ahead of even our own original expectations. We've made national
headlines on a number of occasions and our people appear regularly on
television and radio, national commentators like Walter Williams,
Claire Wolfe, Neal Boortz, Richard Boddie, Thomas Sowell, The Man Show
co-host Doug Stanhope, and ABC co-anchor John Stossel have all either
endorsed us or become members. Even the Republican Liberty Caucus
endorses us. 

Who has a more successful political movement so far, the FSP or The
Consensus??? I will bet that the EFSP has its 5,000 member vote within
the next two years on where to locate. Suggest you jump on the train...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 18:41:37 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:41:37 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
References: <20031222175502.16740.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01c901c3c8bb$4178c820$9cb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project


> > > http://europeanfreestate.org/
> > >
> > > The FSP has apparently spawned a bunch of efforts using similar
> > names.
> > > There is the Swing State Project, the Free Arms Project, I have
> > heard
> > > rumors of a 'Green State Project', and now European Libertarians
> > have
> > > launched a European Free State Project to establish a similarly
> > > libertarian free state within the European Union.
> >
> > With approximately zero probability of success.
>
> Ah, well, now I know it will succeed. The US LP gave us similar odds of
> even reaching 5,000 members. We went on to get the endorsements of LP's
> of a couple dozen states and NH's governor, and our election occured a
> year ahead of even our own original expectations. We've made national
> headlines on a number of occasions and our people appear regularly on
> television and radio, national commentators like Walter Williams,
> Claire Wolfe, Neal Boortz, Richard Boddie, Thomas Sowell, The Man Show
> co-host Doug Stanhope, and ABC co-anchor John Stossel have all either
> endorsed us or become members. Even the Republican Liberty Caucus
> endorses us.
>
> Who has a more successful political movement so far, the FSP or The
> Consensus??? I will bet that the EFSP has its 5,000 member vote within
> the next two years on where to locate. Suggest you jump on the train...
>

I certainly have no objections to such projects, but the levels of success
required by the Consensus v establishing a libertarian nation are vastly
different esp in Europe.
With 5000 members the Consensus could do a great deal.
However, for the other project to succeed they need *millions* of committed
people all in the same place.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 19:24:39 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:24:39 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <013101c3c8b4$495a77c0$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <000001c3c8c1$3e7ba600$6501a8c0@SHELLY>



> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] converging history
> 
> 
> >
> > No one has commented on the rest of that post: that
> > humanity has clearly gone open loop and that surely
> > the singularity is the inevitable result, with no
> > logical new equilibrium immediately threatening us.
> 
> A singularity is by no means inevitable.
> I rate the chance of extinction somewhat higher...

Sure but I mean in the big picture the singu

WHOA Earthquake!  Light fixtures swinging.  Everyone OK?



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 19:37:37 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 19:37:37 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
References: <000001c3c8c1$3e7ba600$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <021501c3c8c3$0dfe3f90$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
To: "'Dirk Bruere'" <dirk at neopax.com>; "'ExI chat list'"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 7:24 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] converging history


>
>
> > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] converging history
> >
> >
> > >
> > > No one has commented on the rest of that post: that
> > > humanity has clearly gone open loop and that surely
> > > the singularity is the inevitable result, with no
> > > logical new equilibrium immediately threatening us.
> >
> > A singularity is by no means inevitable.
> > I rate the chance of extinction somewhat higher...
>
> Sure but I mean in the big picture the singu
>
> WHOA Earthquake!  Light fixtures swinging.  Everyone OK?

We don't get much of that in Britain.
Over here a 5.0 makes national headlines.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 19:37:40 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:37:40 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] taxifornia earthquake
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c8c1$3e7ba600$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000101c3c8c3$1048a4c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>


> Sure but I mean in the big picture the singu
> 
> WHOA Earthquake!  Light fixtures swinging.  Everyone OK?
> 

OK I have a chandalier on about a 3 meter chain hanging in
the front room and it was swinging in the north-south
direction, and it was a gentle low frequency S-wave, (caused
me to get a little woozy) so it has evidently travelled a 
long ways, and there are few major faults to the north, so I
suspect the epicenter was a good 100 km or more to the south of
San Jose.

spike



From rhanson at gmu.edu  Mon Dec 22 19:33:52 2003
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:33:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <12DC51CA-347C-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
References: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>

On 12/22/2003, Charlie Stross wrote:
>I submit that, at this stage, *fiction* is a very effective propaganda 
>tool for our corner. Fiction provides a vehicle for actual concrete 
>scenarios that will allow the people we want to reach (the vast majority 
>who've never heard of the concepts we trade in, either for or against) to 
>visualize what we're talking about. And it's very important to establish 
>our position in fiction before the Frankenstein archetype gets pinned on 
>us. ...
>Damien's working on this right now. Ken MacLeod (who some of you might 
>remember from this list in the early nineties) also writes about 
>transhumanism, from a somewhat more skeptical but overall positive 
>viewpoint. My own through-the-singularity novel is due out in mid-2005 
>from Ace. ...

I have mixed feelings about the role of science fiction here.  If we were 
sure no one else would look at these topics, we should certainly be glad 
that at least science fiction looked at them.  But I constantly run into 
academics whose reason for ignoring these issues is because "that's science 
fiction."  Now perhaps they would still say that if there were not actual 
science fiction novels about these topics.  But it does seem that the fact 
that some scenario is popular in science fiction is often taken as a reason 
not to consider it in "serious" discussions about the future.

Science fiction authors are well aware of the may biases that are 
introduced into their future scenarios due to the need to have an 
entertaining story.  Academia has its own biases, but my guess is that they 
are not as bad.






Robin Hanson  rhanson at gmu.edu  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323 



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 19:56:14 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 19:56:14 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
References: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com><20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <023d01c3c8c5$ae8992f0$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robin Hanson" <rhanson at gmu.edu>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already


> On 12/22/2003, Charlie Stross wrote:
> >I submit that, at this stage, *fiction* is a very effective propaganda
> >tool for our corner. Fiction provides a vehicle for actual concrete
> >scenarios that will allow the people we want to reach (the vast majority
> >who've never heard of the concepts we trade in, either for or against) to
> >visualize what we're talking about. And it's very important to establish
> >our position in fiction before the Frankenstein archetype gets pinned on
> >us. ...
> >Damien's working on this right now. Ken MacLeod (who some of you might
> >remember from this list in the early nineties) also writes about
> >transhumanism, from a somewhat more skeptical but overall positive
> >viewpoint. My own through-the-singularity novel is due out in mid-2005
> >from Ace. ...
>
> I have mixed feelings about the role of science fiction here.  If we were
> sure no one else would look at these topics, we should certainly be glad
> that at least science fiction looked at them.  But I constantly run into
> academics whose reason for ignoring these issues is because "that's
science
> fiction."  Now perhaps they would still say that if there were not actual
> science fiction novels about these topics.  But it does seem that the fact
> that some scenario is popular in science fiction is often taken as a
reason
> not to consider it in "serious" discussions about the future.
>
> Science fiction authors are well aware of the may biases that are
> introduced into their future scenarios due to the need to have an
> entertaining story.  Academia has its own biases, but my guess is that
they
> are not as bad.


http://www.theconsensus.org/uk/essentia/why/index.html
'Of course, this all seems like science fiction. And it is, until it
happens. If you are middle aged then there are other things that you will
remember being science fiction. The list, in no particular order and far
from exhaustive, includes cloning, test tube babies, acid rain, the
Internet, global warming, Plutonium smuggling, genetically engineered
children, personal computers, aberrant weather patterns, the hole in the
ozone layer, the current mass extinction of life, the collapse of Communism
and the kind of terrorism that was once found only in comic books and James
Bond films. '

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu  Mon Dec 22 20:22:10 2003
From: test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu (Bill Hibbard)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:22:10 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: ENOUGH already
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312221420350.8121-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> I just obtained Bill McKibben's much praised diatribe ENOUGH from the
> library.  ...

I discuss Bill McKibben's End of Nature in my own book,
Super-Intelligent Machines. He laments that humans have
conquered nature so thoroughly that there are no truly
wild spaces left. It is not enough for him that humans
preserve nature in parks - he wants unexplored territory.

His lament is misguided in a couple ways. First, there
is plenty of wild physical space left in the oceans and
really wild space beyond the earth's atmosphere. Second,
the great unexplored territory of nature is how biology
and mind work. The ability to create artificial minds
will lead humans into the wildest space we've ever been
to (the title of one of Ben Goertzel's books is Wild
Computing).

McKibben derives spritual inspriation from wild nature,
but if he had more imagination he would realize there
is much greater spiritual inspiration in the creation
of artificial minds far beyond the abilities of human
minds. The true nature lovers are the transhumanists,
not those focused on nostalgia for the past.

Of course, he and others will never be able to stop
the singularity. The industrial countries are pouring
money into computer technology and biological research
as fast as they can. The drive to explore wild spaces
that McKibben claims is lost, is actually very much
alive. He just can't recognize it.

Cheers,
Bill
----------------------------------------------------------
Bill Hibbard, SSEC, 1225 W. Dayton St., Madison, WI  53706
test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu  608-263-4427  fax: 608-263-6738
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/vis.html



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 20:33:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:33:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <01c901c3c8bb$4178c820$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031222203314.23874.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:

> I certainly have no objections to such projects, but the levels of
> success
> required by the Consensus v establishing a libertarian nation are
> vastly different esp in Europe.
> With 5000 members the Consensus could do a great deal.
> However, for the other project to succeed they need *millions* of
> committed people all in the same place.

Well, no, actually. Suggest you read Jason Soren's original paper. All
they need are 20,000 members in a state of less than 1.5 million
population to have a significant impact.

In fact, there are actually a lot more good candidates than we have had
here in the US, for example Andorra only has a population of 72,000.
Gibraltar is only 29,000 (and Sean Hastings is going to be building his
Seastead there). Guernsey and Alderney is 63,000. Iceland is 294,000.
Jersey is 88,000. Lichtenstein is 34,600. Estonia is 1.268 million.
Malta is 383,000. Isle of Man is 77,500. Monaco is 33,800. San Marino
is 28,400. Slovenia is just over the mark at 1.95 million. Svalbard and
Jan Mayen is 2,200.

If you go by proportionality of 20,000 FSP members to 1.5 million Free
State population, then the needed EFSP members to effect similar
libertarian change would be, for each of the candidates above:

State                Needed EFSP Members
Andorra              960
Gibraltar            387
Guernsey & Alderney  840
Iceland              3920
Jersey               1174
Lichtenstein         462
Estonia              16907
Malta                1107
San Marino           379
Isle of Man          1034
Monaco               451
Slovenia             26000
Svalbard & Jan Mayen 29

And these are just nations IN europe. There are also territories of
european nations all around the world as well that range from spits to
uninhabited atolls to major colonial posessions. This is also just
looking at whole countries rather than just departments or provinces,
etc. There are also a large number of allodial freeholds still held in
feudal tenancy.

Just looking at the population numbers, I would say that if an EFSP can
get going, there are some really good potential locations. From these
candidates, all that they really need to do is figure out which ones
are already the most libertarian

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 22 20:37:33 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:37:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221226550.32440-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Robin Hanson wrote:

> But I constantly run into
> academics whose reason for ignoring these issues is because "that's science
> fiction."  Now perhaps they would still say that if there were not actual
> science fiction novels about these topics.  But it does seem that the fact
> that some scenario is popular in science fiction is often taken as a reason
> not to consider it in "serious" discussions about the future.

Hmmm... Sounds like a "herd" or "peer review" effect to me.  Few people
want to stick their necks out for fear they might not get tenure or
their next grant application approved.

On the other hand one of the reasons I went back and learned all about
molecular biology was because I wanted a pet dragon (derived in part
from my thinking dragons were cool from reading the Dragonriders of
Pern series in my youth).  Once I learned enough about molecular
biology I was convinced they were feasible (don't know about flying
but there were some very big reptiles that flew) I started biotech
companies doing aging research because I knew it was going to be
a few decades until the technology developed sufficiently to do
whole genome design (and I wanted to still be alive to take
advantage of using it to design my dragon).

The other reason to have a pet dragon is because if I walk it
around Greenlake its going to be a babe magnet big time. :-)

It sounds to me like many academics simply lack imagination or
aren't willing to do the work necessary to achieve some of the
far out goals one finds in science fiction & fantasy stories.
How many of the people involved in serious nanotechnology research
have read every paper Eric has written on the topic as well as
Nanosystems?  I suspect it isn't many.  And that isn't even
science fiction -- its simply projected engineering capabilities.

Robert



From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Dec 22 20:37:44 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:37:44 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <B2200061-34BE-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 22 Dec 2003, at 19:33, Robin Hanson wrote:
>
> I have mixed feelings about the role of science fiction here.  If we 
> were sure no one else would look at these topics, we should certainly 
> be glad that at least science fiction looked at them.  But I 
> constantly run into academics whose reason for ignoring these issues 
> is because "that's science fiction."  Now perhaps they would still say 
> that if there were not actual science fiction novels about these 
> topics.  But it does seem that the fact that some scenario is popular 
> in science fiction is often taken as a reason not to consider it in 
> "serious" discussions about the future.

As Dirk Bruere notes, "that's science fiction" is a tag that could be 
applied to numerous everyday artefacts today as little as thirty years 
ago (test tube babies, personal computers, etcetera). One need only 
look back to the 1930's or 1940's and the dream of a rocket to the moon 
to see an example of something that was clearly nothing but SF then 
becoming reality a couple of decades later -- with a big budget behind 
it.

It seems to me that many people -- and academics are a subset of 
"people", no more and no less prone to this than anyone else -- have a 
large and unacknowledged emotional investment in the current paradigm. 
You grow up, go to school, work, get married, buy a house, work hard, 
have children ... and anything that jeopardizes this behaviour is, 
clearly undesirable. If you've invested decades in your nest and your 
family, the idea that developments in the next decade or two will turn 
it upside down is deeply threatening because, working on the basis of 
prior experience, it will have invalidated a large part of your life 
and you won't have time to repair the damage.

It's hard to criticize people for feeling this way, because for most of 
our species' history this has been survival-oriented behaviour. 
Circumstances changed slowly if at all -- rapid change was due only to 
disasters like plague, war, famine, and civil disorder, and is 
therefore almost inevitably negative.

As I believe Kuhn observed, old paradigms tend to be displaced only 
when the academics who hold them die or retire. By writing SF I'm 
hopefully reaching the next generation before they have invested so 
much in the current prevalent paradigm that they come to see change as 
threatening. It's a long, slow process.

> Science fiction authors are well aware of the may biases that are 
> introduced into their future scenarios due to the need to have an 
> entertaining story.  Academia has its own biases, but my guess is that 
> they are not as bad.

You're probably right, in general. Special pleading: those SF writers 
who are currently using these ideas -- there aren't many of us, because 
they haven't yet hit the mainstream awareness the way that, say, 
nanotechnology has -- are still, I hope, a bit more serious in outlook. 
Even when we're taking the piss. (Go Google on "Jury Service" and click 
on the topmost link it returns if you've got a free hour :)


-- Charlie



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 20:41:44 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:41:44 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
References: <20031222203314.23874.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <02c901c3c8cc$02cb3020$9cb26bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 8:33 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project


>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>
> > I certainly have no objections to such projects, but the levels of
> > success
> > required by the Consensus v establishing a libertarian nation are
> > vastly different esp in Europe.
> > With 5000 members the Consensus could do a great deal.
> > However, for the other project to succeed they need *millions* of
> > committed people all in the same place.
>
> Well, no, actually. Suggest you read Jason Soren's original paper. All
> they need are 20,000 members in a state of less than 1.5 million
> population to have a significant impact.
>
> In fact, there are actually a lot more good candidates than we have had
> here in the US, for example Andorra only has a population of 72,000.
> Gibraltar is only 29,000 (and Sean Hastings is going to be building his
> Seastead there). Guernsey and Alderney is 63,000. Iceland is 294,000.
> Jersey is 88,000. Lichtenstein is 34,600. Estonia is 1.268 million.
> Malta is 383,000. Isle of Man is 77,500. Monaco is 33,800. San Marino
> is 28,400. Slovenia is just over the mark at 1.95 million. Svalbard and
> Jan Mayen is 2,200.
>
> If you go by proportionality of 20,000 FSP members to 1.5 million Free
> State population, then the needed EFSP members to effect similar
> libertarian change would be, for each of the candidates above:
>
> State                Needed EFSP Members
> Andorra              960
> Gibraltar            387
> Guernsey & Alderney  840
> Iceland              3920
> Jersey               1174
> Lichtenstein         462
> Estonia              16907
> Malta                1107
> San Marino           379
> Isle of Man          1034
> Monaco               451
> Slovenia             26000
> Svalbard & Jan Mayen 29
>
> And these are just nations IN europe. There are also territories of
> european nations all around the world as well that range from spits to
> uninhabited atolls to major colonial posessions. This is also just
> looking at whole countries rather than just departments or provinces,
> etc. There are also a large number of allodial freeholds still held in
> feudal tenancy.
>
> Just looking at the population numbers, I would say that if an EFSP can
> get going, there are some really good potential locations. From these
> candidates, all that they really need to do is figure out which ones
> are already the most libertarian

I think that is hopelessly optimistic.
At the very least you are going to need more hardcore libertarians than
people on welfare, not to mention conservatives and socialists who will
disagree on fundamental issues.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 22 20:43:16 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:43:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] taxifornia earthquake
In-Reply-To: <000101c3c8c3$1048a4c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031222204316.5253.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> I
> suspect the epicenter was a good 100 km or more to
> the south of
> San Jose.

According to another email I just got...

> According to the news, this was a 6.4 earthquake,
> centered 7 miles NE of San Simeon and was felt from
> Los Angeles to San Francisco.

The 7 story what-passes-for-a-skyscraper-around-here
(Mountain View) my office is in was briefly partially
evacuated, due to some people on the 3rd and above
floors having mild panic attacks.  (Which is the real
danger in these cases, in terms of damage caused.)


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 22 20:46:10 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:46:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] taxifornia earthquake
In-Reply-To: <000101c3c8c3$1048a4c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031222204610.6632.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > Sure but I mean in the big picture the singu
> > 
> > WHOA Earthquake!  Light fixtures swinging.  Everyone OK?
> > 
> 
> OK I have a chandalier on about a 3 meter chain hanging in
> the front room and it was swinging in the north-south
> direction, and it was a gentle low frequency S-wave, (caused
> me to get a little woozy) so it has evidently travelled a 
> long ways, and there are few major faults to the north, so I
> suspect the epicenter was a good 100 km or more to the south of
> San Jose.

I'm suprised you haven't drawn a scale on your wall, or table top, or
ceiling to make your chandelier a good siesmometer.....I recall reading
a story about submariners who hung a pendulum to measure the distance
to depth charge blasts....

USGS says it was a 6.5 and centered in Cambria, halfway to LA from you.

That is my 8th post today. Conversation now shifting to extro-freedom,
where you can say as much as you want without certain people getting peeved....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 22 20:46:34 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:46:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <018301c3c820$d8001aa0$b0994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

> I just obtained Bill McKibben's much praised diatribe ENOUGH from the
> library.

Hmmm... Have we discussed Richard Falk's "Religion and Human Global
Governance" yet?  If not, looking at the review on amazon suggests
that should be next on your reading list Damien.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/031223337X

Robert



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 22 20:47:27 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:47:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c8c1$3e7ba600$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031222204727.68234.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] converging history
> > A singularity is by no means inevitable.
> > I rate the chance of extinction somewhat higher...
> 
> Sure but I mean in the big picture the singu
> 
> WHOA Earthquake!  Light fixtures swinging.  Everyone
> OK?

Yes, we Extropians are able to think about the far,
almost indefinite future, and about the immediate
present at the same time.  ^_^


From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 22 21:04:50 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:04:50 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <016b01c3c8cf$40c5dbc0$df994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 2:46 PM


> Have we discussed Richard Falk's "Religion and Human Global
> Governance" yet?
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/031223337X

And I see there another title linked:

War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning
by Chris Hedges

< A veteran New York Times war correspondent's complex, moving, and
thought-provoking reflection on how life is lived most intensely in times of
war.
General George S. Patton famously said, "Compared to war all other forms of
human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God, I do love it so!" Though
Patton was a notoriously single-minded general, it is nonetheless a sad fact
that war gives meaning to many lives, a fact with which we have become
familiar now that America is once again engaged in a military conflict. War
is an enticing elixir. It gives us purpose, resolve, a cause. It allows us
to be noble. >

Damien Broderick



From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 22 21:10:12 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:10:12 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <018a01c3c8cf$fee1c420$df994a43@texas.net>

http://www.keithchandler.com/Essays/Becoming%20Homo%20s.%20sapiens.html

Send your carefully thought-out retorts to Chandler, not to me. :)

Damien Broderick



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 22 21:11:20 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 13:11:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dragons
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221226550.32440-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031222211120.16897.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> On the other hand one of the reasons I went back and
> learned all about
> molecular biology was because I wanted a pet dragon
> (derived in part
> from my thinking dragons were cool from reading the
> Dragonriders of
> Pern series in my youth).  Once I learned enough
> about molecular
> biology I was convinced they were feasible (don't
> know about flying
> but there were some very big reptiles that flew) I
> started biotech
> companies doing aging research because I knew it was
> going to be
> a few decades until the technology developed
> sufficiently to do
> whole genome design (and I wanted to still be alive
> to take
> advantage of using it to design my dragon).
> 
> The other reason to have a pet dragon is because if
> I walk it
> around Greenlake its going to be a babe magnet big
> time. :-)

It would definitely be an artistic statement along the
lines of the glofish, but perhaps better received
given its existing wide precedent in fantasy.  So I
wonder...what all, exactly, would be necessary to
genetically engineer a fire-breathing, flying reptile?

I recall a description someone once worked up, of how
a dragon could have enzymes that digest certain rocks
(mainly limestone) to produce hydrogen gas, that was
stored in an internal bladder, allowing blimp-style
flight (with wings for horizontal propulsion).  This
gas could then be forcefully expelled by contracting
the bladder, either heating up a lot or going past
some kind of spark generator right at the edge of the
mouth (don't want to burn the tongue or gums).  The
description did not mention it, but if the bladder
could contract without expelling the gas, the dragon
could change its volume without changing its mass,
thus controlling the amount of lift its store of
hydrogen gave - and, most importantly, allowing the
dragon to land and take off without having to
sacrifice and regenerate hydrogen (which might limit
landing zones to spots with available limestone).

(The author then went on to speculate that in theory,
upon a dragon's death, the enzyme would eventually
dissolve the bones, leaving only soft tissues which
disentigrate normally.  The only "fossils" they would
leave behind would be pockets of natural gas and
perhaps a bit of oil.  But that is of little
importance to creating a new species.)

One could possibly start from an already existing
winged reptile.  Or perhaps take nature's cue for
optimized flight, and go for a feathered dragon: a
bird.  That way, most of the design needed for flight
is already done; we'd just need to add in the enzyme,
the bladder, and the heater/sparker.  Now, knowing
enough genetics to add in specific organs (rather than
an overall effect, as for the glofish) would be a
challenge...


From mhaislip at quest-web.com  Mon Dec 22 22:13:03 2003
From: mhaislip at quest-web.com (Michael Haislip)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 16:13:03 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"
In-Reply-To: <018a01c3c8cf$fee1c420$df994a43@texas.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<018a01c3c8cf$fee1c420$df994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.2.20031222160209.01faee48@mail.quest-web.com>

At 03:10 PM 12/22/2003, you wrote:
>http://www.keithchandler.com/Essays/Becoming%20Homo%20s.%20sapiens.html
>Send your carefully thought-out retorts to Chandler, not to me. :)


I want that 5 minutes of my life back.


-------------------------------------------------------
Michael Haislip
------------------------------------------------------- 



From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Mon Dec 22 22:18:57 2003
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:18:57 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"
In-Reply-To: <018a01c3c8cf$fee1c420$df994a43@texas.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<018a01c3c8cf$fee1c420$df994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0312222316420.2121@hercules>


Is this Chandler someone known in some circles?

The paragraph that starts with "No one really knows..." basically says:
"I think it's wrong, so it's bullshit."

What a subtle argumentt.

Ciao,
Alfio

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

>http://www.keithchandler.com/Essays/Becoming%20Homo%20s.%20sapiens.html
>
>Send your carefully thought-out retorts to Chandler, not to me. :)
>
>Damien Broderick
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 22 22:28:34 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:28:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221415260.1568-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Science Daily [1] is pointing out the current issue of the
Public Library of Science has an article [2] involving one
of the "most scattered all over the globe" bio research
projects I've run across (excepting perhaps the HGP) that
a significant fraction of the mouse stem cell transcriptome
has been determined.

Short conclusion -- we now know most of the genes that might
make stem cells behave as stem cells.  Next up -- testing
which subset(s) of those are the master control genes that
do the heavy lifting.  After that figure out if turning
on the master control genes (by methods to be determined --
or perhaps if they are disabled in "adult" cells -- augment
the genome with master genes using gene therapy protocols).

Voila -- retrodifferentiation -- turn adult cells back into
stem cells.  Back of the envelope guess -- 3 to 5 years.

So there may be two possibilities for self-renewal materials:
(a) isolate stem cells from the "caches" within the body;
(b) take any old cell (white blood cells, skin cells, etc.)
    and turn it back into a stem cell.

Once one has a good "self" stem cell grow up lots of them
and store them on ice for when they are needed.

Robert

1. Profiling The Genes That Make Stem Cells
   http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031222065220.htm

2. Transcriptome Analysis of Mouse Stem Cells and Early Embryos
   http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0000074
also:
   Gene Expression Profile Created for Mouse Stem Cells and Developing Embryo
   http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0000087
   (which is a little less technical).





From amara at amara.com  Mon Dec 22 12:40:26 2003
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:40:26 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Comet missions dates update
Message-ID: <p05100300bc0c94000d84@[10.0.1.33]>


64 Days to when the Rosetta launch window opens, February 26, 2004.
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=13
This is a mission that has been under development for ten years,
formerly to Comet Wirtanen, now to comet Churyumov-Gersimenkov.

ESA does NOT have a backup plan.

11 Days to Stardust Comet Wild-2 Encounter
http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov


-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"I couldn't read it because my parents forgot to pay the gravity
bill." --Calvin


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 22 22:38:27 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:38:27 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dragons
References: <20031222211120.16897.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <036b01c3c8dc$56f25bf0$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 9:11 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dragons


> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> > On the other hand one of the reasons I went back and
> > learned all about
> > molecular biology was because I wanted a pet dragon
> > (derived in part
> > from my thinking dragons were cool from reading the
> > Dragonriders of
> > Pern series in my youth).  Once I learned enough
> > about molecular
> > biology I was convinced they were feasible (don't
> > know about flying
> > but there were some very big reptiles that flew) I
> > started biotech
> > companies doing aging research because I knew it was
> > going to be
> > a few decades until the technology developed
> > sufficiently to do
> > whole genome design (and I wanted to still be alive
> > to take
> > advantage of using it to design my dragon).
> >
> > The other reason to have a pet dragon is because if
> > I walk it
> > around Greenlake its going to be a babe magnet big
> > time. :-)
>
> It would definitely be an artistic statement along the
> lines of the glofish, but perhaps better received
> given its existing wide precedent in fantasy.  So I
> wonder...what all, exactly, would be necessary to
> genetically engineer a fire-breathing, flying reptile?
>
> I recall a description someone once worked up, of how
> a dragon could have enzymes that digest certain rocks
> (mainly limestone) to produce hydrogen gas, that was
> stored in an internal bladder, allowing blimp-style
> flight (with wings for horizontal propulsion).  This
> gas could then be forcefully expelled by contracting
> the bladder, either heating up a lot or going past
> some kind of spark generator right at the edge of the
> mouth (don't want to burn the tongue or gums).  The
> description did not mention it, but if the bladder
> could contract without expelling the gas, the dragon
> could change its volume without changing its mass,
> thus controlling the amount of lift its store of
> hydrogen gave - and, most importantly, allowing the
> dragon to land and take off without having to
> sacrifice and regenerate hydrogen (which might limit
> landing zones to spots with available limestone).
>
> (The author then went on to speculate that in theory,
> upon a dragon's death, the enzyme would eventually
> dissolve the bones, leaving only soft tissues which
> disentigrate normally.  The only "fossils" they would
> leave behind would be pockets of natural gas and
> perhaps a bit of oil.  But that is of little
> importance to creating a new species.)
>
> One could possibly start from an already existing
> winged reptile.  Or perhaps take nature's cue for
> optimized flight, and go for a feathered dragon: a
> bird.  That way, most of the design needed for flight
> is already done; we'd just need to add in the enzyme,
> the bladder, and the heater/sparker.  Now, knowing
> enough genetics to add in specific organs (rather than
> an overall effect, as for the glofish) would be a
> challenge...

Well, here's a 'mythological creature' project that could probably be
undertaken now, and if successful would be worth a fortune.
Creating a Unicorn.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From thespike at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 22 22:39:43 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 16:39:43 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com><018a01c3c8cf$fee1c420$df994a43@texas.net>
	<6.0.1.1.2.20031222160209.01faee48@mail.quest-web.com>
Message-ID: <01ab01c3c8dc$876af580$df994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Haislip" <mhaislip at quest-web.com>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 4:13 PM

> At 03:10 PM 12/22/2003, you wrote:
> >http://www.keithchandler.com/Essays/Becoming%20Homo%20s.%20sapiens.html
> >Send your carefully thought-out retorts to Chandler, not to me. :)

> I want that 5 minutes of my life back.

Me too, but I posted that url as in index of the sorts of `reasoning' that
claims and arguments by Kurzweil and others are receiving. It's obvious
enough that this is what we *expect* to see, but it's somewhat chilling when
it actually appears.

Damien Broderick



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 22 22:53:03 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:53:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dragons
In-Reply-To: <036b01c3c8dc$56f25bf0$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <20031222225303.90590.qmail@web80402.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> Well, here's a 'mythological creature' project that
> could probably be
> undertaken now, and if successful would be worth a
> fortune.
> Creating a Unicorn.

Been done.  It turned out much simpler just to glue a
horn to a horse's head...until the animal rights'
activists turned out against the circus (literally)
that
did it.  Problem: it might seem so much simpler and
tempting to alter an already born animal than to
tinker
with the genetics that, in practice, tinkering might
always be the path ultimately taken - which ruins the
point of the project.


From artillo at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 23:23:10 2003
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:23:10 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0312222316420.2121@hercules>
Message-ID: <000001c3c8e2$911e9310$9865fea9@bjsmain2>

LOL Alfio I was thinking the EXACT same thing when I read that too! :P

Artillo

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Alfio
Puglisi
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 5:19 PM
To: Damien Broderick; ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"



Is this Chandler someone known in some circles?

The paragraph that starts with "No one really knows..." basically says:
"I think it's wrong, so it's bullshit."

What a subtle argumentt.

Ciao,
Alfio

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

>http://www.keithchandler.com/Essays/Becoming%20Homo%20s.%20sapiens.html
>
>Send your carefully thought-out retorts to Chandler, not to me. :)
>
>Damien Broderick
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 22 23:39:55 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:39:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dragons
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221445250.1568-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031222233955.60387.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> I will not quote Adrian's comments for the sake of
> brevity.

Though I will quote Robert's, since they were
apparently intended for the list.

> I would like to see the article he cited.

Googling a bit...the theory seems to trace its way
back to a Peter Dickinson book,
_The_Flight_of_Dragons_.  Fiction, of course, and
mostly fantasy, but a touch of science fiction.  ISTR
there was a movie version of that book made.

> Because
> one
> doesn't get hydrogen from limestone (which is
> CaCO3).
> Perhaps they are assuming you get a reaction with
> the
> dilute HCl (0.15M) in the stomach.  But if I'm
> reading
> this:
>  
> http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~chem151/lab151/antacidB/
> freshman chemistry lab correctly it looks like you
> get
> CO2 not H2.  Oooops...
> 
> Now, my strategy was a little more practical.
> 
> a) Take one Komodo Dragon Genome (probably
> affordable
>    by individuals in 10-15 years).
> b) Take one Albatross Genome (also affordable in
> that
>    time frame)
> c) Take one Cow Genome (probably available in the
> next
>    1-2 years.
> 
> Combine Komodo reptile genes with Albatross
> light-weight
> wings, bone, etc. with cow digestive tract (using
> bacteria
> to produce methane) and one is getting close.
> 
> One may need to push on the wingspan a little bit
> but
> in a decade we will probably have a good
> understanding
> of how structural genes work.
> 
> Still haven't worked out how you get the methane out
> the front end rather than the back end and how you
> ignite the methane but those are just details.

Line the digestive tract with a kidney-like filter,
designed to extract methane and only methane.  Weak
bioelectric effects - just enough to put a few sparks
in an outgoing stream of hydrogen - should not prove
that difficult; google for "electrocyte", and/or see
http://wildcat.phys.nwu.edu/classes/2002Fall/Phyx135-2/Projects/Electric_eel/charge.html

> One
> might want to require manual lighting of the fire in
> any case to avoid liability risks.

Just have a legally nonexistant person (i.e., use a
fake name) sign a release accepting all responsibility
for a purchased dragon, then have that dragon released
into the wild.  Any resulting liability gets directed
to that person, while the corporation formed to make
the dragon dissolves and releases its IP into the
public domain.

Granted, it might be difficult to get a lot of money
that way.

> One nice thing about this design is that the dragon
> is a vegetarian and not a meat eater.
> 
> Robert

So you could train it to scout for villages so
backwards they sacrifice their own children to
"appease" what they do not understand, and relocate
said sacrifices to adoption centers in more civilized
societies, without worrying if it got hungry?


From aperick at centurytel.net  Mon Dec 22 23:03:36 2003
From: aperick at centurytel.net (rick)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:03:36 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] useful knowledge-base software
In-Reply-To: <200312222231.hBMMV9E06497@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3c8df$d5fac6f0$0200a8c0@soy0450mhz>

Have any of you seen this:

http://www.bitsmithsoft.com/?source=P22020300071500

it is somewhat like a remembrance agent program that I worked on several
years ago -- but it does not try to be an "agent". I think I may end up
using this application to store all my personal articles, clippings,
data and etc. 

Also, do any of you know much about the high speed net access being
offered via cell phone towers? I wonder if this will become my future
means of access when I finally get my new tablet PC.
http://www.pcclub.com/edge/ is a link to the AT&T flavor of gprs that I
use now from T-mobile. 


http://home.centurytel.net/rickw/




From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec 23 00:15:45 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:15:45 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dragons
References: <20031222233955.60387.qmail@web80406.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01f701c3c8e9$ecf7bde0$df994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>

> > I would like to see the article he cited.
>
> Googling a bit...the theory seems to trace its way
> back to a Peter Dickinson book,
> _The_Flight_of_Dragons_.  Fiction, of course, and
> mostly fantasy, but a touch of science fiction.

I haven't seen that one, but the idea is there fully fledged (as I recall)
in Poul Anderson's dated but wonderful THREE HEARTS AND THREE LIONS (1953).

Damien Broderick



From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Dec 23 01:19:03 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:19:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] useful knowledge-base software
In-Reply-To: <000001c3c8df$d5fac6f0$0200a8c0@soy0450mhz>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221715200.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, rick wrote:

> Also, do any of you know much about the high speed net access being
> offered via cell phone towers? I wonder if this will become my future
> means of access when I finally get my new tablet PC.
> http://www.pcclub.com/edge/ is a link to the AT&T flavor of gprs that I
> use now from T-mobile.

I don't know about "high speed" access, but I have T-Mobile's unlimited
$20-per-month GPRS service with my account (it's $30 if you don't have
regular voice service with them as well), and it's not bad -- anywhere
from 28.8kbps to 115kbps depending on location, conditions, etc.  Feels 
about like a regular dial-up connection, at least, and surprisingly the 
lag is not bad -- I can SSH or telnet at regular dial-up speeds.

With my Sony Ericsson T610 phone or my Nokia 3650, I can access the 
Internet via bluetooth, so my Zaurus SL-C750, Jornada 720, or Sigmarion 
III handhelds can access the Internet with just my bluetooth CF card in 
the slot, while the phone remains in my pocket.  Extremely handy for 
mobile Internet use.



From jef at jefallbright.net  Tue Dec 23 02:13:13 2003
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:13:13 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] useful knowledge-base software
References: <000001c3c8df$d5fac6f0$0200a8c0@soy0450mhz>
Message-ID: <03c601c3c8fa$52cf4380$1602650a@int.veeco.com>

rick wrote:
> Have any of you seen this:
>
> http://www.bitsmithsoft.com/?source=P22020300071500
>
> it is somewhat like a remembrance agent program that I worked on
> several years ago -- but it does not try to be an "agent". I think I
> may end up using this application to store all my personal articles,
> clippings, data and etc.
>


I used to use PersonalBrain for this, but gave it up because of the
proprietary and closed database structure.  I didn't want to trust my
knowledge base to that.  This is the same nifty-looking relational topic
display as on Kurzweil's site.  I just looked again, and it appears they
might now have a utility to export the database in some form.  It still
appears that they're only interested in really big corporate accounts
though.

At work I use Outlook 2000 for this purpose.  It has the advantage of a
consistent user interface, and I can easily (for the most part) drag and
drop between email, tasks, and Word documents.  Each item can be assigned
multiple categories, the whole thing syncs nicely with my Palm using
KeySuite, and my work stuff is available on the web via Exchange Server.

For personal knowledge capture and sharing, I'm mainly using my web site,
www.jefallbright.net, coded in PHP and MySQL using Drupal with some patches
and enhancements.  It allows me to use a large set of keywords, relate them
in parent-child-sibling fashion, and it's completely open so I can grow it
and modify it as I wish.  It serves well as a web-based scrap book to share
on topics that interest me, along with some of my thoughts and comments.
I've also been *amazed* at how many people have subscribed and receive daily
notifications of (a portion of) new content.

I've long been intrigued by the notion of a remembrance agent, but Brad
Rhodes' implementation doesn't run well under Windows (last update was in
2001) and I don't have time to code something better myself.

I also participated in beta-testing of a product called Find, that attempted
to index all email and other documents on a Windows machine and make them
available via realtime keyword search, but it was extremely resource-hungry
and it appears the company has gone out of business.  I understand Microsoft
plans to provide a database driven file system which should be a good step
in that direction.

I'm looking forward to Chandler, especially because it's open source, and
it's being implemented and modifiable in Python.

- Jef
www.jefallbright.net



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Dec 23 03:08:13 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 14:08:13 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
References: <20031222151443.42658.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <011b01c3c902$00f3c880$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Thanks Mike and David for the links and the good overview. Gives me
a leg up for further investigations.  

BTW I found a slightly dated (Dec 2002) summary of stem cells/therapeutic
cloning state by state. 

Looks like New Hampshire considered a law against 'therapeutic cloning' 
though not by that name but as at (Dec 2002) found it "inexpedient to
legislate". http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/chhumancl.htm

Good for New Hampshire. 

Regards,
Brett



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Tue Dec 23 03:11:12 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:11:12 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] European Free State Project
In-Reply-To: <011b01c3c902$00f3c880$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
References: <20031222151443.42658.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031222220744.03556030@mail.comcast.net>

Brett Paatsch wrote:

>Thanks Mike and David for the links and the good overview. Gives me
>a leg up for further investigations.

You're welcome.  The more of you guys we can lure this way the better....

>Looks like New Hampshire considered a law against 'therapeutic cloning'
>though not by that name but as at (Dec 2002) found it "inexpedient to
>legislate". http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/chhumancl.htm

That's a felicitous phrase -- "inexpedient to legislate."  Rolls off the 
tongue, doesn't it?  Not as graceful as "Congress shall make no law." but 
pretty good for here-and-now.


-- David Lubkin.




From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 23 05:49:49 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 21:49:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221226550.32440-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031223054949.13820.qmail@web41208.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

<snip>

> The other reason to have a pet dragon is because if
> I walk it around Greenlake its going to be a babe 
> magnet big time. :-)
>
 
"What's that you're draggin?"  Becomes, "What's that,
your dragon?"

Best, Jeff Davis

        "Life doesn't have to survive -- 
            its the *code* that counts."
                      Robert J. Bradbury


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec 23 11:35:11 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 12:35:11 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] why AI is "bullshit"
In-Reply-To: <01ab01c3c8dc$876af580$df994a43@texas.net>
References: <6.0.1.1.2.20031222160209.01faee48@mail.quest-web.com>
	<01ab01c3c8dc$876af580$df994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031223113511.GD32264@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 04:39:43PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote:

> Me too, but I posted that url as in index of the sorts of `reasoning' that
> claims and arguments by Kurzweil and others are receiving. It's obvious
> enough that this is what we *expect* to see, but it's somewhat chilling when
> it actually appears.

I'm not sure this reasoning is going to prevent anything, though. Except
enhance the surprise of those who bought that drivel.

Here's some spirituality for you: you can buy multi-TBit/s switches, today.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031223/c630011d/attachment.bin>

From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 23 15:02:37 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 09:02:37 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu><5.2.1.1.2.20031221124459.0207eef0@mail.gmu.edu>
	<001f01c3c895$ce1e2430$2ee4f418@markcomputer>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE39Dl8zmX76q00014bc2@hotmail.com>

I just started following this thread. Has it been considered that the
phenomenon is cultural and not evolutionary at all? In wealthier nations,
they key to reproductive success in our (mostly) monogamous species would be
to "fit in". You don't "fit in" and appear responsible when you go having 15
children. This applys to both men and women. Excess baggage is a bad thing.
We can't exactly kill all the young when we take over the pride.
Education also would play a key role here. People struggling to eat really
could care less about the future of their social group, be it a tribe, city,
or country. All they really have time for is the survival of themselves and
their immediate family. A larger family would translate into more power
which would allow your family access to resources that otherwise would be
unattainable because another family had already been there first.

As I look at that on paper, it reads quite nicely although I feel I forgot
something I was going to write. Also, please note that I havenever been to a
third world or developing country. I really haven't read that much about
them either.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Walker" <mark at permanentend.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 8:13 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robin Hanson"
> Mark Walker, PhD
> Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
> University of Toronto
> Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
> 15 Devonshire Place
> Toronto
> M5S 1H8
> www.permanentend.org
>
>
> > The demographic transition is the phenomena whereby the birthrate falls
> > dramatically when nations get richer.  This phenomena is *not* driven
> > primarily by birth control.  It happened before birth control, and poor
> > nations now have high birth rates after cheap birth control.
>
> Ok, I see why this is more perplexing. The evolutionary explanation for
this
> aside, is the causal mechanism known? Given that birthrates drop, and it
is
> not birth control measures that are responsible,  it seems that either
> copulation or fertility rates must have dropped. Do we know if it is one
or
> the other (or both)? As for the evolutionary explanation, this is an
> interesting question. Admittedly it is quite a stretch but I wonder if it
is
> related to the following evolutionary counter-intuitive result. I've bred
a
> number of aquarium fish (e.g., Discus, clown fish, etc.) and generally the
> birthrate is higher for those that are kept a little hungry rather than
> those that are fed until they are satiated. This seems counter-intuitive
> since one would think that the fish with the extra calories would have
more
> offspring rather. The best breeding results occur when they are fed lots
for
> say a couple of weeks and then fed almost nothing for a few days. I've
> observed the similar results with breeding worms. In any event, the
> hypothesis based on this flimsy evidence is that human birthrates are
> correlated negatively with total calories or the steadiness of food
supply.
> (Perhaps it goes without saying that the correlation will fail below a
> certain level of calories that stress the organisms so much that they
cannot
> breed). Obviously evidence for this will be hard to come by since in
general
> the rich nations have a greater calorie consumption and poorer nation
fewer.
> http://www.fao.org/NEWS/1998/981204-e.htm We would need to find examples
> where poor nations have a steady and abundant supply or rich nations have
> low calorie consumption or periods of interruption in their food supply to
> refute the hypothesis.
>
> Mark
>
> Mark Walker, PhD
> Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
> University of Toronto
> Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
> 15 Devonshire Place
> Toronto
> M5S 1H8
> www.permanentend.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 23 15:15:13 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 09:15:13 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution and adoption
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu><002d01c3c7e4$4b33e930$2ee4f418@markcomputer><00de01c3c808$8d296620$b0994a43@texas.net>
	<001301c3c88e$b6c8a5a0$2ee4f418@markcomputer>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE44C6Ny0YuoI000067db@hotmail.com>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Walker" <mark at permanentend.org>
To: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] evolution and adoption


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Damien Broderick"
>
> > I'm not sure how tongue in cheek this is, Mark. What's you've described
> is,
> > after all, exactly what wealthy people did in the 19th and early 20th,
and
> > indeed perhaps all the way back to the invention of hierachical power
> > culture. Wet nurses, nannies, private tutors, boarding schools or their
> > harsh equivalent; all these allowed the luckless wives of the rich to
> > produce one child rapidly after another, many of them doomed to perish,
> > without wasting time and effort on emotional support, bonding, etc--and
> the
> > wonderful result was that these warped kids proved just the right stuff
> for
> > going out and building empires, thus perpetuating the process. Until it
> > stopped working. And now nations like the UK struggle to deal with the
> > legacy bullshit embedded in the culture.
> >
> I certainly don't deny that this sort of thing happened, and it didn't
> always happen with the rich.  Rousseau (who was not rich) had five
children
> with his mistress and gave them all up to orphanages, which was to subject
> his children to even more appalling conditions that the rich foisted on
> their children. My point simply is that since orphanages and adoption give
> one's offspring a high probability of survival it seems to make
evolutionary
> sense to have as many children as possible and give them up to such
> agencies. I agree with you that this is not necessarily a good thing, only
> that it seems to make sense, evolutionarily speaking.
>
It's easy, when considering human activity, to forget that there's a
cultural side to human evolution. Unless you are so powerful that you are
"untouchable", doing things that are culturally unacceptable doesn;t help
you get along with the rest of the "tribe". We are social creatures and the
unspoken agreement may be "have no more children that you can personally
take care of. We won't have to worry about taking care of your children and
you won't have to worry about taking care of ours". Culturally, the survival
of the tribe is more important than the reproductive success of one
individual. This cultural signifigance doesn;t apply to the worms or fish
you are describing.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 23 15:26:26 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 07:26:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031223054949.13820.qmail@web41208.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031223152626.25554.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > The other reason to have a pet dragon is because if
> > I walk it around Greenlake its going to be a babe 
> > magnet big time. :-)
> >
>  
> "What's that you're draggin?"  Becomes, "What's that,
> your dragon?"

You get to say to girls, with a straight face,"Wanna pet my lizard?" ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 23 15:29:05 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 10:29:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <20031222112003.GC32264@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <000501c3c969$8394ec30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Eugen Leitl wrote,
> Meanwhile, I remain rather underwhelmed. (Perhaps, I'm just a 
> naturally more morose type than Spike).

I have long observed that technology developers and implementers are often
more realistic about difficulties and delays than technology promoters and
consumers.  (And I certainly count Eugen among the former rather than the
latter!)  As an expert learns about the problem space, it always becomes
apparent that it is more convoluted and complicated than had previously been
assumed.  The people actually working with the technology can make much more
educated guesses and predictions than those waiting for the technology.  The
time-frame projections always seem too short to the developers and
implementers, and too long to the promoters and consumers.  The former have
to focus on all the requirements and developments needed to achieve results.
Whereas the latter tend to focus only on their wish list of desired results.
The hands-on experience, knowledge and inside information will always give a
more realistic perspective than the less-detailed promoter representations
or consumer expectations.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 23 15:40:31 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 10:40:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Affective computing: Candy bars for the soul
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE39Dl8zmX76q00014bc2@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c3c96b$1c748db0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Kevin Freels wrote,
> I just started following this thread. Has it been considered 
> that the phenomenon is cultural and not evolutionary at all? 

Yes.  Your concept of "fitting in" is a very strong influence.  It helps
push the whole group to act in the same way, even when some of the
individuals may not feel the direct affect of influences.

> People struggling to eat really could care less about 
> the future of their social group, be it a tribe, city, or 
> country. All they really have time for is the survival of 
> themselves and their immediate family. A larger family would 
> translate into more power which would allow your family 
> access to resources that otherwise would be unattainable 
> because another family had already been there first.

In earlier times, children were a bonus.  They helped work and support the
family.  They gathered food, hunted, watched other children, performed work,
etc.  The more children a family had, the richer each individual became.

But in richer societies, children are a burden.  The don't work and support
the family.  They cost money to feed, clothe, raise and educate.  Families
today not only don't benefit from children, but they can't afford a lot of
children.  The more children a family has, the poorer each individual
becomes.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From megao at sasktel.net  Sun Dec 21 17:30:35 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 11:30:35 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Epignomics/epigenetics- Nature Vs Nurture re-visited
Message-ID: <3FE5D8BA.EA85302D@sasktel.net>

>From Pagees 10 and 12 of Vol3#9 Nov/Dec 2003 PharmaGenomics
http://www.pharmagenomicsonline.com

Sorry article is not posted to the web but this item merits ongoing
discussion
**********************************************************
New Research Thrusts Epigenetics into the Drug and Diagnostic Spotlight
"Study results in this emerging field could pique the interest - and
open the pockets - of big pharma"

Recent research conducted at Duke University (Durham, NC, USA) into gene
methylation has revealed the correlation between a pregnant female's
diet and gene function in her offspring - findings that not only advance
our understanding of nutritional intake and susceptibility to disease
but also have implications for the application of epignetics to the
discovery of new drug therapeutics.

Epigenetics , as defined in the 10 august 2001 issue of SCIENCE, is the
study of inheritable changes in gene function that occur without a
change in DNA sequence.
The research team at Duke University, led by Randy Jirtle, professor of
the departments of radiation, oncology and pathology, focused its work
on Agouti mice, a strain of mouse with active genes that are linked to a
yellow-colored coat, as well as to obesisty, diabetes and cancer.  The
female mice were given extra vitamins and supplements - B12, folic acid,
choline and betaine - that affected methylation of these particular
genes.  Methyl groups are derived entirely from the foods people eat;
methylation allows environmental factors to tweak gene expression
without creating permanent mutations.  The supplements interacted with
the methyl group attached to a chromasome and altered the gene
expression by making the strands of DNA coil tight enough to cease
function.  The Agouti's offspring were born with a normal, brown-colored
coat and no inherited predispostion for obesity, diabetes or cancer.

"Our mouse study provided the first evidence that nutritional
supplementation during pregnancy can determine adult susceptibility to
diseases by altering the methylation of transposons adjacent to
housekeeping genes", says Jirtle.  "Thus, retroposons and also
imprinting regulatory elements of imprinted genes now can be considered
as genomic targets that link nutrition during early development with
adult disease susceptibility."

The next step in this project will be to define those epigenetically
liable targets in humans that result in diseases such as cancer, autism,
and bipolar disease.  The studies need to be done in humans because the
position of the retroposons and the imprinting regulatory elements are
different in each species.  Jirtle believes that identifying the targets
involved in epignetic deregulation will have a tremendous impact on the
drug discovery industry because it will delineate novel signaling
pathways mechanistically involved in these diseases and will result in a
completely different concept of drug design - altering epignetic
profiles rather than blocking enzymes or receptors.

"Our findings proved the important principle that environmental
exposures during early development can result in dramatic phenotype
changes in adulthood via altered DNA methylation," Jirtle says.  "This
will cause scientists to think differently about the etiology of chronic
diseases and the role of the environment in the disease process.  It
also will significantly enhance the visibility and credibility of
epignetic research".

Also advancing epignetic research is the the work being done by the
Human Epigenome Consortium, a collaboration between Epigenomics AG
(Berlin, Germany) and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute (Hinxton,
Cambridge, UK).
A pilot study, funded by the European Union, of methylation patterns in
the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) recently was completed.  The
sucess of this research led to the launch of the Human Epigenome Project
(HEP), the goal of which is to identify and describe sites in the human
genome at which cytosine bases are modified by DNA methylation.

The HEP pilot study began in 2000.  Researchers developed a pipeline for
large-scale methylation analysis using 150 expressed genes of MHC human
chromasome 6 as a model.  "The results now are being analysed and
prepared for publication," says Stephen Beck, head of human sequencing
at the Sanger Institute.  "[The results] confirmed our prediction that
methylation patterns are tissue specific.  The prescence of methylation
variable positions, we believe, will significantly increase our ability
to understand and diagnose disease".

According to the consortioum's web site, data analysis is broken down
into five steps.  First, genomic DNA goes through a bisulphite treatment
that converts non-methylated cytosines into a different base - uracil.
Next, the treated DNA is amplified in a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)
using bisulphite specific primers.  Third, the PCR products are
sequenced.  Then, the generated trace files go through data
normalization specific for bisulphite-converted sequences.  Lastly,trace
files are visualized or shown in data.

HEP researchers are working with Epigenomics' proprietary
high-throughput technology, which involves DNA methylation assays that
can run on microarrays, real-time PCR and primer-extension-based
products.  The consortium anticipates that the project will be completed
in five years.

The project is expected to yield commercial benefits in the diagnostic
sector.  "As far as we know, it has not yet been applied for extensive
drug or target discovery, but because this is a conceivable approach, we
might see it happen in the future". says Epignomics CSO Kurt Berlin.

Jirtle says he believes the effect of epignetics on the drug discovery
industry will be "massive; however, most of the pharmaceutical companies
just don't realize that yet".   The diseases that most likely result
from epignetic deregulation are cancer, autism and diabetes.  Therefore,
these diseases are likely to be the first targets of epignetic-derived
drugs.  Jirtle says, "It will probably be some time before we see
epigenetic-derived therapeutic or diagnostic pharmaceuticals because we
are just beginning to define disease-causing epigenetic mutations, and
the pharmaceutical industry is still not taking epignetics very
seriously".





From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Dec 22 04:42:43 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:42:43 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] FW: CPU component size
Message-ID: <004d01c3c846$09ee3d60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

>
<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%
20Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif>
file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%2
0Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif

>Kinna hard to look at something that ain't there...

It's Intel's roadmap for the next few years. This is an experiment: try
opening the enclosure.  spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031221/8a6aba8c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Wayne Magor" <wemagor5 at yahoo.com>
Subject: CPU component size
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:33:05 -0800
Size: 94143
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031221/8a6aba8c/attachment.mht>

From mark at permanentend.org  Tue Dec 23 16:08:50 2003
From: mark at permanentend.org (Mark Walker)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 11:08:50 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution and adoption
References: <5.2.1.1.2.20031215121713.01eec398@mail.gmu.edu><002d01c3c7e4$4b33e930$2ee4f418@markcomputer><00de01c3c808$8d296620$b0994a43@texas.net><001301c3c88e$b6c8a5a0$2ee4f418@markcomputer>
	<Law10-OE44C6Ny0YuoI000067db@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <007001c3c96f$10e17630$2ee4f418@markcomputer>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Freels"

> It's easy, when considering human activity, to forget that there's a
> cultural side to human evolution. Unless you are so powerful that you are
> "untouchable", doing things that are culturally unacceptable doesn;t help
> you get along with the rest of the "tribe". We are social creatures and
the
> unspoken agreement may be "have no more children that you can personally
> take care of. We won't have to worry about taking care of your children
and
> you won't have to worry about taking care of ours". Culturally, the
survival
> of the tribe is more important than the reproductive success of one
> individual. This cultural signifigance doesn;t apply to the worms or fish
> you are describing.

By the 'cultural side' of evolution I take it you mean something like
nongenetic intergenerational transmission of information (Bonner, The
Evolution of Culture in Animals, 1983). The most prevalent hypothesis among
experts in human behavior is that human activity is primarily guided by
culture rather than genetics, although it may be that the tide is turning.
There is lots of evidence that about 30 to 50 % of the variability in human
personality is under genetic influence (see my paper "Genetic Virtue"
http://www.permanentend.org/gvp.htm for a brief review of some of this
evidence). In any event, I would be surprised if the number of children one
has is entirely under culture control but I agree that this is certainly not
a hypothesis we can dismiss a priori. Do you have any evidence to think that
this phenomena is entirely or mostly under cultural influence like the
length of skirts?

Mark

Mark Walker, PhD
Research Associate, Philosophy, Trinity College
University of Toronto
Room 214  Gerald Larkin Building
15 Devonshire Place
Toronto
M5S 1H8
www.permanentend.org





From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Dec 23 17:39:06 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 12:39:06 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIOTECH: Cloning in NJ? - New Treatments for Diseases
Message-ID: <1700-220031222317396374@M2W055.mail2web.com>

Cloning legalized in New Jersey? 

---------- 
[WorldNetDaily] 

"Called by opponents the most radical cloning bill ever, a measure passed
by the New Jersey state Assembly would allow cloned human embryos to be
implanted in a womb then destroyed for research use....The bill's sponsors
argue it will be an important advance in...new treatments for Parkinson's
disease, Alzheimer's and other illnesses." (12/17/03) 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36170 



--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 23 21:32:17 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 13:32:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221415260.1568-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031223213217.10803.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> Voila -- retrodifferentiation -- turn adult cells
> back into stem cells.  Back of the envelope guess --

> 3 to 5 years.

Too slow.  Try yesterday.

We're in the moment of "low-hanging fruit",
genomically speaking, and the "tree" is groaning under
its burden.  (Would that be "the tree of life"?  ;-} )

>From Eurekalert:

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-12/sri-rct122203.php

Regenerative chemical turns muscle cells into stem
cells

A group of researchers from The Scripps Research
Institute has identified a small synthetic molecule
that can induce a cell to undergo
dedifferentiation--to move backwards developmentally
from its current state to form its own precursor cell.

These precursor cells are multipotent...

Best, Jeff Davis

   "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                           Ray Charles

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 23 22:14:39 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 22:14:39 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <20031223213217.10803.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <02b301c3c9a2$2846a830$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Davis" <jrd1415 at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 9:32 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes


> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Voila -- retrodifferentiation -- turn adult cells
> > back into stem cells.  Back of the envelope guess --
> 
> > 3 to 5 years.
> 
> Too slow.  Try yesterday.
> 
> We're in the moment of "low-hanging fruit",
> genomically speaking, and the "tree" is groaning under
> its burden.  (Would that be "the tree of life"?  ;-} )
> 
> >From Eurekalert:
> 
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2003-12/sri-rct122203.php
> 
> Regenerative chemical turns muscle cells into stem
> cells
> 
> A group of researchers from The Scripps Research
> Institute has identified a small synthetic molecule
> that can induce a cell to undergo
> dedifferentiation--to move backwards developmentally
> from its current state to form its own precursor cell.
> 
> These precursor cells are multipotent...
 

The big question IMO is whether these are 'old' stem cells.
What's the state of their 'clock'?

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 23 22:40:04 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 14:40:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <20031223213217.10803.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231430410.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Jeff Davis wrote:

> Regenerative chemical turns muscle cells into stem cells
>
> A group of researchers from The Scripps Research
> Institute has identified a small synthetic molecule that
> that can induce a cell to undergo dedifferentiation--to
> move backwards developmentally from its current state
> to form its own precursor cell.
>
> These precursor cells are multipotent...

Careful careful -- In the first place muscle tissue contains
muscle stem cells.  I believe it has been shown that properly
stimulated these can differentiate into other cells.  Mature
muscle cells are one of the few cell types in the body that
are multinucleated (the other I'm aware of is some liver cells).
Getting a cell to revert from multiple nuclei to a single nuclei
so it can really be multipotent (most cells only have a single
nuclei) has got to be a neat trick -- I see no reason why natural
selection would include a program for this purpose.  In my mind
this is going to require some kind of mechanical "uncloning"
operation to remove the extra nuclei then some removal of
the switches that drove differentiation.  And it is starting
to look like differentation may be driven in part by molecular
modifications to the histones (acetylation, glycosylation, etc.)
removing those modifications from just the right histones is
going to be a mean trick.

I'd want to look at the scientific paper(s) -- I suspect they just
happened to have stumbled across a way to promote the growth of normal
muscle stem cells.

Another good example of really bad reporting in the public press.

A little knowledge is a bad thing.

And you can quote me on that Jeff.  :-)
Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 23 22:51:20 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 14:51:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <02b301c3c9a2$2846a830$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Dirk Bruere wrote:

> The big question IMO is whether these are 'old' stem cells.
> What's the state of their 'clock'?

The clock's state will be most likely be "older", though perhaps
not as old as adult cells in the body.  Aubrey, Rafal and I have
discussed this in some older notes over the last 6-12 months.

Aging (IMO) is ultimately caused by the misrepair of DNA double
strand breaks.  There are a host of things you can get leading
up to that -- point mutations (leading to cancer), undigestable
molecules leading to lipofuscin accumulation, protein glycosylation
leading to hardening of the arteries, shortening of telomeres leading
to decreased immune system response and reduced cellular replication
potential and increased cellular scenescence and probably a host
of other things.  Aubrey's IBG proposals and SENS work are trying
to deal with those things that are right up in front of our faces
and find solutions.  But ultimately when you solve all of those
problems I think DNA misrepair is going to get you unless we
have the technology to replace or rewrite the defective genomes.

Replacement comes from finding the least aged stem cells.  That
is going to require either very high throughput (and inexpensive)
gene expression measurement capabilities (probably with gene chips)
or very inexpensive whole genome sequencing.  Take 100 stem cells,
duplicate them, find the most perfectly intact genome in the clones
and then use the original cell to produce billions of copies for
therapies.

Rewrite is going to require the Freitas Chromallocytes that can
take out an old grungy genome and replace it with something better.
That will require real MNT.

The good thing is that we have parallel strategies that do not
seem to depend on the same technologies.

Robert




From thespike at earthlink.net  Tue Dec 23 23:10:46 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:10:46 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <019c01c3c9aa$01c33720$0c9d4a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 4:51 PM

> Take 100 stem cells,
> duplicate them, find the most perfectly intact genome in the clones
> and then use the original cell to produce billions of copies for
> therapies.

How do you know when you find it? I'd have thought: take 100 stem cells,
then take a majority vote at each allele locus (if that's feasible), then
compile the most popular choices.

> Rewrite is going to require the Freitas Chromallocytes

Google:

No pages were found containing "chromallocytes".

(BTW, a suggestion to Dirk: please follow netiquette and delete the bulk of
what you're replying to, especially when your comment is the usual one or
two lines.)

Damien Broderick



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Dec 23 23:40:50 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 10:40:50 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <20031223213217.10803.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00c501c3c9ae$32b326c0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Jeff Davis wrote:

> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Voila -- retrodifferentiation -- turn adult cells
> > back into stem cells.  Back of the envelope guess --
> 
> > 3 to 5 years.
> 
> Too slow.  Try yesterday.
> 
> We're in the moment of "low-hanging fruit",
> genomically speaking, and the "tree" is groaning under
> its burden.  (Would that be "the tree of life"?  ;-} )

Last paragraph of the same article says:

"However, tissue regeneration is years away at best, and at the
 moment, Schultz and Ding are still working on understanding the
exact biochemical mechanism whereby reversine causes the muscle
cells to dedifferentiate into their progenitors, as well as attempting
to improve the efficiency of the process. ..."

---

The technology described in the paper Robert posted is impressive
(thanks for posting it), but its worth remembering that there are big 
differences between mice and humans developmentally. One can't
learn everything important about apples by studying only oranges. We 
(people) won't have treatments for human conditions until we
understand the human conditions. This means working with human 
cells and human genes. Then we'd need to develop and test the
prospective therapies which almost certainly involves taking them 
through a trial process (FDA approval etc).  That takes serious time
even for single conditions.

I don't want to rain on the parade. Its important though, that folks
understand that politics (based largely on religious beliefs) is slowing
down research into human developmental biology. Being well informed
means one can make a difference in this area as an activist for one's
own best interest. Politics won't stop the march of technology. It might
however slow it down enough that  those of us alive now don't stay that
way much longer than our predecessors. 

I just re-read Stephen Hall's book _The Merchants of Immortality_ 
(pub 2003).  I highly recommend it as a case study in how politics
(in this case the politics around stem cells) can slow the march of
technology. 

Regards,
Brett Paatsch




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec 24 00:01:59 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 16:01:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
Message-ID: <20031224000159.99530.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> But ultimately when you solve all of those
> problems I think DNA misrepair is going to get you
unless we
> have the technology to replace or rewrite the
defective genomes.

Just seeing if I understand correctly...so, would a
step towards this be viruses that identified certain
types of common (and detrimental) miswrites, and
corrected them with the corresponding correct strings
taken from the patient's DNA?  Or, more elaborately,
nanoites programmed with what a patient's DNA "should"
look like (telomeres and all), then go cell by cell
examining and rewriting the DNA?  (Which could be used
for anti-aging treatment as well as certain upgrades -
albeit mostly for functions that the DNA is still
involved in, as opposed to merely having set the
course for, in an adult body.)


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 24 01:07:26 2003
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:07:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231430410.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031224010726.89160.qmail@web41209.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

<snip>

> Another good example of really bad reporting in the
> public press.
> 
> A little knowledge is a bad thing.
> 
> And you can quote me on that Jeff.  :-)
> Robert

I'm of a similar mind, Robert.  I looked closely at
the article for some 'hard' details and found none. 
Didn't like the 'cute'/presumptive name
--"reversin"--for their wonder drug.  If it had been
an institution of lesser credibility--or at least name
recognition--than Scripps, I wouldn't have passed it
to the list.  But it was certainly timely, ...and it
was Scripps, so, as with all things, caveat emptor.  

Best, Jeff Davis

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who
said it--no matter if I have said it--unless it agrees
with your own reason and your common sense."
                         Buddha 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Dec 24 01:09:40 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:09:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <019c01c3c9aa$01c33720$0c9d4a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231701280.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Damien Broderick wrote:

> How do you know when you find it? I'd have thought: take 100 stem cells,
> then take a majority vote at each allele locus (if that's feasible), then
> compile the most popular choices.

Majority rule might be interesting within an individual.  The problem is
that there may be epigenetic phenomena (there is now an epigenomic project)
caused by genomic modifications within individual cells (causing 1 stem cell
not to be equal to another stem cell).  In addition actual gene expression
patterns may be influenced by circulating hormone levels which are in turn
influenced by cells elsewhere.

Ideally you would like to sequence the genomes of each stem cell and find
the one most similar (having suffered the least damage probably) to that
you were born with.  Thats probably what you want to run with.  However,
as we understand the program better it may be that we discover what
a more idealized genome should be -- in which case one might want to
pick the stem cell closest to that.  Eventually one would do gene
therapies on the stem cell to drive it closer to the ideal even
though that might be less like you.  This gets tricky because one
would want to take it right up to the edge of where your immune
system starts rejecting the engineered stem cells as foreign.

> Google:
> No pages were found containing "chromallocytes".

Sorry, I'll send you the reference off-list since it isn't published
yet (maybe this year if we are lucky).  If you read between the lines
of Nanomedicine VI and a couple of Robert's papers it clear that
you can do chromosome extraction and replacement.  I've called
this "nuclear abortion" in several talks much to the displeasure
of Robert F.

Robert




From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Wed Dec 24 06:08:43 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 23:08:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: PowerPoint is Evil! ...again
Message-ID: <3FE92D6B.9E4E1D12@mindspring.com>

Thats 'cos they don't know how to use PowerPoint!

I've devised a way of using it to make interactive multiple choice quizzes with
animated musical cartoon characters that that tell you if you have the answer
right or wrong - clicking on links leading to any page you choose for a more
subtle f conveying complex information ... 

I work with children with emotional and behavioural difficulties and they think
it's "Cool Miss!"  - the equivalent of a Nobel prize as far as I'm concerned.  
(Well, compared with: "f*** this!! f**** c*** !!" and an overturned table,
which is the usual response to work.)
 
This is a bee I have in my bonnet. No one uses it properly.

Jacquie

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Terry W. Colvin 
  To: Forteana /Alternate Orphan/ ; Extropy-chat at extropy.org ;
skeptic at listproc.hcf.jhu.edu 
  Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:48 AM
  Subject: [forteana] FWD (Got Caliche?) PowerPoint is Evil! ...again


  http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/14/magazine/14POWER.html

  What if PowerPoint is actually making us stupider? Edward Tufte claims that
  Microsoft's ubiquitous software forces people to mutilate data beyond 
  comprehension. PowerPoint also encourages users to rely on bulleted lists,
  a 'faux analytical' technique that dodges the speaker's responsibility to tie
  information together. PowerPoint is uniquely suited to our modern age of
  obfuscation -- where manipulating facts is as important as presenting them
  clearly. If you have nothing to say, maybe you need just the right tool to
  help you not say it.


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Dec 24 06:57:26 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 17:57:26 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Maths 101 -  humor - pretty feeble
Message-ID: <003401c3c9eb$30cc51a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

> Subject: Math 101
> 
> 
> >From a strictly mathematical viewpoint it goes like
> this:
> >
> >
> >
> >What makes 100%?
> >
> >
> >
> >What does it mean to give MORE than 100%?
> >
> >
> >
> >Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving
>  more than 100%?
> >
> >
> >
> >We have all been to those meetings where someone
> wants you to give over
> >100%.
> >
> >
> >
> >How about achieving 103%?
> >
> >
> >
> >Here's a little mathematical formula that might help
> you  answer these
> >questions:
> >
> >
> >
> >If:  A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y
> Z  is represented
> >as:
> >
> >1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
> 22 23 24 25 26
> >
> >
> >
> >Then:
> >
> >
> >
> >H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
> >8+1+18+4+23+15+18+11 = 98%
> >
> >
> >
> >and,
> >
> >
> >
> >K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
> >11+14+15+23+12+5+4+7+5 = 96%
> >
> >
> >
> >But,
> >
> >
> >
> >A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
> >1+20+20+9+20+21+4+5 = 100%
> >
> >
> >
> >....And,
> >
> >
> >
> >B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
> >2+21+12+12+19+8+9+20 = 103%
> >
> >
> >
> >AND, look how far butt-kissing will take you:
> >
> >
> >
> >B-U-T-T--K-I-S-S-I-N-G
> >2+21+20+20+11+9+19+19+9+14+7 = 151%
> >
> >
> >
> >But one can then conclude with mathematical certainty
>  that:
> >
> >
> >
> >While, Hard work and Knowledge will get you close,
> >
> >
> >
> >And, Attitude will get you there,
> >
> >
> >Bullshit and Butt kissing will put you over the top!

-----

Its not *really* maths I know.  Good holidays extropes,

Brett




From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 24 13:27:40 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 13:27:40 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
References: <20031223213217.10803.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <006e01c3ca21$b48e9300$9cb26bd5@artemis>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3334923.stm
The dark side of digital utopia
Dot.life - Where tech meets life, every Monday
By Mark Ward
BBC News Online technology correspondent

How would people act if they were freed from real life laws and social
constraints? A new, interactive computer game offers just such a scenario -
with some disturbing results.
Imagine you could move to a city where you could swap yourself for a
younger, slimmer version that never ages and never gets tired.

In this city you could choose which job to pursue, build your dream home and
do all the things you did not have the courage to do in your other life.

It sounds great but soon after you arrive, the gloss begins to fade.

One of the first people you meet is a kindly looking granny who greets you
with a slap round the face and a barrage of abuse.

Escaping to one of the "safe" homes you find a den of thieves who trick you
into handing over all your cash.

The local newspapers are full of investigations into child prostitution,
rampant crime, mafia-controlled neighbourhoods, shadowy self-declared
governments struggling to maintain order and runaway inflation.

Welcome to Alphaville.

Dark history

Alphaville is the biggest city in The Sims Online, a spin-off of the highly
successful Sims computer game. As its name implies, players can control
virtual people in an online world.

The Sims Online can be likened to a chatroom with moving pictures in which
people are represented by an avatar rather than text.

But to the chatting it adds a rich virtual world in which every player has a
home. There are places to socialise, to work and visit, shops and services,
even virtual pets.

Alphaville and its sister cities in The Sims Online were supposed to be
benign utopias that allowed people to discover who they could be when freed
from the economic and social restraints that shackle them in real life.

But it has not turned out like that at all.

The dark side of Alphaville has been documented by one of its former
"residents", Peter Ludlow, who in real life is a philosophy professor at the
University of Michigan.


Urizenus, one of the avatars controlled by Prof Ludlow, was chief reporter
on a newspaper called The Alphaville Herald which featured interviews with
Alphaville's child prostitutes, sadomasochists, Sims Mafioso, thieves and
members of its shadow government.
"The Alphaville Herald was not supposed to document dodgy things," he says.
"It was done to document the emergence of economic, social and political
structures in the game."

Like increasing numbers of academics Mr Ludlow is interested in virtual game
worlds like The Sims Online because they act as live, accelerated
laboratories for studying the ways people interact, get on and fall out.

But as the problems of The Sims Online mounted The Alphaville Herald - which
exists as a separate website - became a guidebook to the goings-on in this
dystopia.

Action and reaction

Mr Ludlow thought the people behind the game should know what was going on
inside Alphaville, not least because some things - child prostitution, for
example - are morally and legally troubling.


But when they found out, Maxis, the game's developers, and Electronic Arts,
the distributors, banned all in-game mention of The Alphaville Herald, says
Mr Ludlow.
Then, says Mr Ludlow, he was thrown out of the game and his accounts closed
down, cutting him off from his Sims.

EA and Maxis say they are aware of Prof Ludlow's comments, that they are
dealing with customer queries collectively and cannot talk about individual
accounts.

They will "continue to monitor external issues as appropriate". They
declined to comment further. "


Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 24 06:00:02 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 22:00:02 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs with figures
In-Reply-To: <3FE6A614.4010502@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <006e01c3c9e3$2c07e560$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

Please open the enclosure.

It is said a picture is worth a thousand words, and 
in my case more than that, having scored a few dB down
on the old verbal SATs, but having more than made it
up on the math section.

I made some Matlab 3D plots, but then realized most
extropians do not have Matlab at home.  Most do
have microsloth Excel however.  Of course excel sucks 
at 3D graphing, so I set up some 2D views.

Hit the tab "1".  Those two graphs show 36 nodes of one
ring of an MBrain, a top view and a side view, if you
want to think of it that way.  Imagine the points as
nodes in a circular orbit around a star.

Now hit tab "2".  This is the same ring rotated thru
an angle of 45 degrees.  Change the value theta1 to
some other values and see what happens to the ring.

OK hit tab "3" and witness two nested rings of radius
5 and 4.  Change the values of theta1 and theta2.  The
angles can be anything and the radii can be anything so
long as they are not equal to each other.  Imagine the
rings as particles in a circular orbit.  The smaller ring
orbits faster but it doesn't matter: there are no collisions
because the two rings do not intersect.  Change the values
of theta1 and theta2.

Now hit tab "4" and see 5 rings, all different angles and
different radii.  Is it clear that there are no intersecting
orbits?  Is it equally clear that there are no possible
collisions between particles in different orbits, so long
as the radii differ?  Change the angles and radii and see
that you could have a trillion nodes per ring and few billion 
rings, with the relative angle between adjacent rings a 
microradian, thus forming a sphere, all with no intersecting 
orbits, no colliding nodes and no gravitational instability.

This is a traditional Bradburian MBrain.

OK now as a thought experiment, think of this MBrain being
formed around a rocky planet instead of a star.  Continue
removing material from the planet and adding it to the rings
until there is no planet left, all of it being in the rings,
and there you have it: an SBrain.  If Jupiter were rocky and 
metally instead of gas, and this process were used to form a 
sphere a minute in diameter, then from the point of view of 
earth, it would look like a full moon, only more than twice the
apparent size of luna.

Merrrrry Newtonmas everyone!  See you in a week.  spike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: orbits.xls
Type: application/vnd.ms-excel
Size: 81408 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031223/2faf97bd/attachment.xls>

From etheric at comcast.net  Wed Dec 24 15:34:09 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 07:34:09 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
References: <20031223213217.10803.qmail@web41205.mail.yahoo.com>
	<006e01c3ca21$b48e9300$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <000c01c3ca33$625de790$0300a8c0@etheric>

This is not Libertarianism, Libertarianism requires laws not lawlesness

try again

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>
To: <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 5:27 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?


> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3334923.stm
> The dark side of digital utopia
> Dot.life - Where tech meets life, every Monday
> By Mark Ward
> BBC News Online technology correspondent
>
> How would people act if they were freed from real life laws and social
> constraints? A new, interactive computer game offers just such a
scenario -
> with some disturbing results.
> Imagine you could move to a city where you could swap yourself for a
> younger, slimmer version that never ages and never gets tired.
>
> In this city you could choose which job to pursue, build your dream home
and
> do all the things you did not have the courage to do in your other life.
>
> It sounds great but soon after you arrive, the gloss begins to fade.
>
> One of the first people you meet is a kindly looking granny who greets you
> with a slap round the face and a barrage of abuse.
>
> Escaping to one of the "safe" homes you find a den of thieves who trick
you
> into handing over all your cash.
>
> The local newspapers are full of investigations into child prostitution,
> rampant crime, mafia-controlled neighbourhoods, shadowy self-declared
> governments struggling to maintain order and runaway inflation.
>
> Welcome to Alphaville.
>
> Dark history
>
> Alphaville is the biggest city in The Sims Online, a spin-off of the
highly
> successful Sims computer game. As its name implies, players can control
> virtual people in an online world.
>
> The Sims Online can be likened to a chatroom with moving pictures in which
> people are represented by an avatar rather than text.
>
> But to the chatting it adds a rich virtual world in which every player has
a
> home. There are places to socialise, to work and visit, shops and
services,
> even virtual pets.
>
> Alphaville and its sister cities in The Sims Online were supposed to be
> benign utopias that allowed people to discover who they could be when
freed
> from the economic and social restraints that shackle them in real life.
>
> But it has not turned out like that at all.
>
> The dark side of Alphaville has been documented by one of its former
> "residents", Peter Ludlow, who in real life is a philosophy professor at
the
> University of Michigan.
>
>
> Urizenus, one of the avatars controlled by Prof Ludlow, was chief reporter
> on a newspaper called The Alphaville Herald which featured interviews with
> Alphaville's child prostitutes, sadomasochists, Sims Mafioso, thieves and
> members of its shadow government.
> "The Alphaville Herald was not supposed to document dodgy things," he
says.
> "It was done to document the emergence of economic, social and political
> structures in the game."
>
> Like increasing numbers of academics Mr Ludlow is interested in virtual
game
> worlds like The Sims Online because they act as live, accelerated
> laboratories for studying the ways people interact, get on and fall out.
>
> But as the problems of The Sims Online mounted The Alphaville Herald -
which
> exists as a separate website - became a guidebook to the goings-on in this
> dystopia.
>
> Action and reaction
>
> Mr Ludlow thought the people behind the game should know what was going on
> inside Alphaville, not least because some things - child prostitution, for
> example - are morally and legally troubling.
>
>
> But when they found out, Maxis, the game's developers, and Electronic
Arts,
> the distributors, banned all in-game mention of The Alphaville Herald,
says
> Mr Ludlow.
> Then, says Mr Ludlow, he was thrown out of the game and his accounts
closed
> down, cutting him off from his Sims.
>
> EA and Maxis say they are aware of Prof Ludlow's comments, that they are
> dealing with customer queries collectively and cannot talk about
individual
> accounts.
>
> They will "continue to monitor external issues as appropriate". They
> declined to comment further. "
>
>
> Dirk
>
> The Consensus:-
> The political party for the new millennium
> http://www.theconsensus.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 24 15:55:53 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 07:55:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs with figures
In-Reply-To: <006e01c3c9e3$2c07e560$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031224155553.67837.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote: 
> Now hit tab "4" and see 5 rings, all different angles and
> different radii.  Is it clear that there are no intersecting
> orbits?  Is it equally clear that there are no possible
> collisions between particles in different orbits, so long
> as the radii differ?  Change the angles and radii and see
> that you could have a trillion nodes per ring and few billion 
> rings, with the relative angle between adjacent rings a 
> microradian, thus forming a sphere, all with no intersecting 
> orbits, no colliding nodes and no gravitational instability.

Oh, I wouldn't call this a sphere, I'd call it a nautilus shell. but
your concept holds.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 24 16:00:16 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 08:00:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
In-Reply-To: <000c01c3ca33$625de790$0300a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <20031224160016.80535.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>

Where are the insurance companies? I'll bet that the owning company
does not permit this, either.

--- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> This is not Libertarianism, Libertarianism requires laws not
> lawlesness
> 
> try again
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>
> To: <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>; "ExI chat list"
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 5:27 AM
> Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
> 
> 
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3334923.stm
> > The dark side of digital utopia
> > Dot.life - Where tech meets life, every Monday
> > By Mark Ward
> > BBC News Online technology correspondent
> >
> > How would people act if they were freed from real life laws and
> social
> > constraints? A new, interactive computer game offers just such a
> scenario -
> > with some disturbing results.
> > Imagine you could move to a city where you could swap yourself for
> a
> > younger, slimmer version that never ages and never gets tired.
> >
> > In this city you could choose which job to pursue, build your dream
> home
> and
> > do all the things you did not have the courage to do in your other
> life.
> >
> > It sounds great but soon after you arrive, the gloss begins to
> fade.
> >
> > One of the first people you meet is a kindly looking granny who
> greets you
> > with a slap round the face and a barrage of abuse.
> >
> > Escaping to one of the "safe" homes you find a den of thieves who
> trick
> you
> > into handing over all your cash.
> >
> > The local newspapers are full of investigations into child
> prostitution,
> > rampant crime, mafia-controlled neighbourhoods, shadowy
> self-declared
> > governments struggling to maintain order and runaway inflation.
> >
> > Welcome to Alphaville.
> >
> > Dark history
> >
> > Alphaville is the biggest city in The Sims Online, a spin-off of
> the
> highly
> > successful Sims computer game. As its name implies, players can
> control
> > virtual people in an online world.
> >
> > The Sims Online can be likened to a chatroom with moving pictures
> in which
> > people are represented by an avatar rather than text.
> >
> > But to the chatting it adds a rich virtual world in which every
> player has
> a
> > home. There are places to socialise, to work and visit, shops and
> services,
> > even virtual pets.
> >
> > Alphaville and its sister cities in The Sims Online were supposed
> to be
> > benign utopias that allowed people to discover who they could be
> when
> freed
> > from the economic and social restraints that shackle them in real
> life.
> >
> > But it has not turned out like that at all.
> >
> > The dark side of Alphaville has been documented by one of its
> former
> > "residents", Peter Ludlow, who in real life is a philosophy
> professor at
> the
> > University of Michigan.
> >
> >
> > Urizenus, one of the avatars controlled by Prof Ludlow, was chief
> reporter
> > on a newspaper called The Alphaville Herald which featured
> interviews with
> > Alphaville's child prostitutes, sadomasochists, Sims Mafioso,
> thieves and
> > members of its shadow government.
> > "The Alphaville Herald was not supposed to document dodgy things,"
> he
> says.
> > "It was done to document the emergence of economic, social and
> political
> > structures in the game."
> >
> > Like increasing numbers of academics Mr Ludlow is interested in
> virtual
> game
> > worlds like The Sims Online because they act as live, accelerated
> > laboratories for studying the ways people interact, get on and fall
> out.
> >
> > But as the problems of The Sims Online mounted The Alphaville
> Herald -
> which
> > exists as a separate website - became a guidebook to the goings-on
> in this
> > dystopia.
> >
> > Action and reaction
> >
> > Mr Ludlow thought the people behind the game should know what was
> going on
> > inside Alphaville, not least because some things - child
> prostitution, for
> > example - are morally and legally troubling.
> >
> >
> > But when they found out, Maxis, the game's developers, and
> Electronic
> Arts,
> > the distributors, banned all in-game mention of The Alphaville
> Herald,
> says
> > Mr Ludlow.
> > Then, says Mr Ludlow, he was thrown out of the game and his
> accounts
> closed
> > down, cutting him off from his Sims.
> >
> > EA and Maxis say they are aware of Prof Ludlow's comments, that
> they are
> > dealing with customer queries collectively and cannot talk about
> individual
> > accounts.
> >
> > They will "continue to monitor external issues as appropriate".
> They
> > declined to comment further. "
> >
> >
> > Dirk
> >
> > The Consensus:-
> > The political party for the new millennium
> > http://www.theconsensus.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 24 16:11:12 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 08:11:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: PowerPoint is Evil! ...again
In-Reply-To: <3FE92D6B.9E4E1D12@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031224161112.69897.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
Jacquie says:
> Thats 'cos they don't know how to use PowerPoint!

I have to agree. PP isn't all things for all people, but it also takes
someone who knows anything about graphic design and communications to
make the most of it as well. Considering some of the profs I've met,
the main reason they hate it is because it constricts their ability to
throw information at their audience to managable chunks. Some profs
like to intimidate the students with overwhelming amounts of info, so
the students glaze out and allow the prof to mentally defenestrate them
with questions they can't answer, thus proving the profs intellectual
superiority.
Most of Tufte's complaints are not actually a fault of the software,
but that the users are completely incompetent at conveying information
properly (uh, yeah, thats why they went into engineering, so they
wouldn't have to deal with people). Perhaps they are too proud of their
genius IQs and degrees to pick up a book titled "Power Point for Dummies"????

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu  Wed Dec 24 16:37:43 2003
From: test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu (Bill Hibbard)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 10:37:43 -0600 (CST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] frequency of BSE and CJD greater than thought?
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312241033190.16037-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>

There is an alarming article at:

  http://www.monitor.net/rachel/r607.html

Do folks on this list have an assessment of how credible
this is?

Thanks,
Bill
----------------------------------------------------------
Bill Hibbard, SSEC, 1225 W. Dayton St., Madison, WI  53706
test at demedici.ssec.wisc.edu  608-263-4427  fax: 608-263-6738
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/~billh/vis.html



From charlie at antipope.org  Wed Dec 24 17:29:35 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 17:29:35 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] frequency of BSE and CJD greater than thought?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312241033190.16037-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312241033190.16037-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>
Message-ID: <BE7BF4D9-3636-11D8-B958-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 24 Dec 2003, at 16:37, Bill Hibbard wrote:

> There is an alarming article at:
>
>   http://www.monitor.net/rachel/r607.html
>
> Do folks on this list have an assessment of how credible
> this is?

Far as I can tell, it looks like a reasonable summary right up until 
the very end. At that point, the author engages in cautious 
speculation, which is not in itself unreasonable. However, it's worth 
looking to the UK before arguing that large numbers of cases of CJD are 
being misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's; over here there has been a lot of 
research interest in nvCJD (obviously! -- the "worst case" predictions 
that, thankfully, don't seem to have emerged, had up to 30% of us dying 
of nvCJD!) with increased emphasis on diagnosis. I'd be very surprised 
if coroners in the UK were misdiagnosing their autopsy cases in this 
way.

The important points to note are that (a) feeding animal protein to 
ruminants clearly acts as a disease amplifier in prion mediated 
pathologies -- it's a practice that needs to be stamped out -- and (b) 
prion disease are very slow to develop, so there's a lag between the 
epidemic commencing and the time at which it impinges on public 
awareness. There's also a point (c) which is that farmers don't like 
having their herds condemned. In France, cattle which are destroyed 
after contracting rabies are eligible for compensation, but cattle 
destroyed because of BSE don't receive any subsidy. I seem to recall 
reading that the incidence of rabies-infected cattle being destroyed in 
France have tripled in the past five years ... we're probably lucky 
that the UK was considered a rabies-free zone in the 1980's[*], because 
it made the appearance of BSE more obvious.



-- Charlie

[*] The UK isn't actually rabies-free; it was discovered last year that 
some rabies strains are endemic in the local bat population, when an 
animal conservation officer who was bitten by a bat contracted rabies 
and died of it, the first victim in nearly a century. Luckily British 
bats are rare enough to mostly qualify as endangered species, and they 
don't usually bite unless you go grabbing them in their roosts.



From brian at posthuman.com  Wed Dec 24 17:50:08 2003
From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 11:50:08 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] frequency of BSE and CJD greater than thought?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312241033190.16037-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0312241033190.16037-100000@demedici.ssec.wisc.edu>
Message-ID: <3FE9D1D0.4040801@posthuman.com>

I don't find the hypothesis that there are many more BSE cases to be 
found lurking in "downer" cattle to be realistic since AFAIK the USDA 
here is now testing every single cow that displays such behavior (they 
claim they tested something like 20k cows in the last year I think) and 
so far has not found more than this one case announced yesterday.

As far as the two studies mentioned claiming that CJD is more widespread 
than believed - I don't see the connection between that and BSE, since 
the disease caused by eating BSE-infected meat products (keep in mind 
you would have to eat part of the spine or brain of the cow... muscle 
meats aren't affected) is a different disease, vCJD, which I don't see 
those studies mentioning.

Here's a little thing I found on Google explaining the difference:

http://www.brainandspine.org.uk/pdf/cjdpatients.pdf

There doesn't appear to be any large epidemic of vCJD, even in Europe... 
there have been articles I've read in New Scientist and other places in 
the past couple years commenting on this.
-- 
Brian Atkins
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/



From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Wed Dec 24 21:26:21 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 15:26:21 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
References: <20031224160016.80535.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Law10-OE55871XTzy6i00016417@hotmail.com>

I don't think it even begins to scrape the surface of reality. The majority
of these fols are "gamers" which means many are probably kids. Also, since
it is not "real" many of the people probably go to great lengths to make the
dull humdrum of everyday life exciting. Nothing can really be lost, no real
money is made, and noone can actually be hurt. It's a sim, and as a sim, it
lacks that one important thing...reality.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?


> Where are the insurance companies? I'll bet that the owning company
> does not permit this, either.
>
> --- "R.Coyote" <etheric at comcast.net> wrote:
> > This is not Libertarianism, Libertarianism requires laws not
> > lawlesness
> >
> > try again
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>
> > To: <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>; "ExI chat list"
> > <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 5:27 AM
> > Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
> >
> >
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3334923.stm
> > > The dark side of digital utopia
> > > Dot.life - Where tech meets life, every Monday
> > > By Mark Ward
> > > BBC News Online technology correspondent
> > >
> > > How would people act if they were freed from real life laws and
> > social
> > > constraints? A new, interactive computer game offers just such a
> > scenario -
> > > with some disturbing results.
> > > Imagine you could move to a city where you could swap yourself for
> > a
> > > younger, slimmer version that never ages and never gets tired.
> > >
> > > In this city you could choose which job to pursue, build your dream
> > home
> > and
> > > do all the things you did not have the courage to do in your other
> > life.
> > >
> > > It sounds great but soon after you arrive, the gloss begins to
> > fade.
> > >
> > > One of the first people you meet is a kindly looking granny who
> > greets you
> > > with a slap round the face and a barrage of abuse.
> > >
> > > Escaping to one of the "safe" homes you find a den of thieves who
> > trick
> > you
> > > into handing over all your cash.
> > >
> > > The local newspapers are full of investigations into child
> > prostitution,
> > > rampant crime, mafia-controlled neighbourhoods, shadowy
> > self-declared
> > > governments struggling to maintain order and runaway inflation.
> > >
> > > Welcome to Alphaville.
> > >
> > > Dark history
> > >
> > > Alphaville is the biggest city in The Sims Online, a spin-off of
> > the
> > highly
> > > successful Sims computer game. As its name implies, players can
> > control
> > > virtual people in an online world.
> > >
> > > The Sims Online can be likened to a chatroom with moving pictures
> > in which
> > > people are represented by an avatar rather than text.
> > >
> > > But to the chatting it adds a rich virtual world in which every
> > player has
> > a
> > > home. There are places to socialise, to work and visit, shops and
> > services,
> > > even virtual pets.
> > >
> > > Alphaville and its sister cities in The Sims Online were supposed
> > to be
> > > benign utopias that allowed people to discover who they could be
> > when
> > freed
> > > from the economic and social restraints that shackle them in real
> > life.
> > >
> > > But it has not turned out like that at all.
> > >
> > > The dark side of Alphaville has been documented by one of its
> > former
> > > "residents", Peter Ludlow, who in real life is a philosophy
> > professor at
> > the
> > > University of Michigan.
> > >
> > >
> > > Urizenus, one of the avatars controlled by Prof Ludlow, was chief
> > reporter
> > > on a newspaper called The Alphaville Herald which featured
> > interviews with
> > > Alphaville's child prostitutes, sadomasochists, Sims Mafioso,
> > thieves and
> > > members of its shadow government.
> > > "The Alphaville Herald was not supposed to document dodgy things,"
> > he
> > says.
> > > "It was done to document the emergence of economic, social and
> > political
> > > structures in the game."
> > >
> > > Like increasing numbers of academics Mr Ludlow is interested in
> > virtual
> > game
> > > worlds like The Sims Online because they act as live, accelerated
> > > laboratories for studying the ways people interact, get on and fall
> > out.
> > >
> > > But as the problems of The Sims Online mounted The Alphaville
> > Herald -
> > which
> > > exists as a separate website - became a guidebook to the goings-on
> > in this
> > > dystopia.
> > >
> > > Action and reaction
> > >
> > > Mr Ludlow thought the people behind the game should know what was
> > going on
> > > inside Alphaville, not least because some things - child
> > prostitution, for
> > > example - are morally and legally troubling.
> > >
> > >
> > > But when they found out, Maxis, the game's developers, and
> > Electronic
> > Arts,
> > > the distributors, banned all in-game mention of The Alphaville
> > Herald,
> > says
> > > Mr Ludlow.
> > > Then, says Mr Ludlow, he was thrown out of the game and his
> > accounts
> > closed
> > > down, cutting him off from his Sims.
> > >
> > > EA and Maxis say they are aware of Prof Ludlow's comments, that
> > they are
> > > dealing with customer queries collectively and cannot talk about
> > individual
> > > accounts.
> > >
> > > They will "continue to monitor external issues as appropriate".
> > They
> > > declined to comment further. "
> > >
> > >
> > > Dirk
> > >
> > > The Consensus:-
> > > The political party for the new millennium
> > > http://www.theconsensus.org
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > extropy-chat mailing list
> > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From twodeel at jornada.org  Wed Dec 24 21:43:19 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 13:43:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
In-Reply-To: <Law10-OE55871XTzy6i00016417@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312241326510.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:

> I don't think it even begins to scrape the surface of reality. The
> majority of these fols are "gamers" which means many are probably kids.
> Also, since it is not "real" many of the people probably go to great
> lengths to make the dull humdrum of everyday life exciting. Nothing can
> really be lost, no real money is made, and noone can actually be hurt.
> It's a sim, and as a sim, it lacks that one important thing...reality.

I agree.  People do things with online characters that they'd never dream
of doing in reality.  Maybe when the VR experience becomes real enough
that it can actually satisfy real physical desires, it will tell us more
about how people might react in similar circumstances in reality, but 
right now, well, it's just a game.

I mean, unless having your character eat 30,000 calories of pie actually
makes you feel good at first, then full, then over-full, then like you're
about to burst, it doesn't really matter.  And unless having your
character commit a virtual crime has actual negative consequences that
matter to you, it will just be a fun thrill with no worries attached.  So
it would hardly be surprising if Alphaville were a whirling cesspool of
crime ... but it doesn't tell us much about reality.



From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 24 22:19:57 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 22:19:57 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312241326510.12761-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <02d301c3ca6c$10820120$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?


> On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:
>
> > I don't think it even begins to scrape the surface of reality. The
> > majority of these fols are "gamers" which means many are probably kids.
> > Also, since it is not "real" many of the people probably go to great
> > lengths to make the dull humdrum of everyday life exciting. Nothing can
> > really be lost, no real money is made, and noone can actually be hurt.
> > It's a sim, and as a sim, it lacks that one important thing...reality.
>
> I agree.  People do things with online characters that they'd never dream
> of doing in reality.  Maybe when the VR experience becomes real enough
> that it can actually satisfy real physical desires, it will tell us more
> about how people might react in similar circumstances in reality, but
> right now, well, it's just a game.

> I mean, unless having your character eat 30,000 calories of pie actually
> makes you feel good at first, then full, then over-full, then like you're
> about to burst, it doesn't really matter.  And unless having your
> character commit a virtual crime has actual negative consequences that
> matter to you, it will just be a fun thrill with no worries attached.  So
> it would hardly be surprising if Alphaville were a whirling cesspool of
> crime ... but it doesn't tell us much about reality.


Well, given that large parts of the world are actually run like this I
suggest that you are overly optimistic.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Wed Dec 24 22:30:34 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 17:30:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>

> Aging (IMO) is ultimately caused by the misrepair of DNA double
> strand breaks.  There are a host of things you can get leading
> up to that -- point mutations (leading to cancer), undigestable
> molecules leading to lipofuscin accumulation, protein glycosylation
> leading to hardening of the arteries, shortening of telomeres leading
> to decreased immune system response and reduced cellular replication
> potential and increased cellular scenescence and probably a host
> of other things.  Aubrey's IBG proposals and SENS work are trying
> to deal with those things that are right up in front of our faces
> and find solutions.  But ultimately when you solve all of those
> problems I think DNA misrepair is going to get you unless we
> have the technology to replace or rewrite the defective genomes.

### I think I shouldn't say it but, whatever: I have some privileged
information about a new technique which could lead to a quantum leap in the
repair of cells in adult mammals (i.e. rejuvenation of adult tissues, in
vivo). Nuff said. This is my promise of a big Christmas present for
everybody in the next few years. Stay tuned.

I'd be surprised if in the next ten years we don't have a treatment (in the
form of a few injections) which will prolong adult human life by 20 to 30
years. In the year 2014 you can look back on this post and either call me
prescient, or sadly remark on my unjustified optimism. Time will tell.

Rafal



From twodeel at jornada.org  Wed Dec 24 22:26:25 2003
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 14:26:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
In-Reply-To: <02d301c3ca6c$10820120$9cb26bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312241422450.12761-100000@hplx.net>

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Dirk Bruere wrote:

> Well, given that large parts of the world are actually run like this I
> suggest that you are overly optimistic.

Well, all I'm saying is that in a virtual environment like Alphaville,
pretty much EVERYBODY misbehaves and does whatever they want -- stuff they
would not necessarily do in reality.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 24 23:03:21 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 15:03:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312241422450.12761-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031224230321.57879.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Dirk Bruere wrote:
> 
> > Well, given that large parts of the world are actually run like
> this I
> > suggest that you are overly optimistic.
> 
> Well, all I'm saying is that in a virtual environment like
> Alphaville,
> pretty much EVERYBODY misbehaves and does whatever they want -- stuff
> they would not necessarily do in reality.

Yes, in fact, it is the exact opposite of a libertarian or anarchist
society, because Alphaville residents don't suffer real consequences.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 24 23:36:52 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 23:36:52 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
References: <20031224230321.57879.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <030001c3ca76$cf5965c0$9cb26bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?


>
> --- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Dirk Bruere wrote:
> >
> > > Well, given that large parts of the world are actually run like
> > this I
> > > suggest that you are overly optimistic.
> >
> > Well, all I'm saying is that in a virtual environment like
> > Alphaville,
> > pretty much EVERYBODY misbehaves and does whatever they want -- stuff
> > they would not necessarily do in reality.
>
> Yes, in fact, it is the exact opposite of a libertarian or anarchist
> society, because Alphaville residents don't suffer real consequences.


Given that there are no anarchist or libertarian societies, but plenty of
Alphavilles, perhaps that tells us rather more about Human nature.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 24 23:49:30 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 18:49:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] VR-BAR:  Happy Newtonmas!
In-Reply-To: <20031224230321.57879.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002101c3ca78$966fee30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

(The virtual reality bar is a simulated cyberspace that Harv likes to visit
with real and imaginary friends.)

The bar scene resolves into warm colors.  Holographic candles on the tables
provide mood lighting and a cheery glow.  Harv is sitting at his usual table
with his usual friends.  He has just mixed a B-Happy(TM) drink and a
B-Smart(TM) drink, and is stirring them with a candy-cane.  The blond at the
table was drinking a hot mocha with fat-free sugar-free whipped cream on
top.  The floating hat just above the blond was decked with mistletoe
bobbing in the air.  The brunette was just diving into a plate of sushi with
pair of colored chopsticks, one red and one green.  The robotender is
wheeling around with his winter scarf floating behind him in an imaginary
wind.  Projected snowflakes swirling in the air as he goes by.  The
slime-mold floated serenely on a shallow bowl of eggnog.  The "Best of
Extropian Newtonmas Music" was playing in the background.  They see you and
raise their glasses and wave their greeting.

"Happy Newtonmas!" they exclaim in unison.  One of them signaled more chairs
and tabletops to float over into the area.  The robotender circles back
around with your advance orders ready to serve.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From jcorb at iol.ie  Thu Dec 25 00:18:37 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 00:18:37 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best wishes
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031225001802.033b2360@pop.iol.ie>

Hope everyone has an enjoyable and peaceful season, whatever way you 
observe it.




James...



From neptune at superlink.net  Thu Dec 25 00:38:31 2003
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 19:38:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best wishes
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031225001802.033b2360@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <004701c3ca7f$6d111800$8acd5cd1@neptune>

Ditto!
----- Original Message ----- 
From: J Corbally <jcorb at iol.ie>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 7:18 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best wishes


> Hope everyone has an enjoyable and peaceful season, whatever way you 
> observe it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> James...
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



From thespike at earthlink.net  Thu Dec 25 00:38:37 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 18:38:37 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] VR-BAR:  Happy Newtonmas!
References: <002101c3ca78$966fee30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <00e501c3ca7f$7198c300$cb994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message -----
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 5:49 PM

>The slime-mold floated serenely on a shallow bowl of eggnog.

I'm glad the slime-mold was able to make it--wouldn't be the same without
it/them!

Bring on the brews!

Damien Broderick



From thespike at earthlink.net  Thu Dec 25 06:52:16 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 00:52:16 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Beagle--uh oh
References: <002101c3ca78$966fee30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<00e501c3ca7f$7198c300$cb994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <014301c3cab3$a4d0a600$cb994a43@texas.net>

<
Beagle keeps scientists waiting
25-Dec-03 06:29 GMT
 ...................................................
Summary
http://www.beagle2.com/news/index.htm

< No telemetry from Beagle 2 was received during this morning's passage of
NASA's Mars Odyssey over the Isidis Planitia landing site.


Professor Colin Pillinger, lead scientist for the Beagle 2 project,
commented that this certainly does not mean that the probe had been damaged
during its descent. There were a number of possible explanations, the most
likely being that the Beagle 2 antenna was not pointing in the direction of
Mars Odyssey.

The next opportunity to communicate with Beagle 2 will be late this evening
(between 10pm and midnight GMT) when the Jodrell Bank Observatory will
listen out for a signal from the lander. >



From samantha at objectent.com  Thu Dec 25 08:20:57 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 00:20:57 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] A Libertarian experiment?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312241422450.12761-100000@hplx.net>
References: <02d301c3ca6c$10820120$9cb26bd5@artemis>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312241422450.12761-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20031225002057.5e5eec45.samantha@objectent.com>

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 14:26:25 -0800 (PST)
Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Dirk Bruere wrote:
> 
> > Well, given that large parts of the world are actually run like this I
> > suggest that you are overly optimistic.
> 
> Well, all I'm saying is that in a virtual environment like Alphaville,
> pretty much EVERYBODY misbehaves and does whatever they want -- stuff they
> would not necessarily do in reality.
> 

As opposed to the real world where the vast majority of people endlessly repeat whatever routine managed to not kill them and be remotely tolerable, at least tolerable with currently available legal psychoactives.   At least in the virtual world people don't tend to just sit and grow mold.

-s


From scerir at libero.it  Thu Dec 25 09:01:18 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 10:01:18 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] VR-BAR:  Happy Newtonmas!
References: <002101c3ca78$966fee30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<00e501c3ca7f$7198c300$cb994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <002601c3cac5$ba705d40$f0c7fea9@scerir>

> Bring on the brews!
> 
> Damien Broderick

But pay attention to this brand new "anti-bubble" effect!
http://ej.iop.org/links/q70/VMDjFcWLsjv8u+3qx22qnQ/njp3_1_161.pdf
many fine pics here, home trials possible, and recommended too.
Buone Feste!
s.

Btw, it seems that Spike's "think of this MBrain being
formed around a rocky planet instead of a star.  Continue
removing material from the planet and adding it to the rings
until there is no planet left, all of it being in the rings,
and there you have it: an SBrain." has something to do with
"bubble-antibubble" symmetry.



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Thu Dec 25 09:12:27 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 20:12:27 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Beagle--uh oh
References: <002101c3ca78$966fee30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<00e501c3ca7f$7198c300$cb994a43@texas.net>
	<014301c3cab3$a4d0a600$cb994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <025901c3cac7$377f5420$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Damien Broderick wrote:

> Beagle keeps scientists waiting
> 25-Dec-03 06:29 GMT
>  ...................................................
> Summary
> http://www.beagle2.com/news/index.htm
> 
> < No telemetry from Beagle 2 was received during this morning's
> passage of  NASA's Mars Odyssey over the Isidis Planitia landing
> site.
..
> The next opportunity to communicate with Beagle 2 will be late 
> this evening (between 10pm and midnight GMT) when the Jodrell
> Bank Observatory will listen out for a signal from the lander. >

A little suspense may help justisfy the sound-bite. 

"The Beagle has landed!"  or  "Beagle lands badly", sadly. 

Brett





From scerir at libero.it  Thu Dec 25 09:10:58 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 10:10:58 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] VR-BAR:  Happy Newtonmas!
References: <002101c3ca78$966fee30$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT><00e501c3ca7f$7198c300$cb994a43@texas.net>
	<002601c3cac5$ba705d40$f0c7fea9@scerir>
Message-ID: <002f01c3cac7$039e1420$f0c7fea9@scerir>

> http://ej.iop.org/links/q70/VMDjFcWLsjv8u+3qx22qnQ/njp3_1_161.pdf

if the link is broken (as it seems now) try one of these
http://www.iop.org/EJ/news/-topic=669/journal/1367-2630/1
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1367-2630/5/1/161/
http://ej.iop.org/links/q29/WnxqUoXJCx+9O5bXFWIrUg/njp3_1_161.pdf



From samantha at objectent.com  Thu Dec 25 10:00:09 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 02:00:09 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] useful knowledge-base software
In-Reply-To: <03c601c3c8fa$52cf4380$1602650a@int.veeco.com>
References: <000001c3c8df$d5fac6f0$0200a8c0@soy0450mhz>
	<03c601c3c8fa$52cf4380$1602650a@int.veeco.com>
Message-ID: <20031225020009.66c573b6.samantha@objectent.com>

I find the notion that Outlook deserves to be called a "Personal Information Manager" quite distressing.   It is a barely useable email program, when it doesn't choose to lock up and ignoring that it encrypts all "your" mail in a funny format difficult to do anything else with.  As a task manager it sucks rocks.  There is not even a simple hierachy or an interdependency management.  The Calendar functionality is useable with similar caveats to mail.  Notes?  They would be a lot better if I could attach them anywhere and organize them more deeply.  But all of these functionalities together even when well done are not what I need as a PIM.

I need a tool that will keep track of the cookie crumbs of web pages, docs, searches, images, notes jotted down, mutterings and ravings, wild ideas and tentative integrations that we all do as we swim in this information sea.  The call is always to see/sense more, integrate more, swim more swiftly or winnow more finely.   I need clean interfaces that I can ask real questions of and have the width and breadth of information traveled and half digested, by self and others at will, and on the net at large, used on my/our behalf to find the answer or that which an answer may be approached from.  It is an open framework that I can hang not just new documents and notes and emails etc upon but that I can fill with concepts and association fragments and that can extract (ultimately) concepts and associations and factoids out of any/all input.   Full text search is a bare beginning.  It is a place where I can hang new techniques, facts, ideas as I learn them and have them associate an!
d coalesce in new and sometimes fruitful ways.  It is where I can hang every mental tool and find it when need arises.

That would be a PIM.  Outlook and Chandler are mere toys for some small fragment of what is needed. 

- s


On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 18:13:13 -0800
"Jef Allbright" <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:

> rick wrote:
> > Have any of you seen this:
> >
> > http://www.bitsmithsoft.com/?source=P22020300071500
> >
> > it is somewhat like a remembrance agent program that I worked on
> > several years ago -- but it does not try to be an "agent". I think I
> > may end up using this application to store all my personal articles,
> > clippings, data and etc.
> >
> 
> 
> I used to use PersonalBrain for this, but gave it up because of the
> proprietary and closed database structure.  I didn't want to trust my
> knowledge base to that.  This is the same nifty-looking relational topic
> display as on Kurzweil's site.  I just looked again, and it appears they
> might now have a utility to export the database in some form.  It still
> appears that they're only interested in really big corporate accounts
> though.
> 
> At work I use Outlook 2000 for this purpose.  It has the advantage of a
> consistent user interface, and I can easily (for the most part) drag and
> drop between email, tasks, and Word documents.  Each item can be assigned
> multiple categories, the whole thing syncs nicely with my Palm using
> KeySuite, and my work stuff is available on the web via Exchange Server.
> 
> For personal knowledge capture and sharing, I'm mainly using my web site,
> www.jefallbright.net, coded in PHP and MySQL using Drupal with some patches
> and enhancements.  It allows me to use a large set of keywords, relate them
> in parent-child-sibling fashion, and it's completely open so I can grow it
> and modify it as I wish.  It serves well as a web-based scrap book to share
> on topics that interest me, along with some of my thoughts and comments.
> I've also been *amazed* at how many people have subscribed and receive daily
> notifications of (a portion of) new content.
> 
> I've long been intrigued by the notion of a remembrance agent, but Brad
> Rhodes' implementation doesn't run well under Windows (last update was in
> 2001) and I don't have time to code something better myself.
> 
> I also participated in beta-testing of a product called Find, that attempted
> to index all email and other documents on a Windows machine and make them
> available via realtime keyword search, but it was extremely resource-hungry
> and it appears the company has gone out of business.  I understand Microsoft
> plans to provide a database driven file system which should be a good step
> in that direction.
> 
> I'm looking forward to Chandler, especially because it's open source, and
> it's being implemented and modifiable in Python.
> 
> - Jef
> www.jefallbright.net
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Thu Dec 25 10:08:21 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 02:08:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312250204100.4787-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

> ### I think I shouldn't say it but, whatever: I have some privileged
> information about a new technique which could lead to a quantum leap in the
> repair of cells in adult mammals (i.e. rejuvenation of adult tissues, in
> vivo). Nuff said. This is my promise of a big Christmas present for
> everybody in the next few years. Stay tuned.

Had to smile at this one Rafal.  I like Christmas surprises but this
one seems to be part of a mystery drama as well.  I understand your
perspective but that doesn't stop me from wondering if I leave you
milk and cookies if some more information about the presents may
be forthcoming...

R.
:-)




From samantha at objectent.com  Thu Dec 25 10:19:50 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 02:19:50 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <016b01c3c8cf$40c5dbc0$df994a43@texas.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<016b01c3c8cf$40c5dbc0$df994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <20031225021950.0e27a8fd.samantha@objectent.com>

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 15:04:50 -0600
"Damien Broderick" <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:

> < A veteran New York Times war correspondent's complex, moving, and
> thought-provoking reflection on how life is lived most intensely in times of
> war.
> General George S. Patton famously said, "Compared to war all other forms of
> human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God, I do love it so!" Though
> Patton was a notoriously single-minded general, it is nonetheless a sad fact
> that war gives meaning to many lives, a fact with which we have become
> familiar now that America is once again engaged in a military conflict. War
> is an enticing elixir. It gives us purpose, resolve, a cause. It allows us
> to be noble. >
> 

If this current idiocy is the best that can be had to give us purpose, resolve, and a cause - if it is the closest we get to "noble" - then please pass the koolaid.   

I do not see how anyone can suppose this never-ending, perpetually over-spending, freedom destroying, cynical, bullying crap-shoot disguised as "war" brings any meaning at all to life.  It makes life infinitely ugly and sad if taken seriously.  As ugly as war is this current fiasco sullies even the name of "war".

- s


From charlie at antipope.org  Thu Dec 25 13:06:39 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 13:06:39 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031225021950.0e27a8fd.samantha@objectent.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312221244150.32683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<016b01c3c8cf$40c5dbc0$df994a43@texas.net>
	<20031225021950.0e27a8fd.samantha@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <2D6241DB-36DB-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 25 Dec 2003, at 10:19, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> If this current idiocy is the best that can be had to give us purpose, 
> resolve, and a cause - if it is the closest we get to "noble" - then 
> please pass the koolaid.
>
> I do not see how anyone can suppose this never-ending, perpetually 
> over-spending, freedom destroying, cynical, bullying crap-shoot 
> disguised as "war" brings any meaning at all to life.  It makes life 
> infinitely ugly and sad if taken seriously.  As ugly as war is this 
> current fiasco sullies even the name of "war".

I'd like to add to that: war seems to me to be about as anti-extropic 
as you can get. The triumph of brute force over enlightenment, 
destruction, death and despair on a massive scale. An excuse for the 
enemies of freedom on every side to chip away at civil rights. The 
ascendency of dehumanization is the *opposite* of transhumanism.

About the only possible exception to this bleak picture is the way that 
in the industrial age war permits the mobilization of vast 
technological and scientific resources and their direction towards 
achieving specific goals, in a manner that is difficult to coordinate 
in peacetime. But those goals are seldom positive, frequently 
destructive, and wouldn't it be better to achieve such mobilization for 
creative and constructive ends instead?


-- Charlie



From matus at matus1976.com  Thu Dec 25 13:32:48 2003
From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 08:32:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <2D6241DB-36DB-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3caeb$9a163da0$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>


> 
Charlie Stross said:

> I'd like to add to that: war seems to me to be about as anti-extropic
> as you can get. The triumph of brute force over enlightenment,
> destruction, death and despair on a massive scale. An excuse for the
> enemies of freedom on every side to chip away at civil rights. The
> ascendency of dehumanization is the *opposite* of transhumanism.

I would like to disagree with that.  War is neither intrinsically
extropic nor anti-extropic.  If one of the parties at war is less
extropic, and it wins, then war is anti-extropic.  If the other party is
more extropic, and it wins, the result is clearly extropic.  Would you
have been content trying to 'enlighten' Hitler or Hirohito or Stalin
about why war was wrong?  As I have pointed out many times on this list,
there has never been a society more anti-extropic than just about every
incarnation of communism on this planet.  More people have been killed
by communism than all war dead combined, add to that any other kind of
murderous totalitarian regime, and I am hard pressed to believe that
wars enacted to remove such murderous tyrants are *always*
anti-extropic.  I find you summation simplistic.  Take a look at the
rights enjoyed by people under the Khmere Rouge

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/WF6.TAB.6.3.GIF

And tell me if a war to free them from that particular oppressive
murderous regime would not have been extropic.  If any part of extropy
requires freedoms of any kind, than turning non-free nations free by
means of war is by definition extropic. 

Extropic progress requires freedom of information, ideas, thoughts,
technology, etc.  In most oppressive states, the internet and computers
are illegal, non-governmental publications and political disagreement,
also are, including property and technology in others.  Yet you assert
that *any* war, even ones that would bring freedom to these horrifically
oppressed peoples are by definition anti-extropic?  

You can debate about the specific ways a war might be carried out, and
can surely figure some to be anti-extropic, but to absolutely assert
that *any* war is automatically anti-extropic is egregious. 

> 
> About the only possible exception to this bleak picture is the way
that
> in the industrial age war permits the mobilization of vast
> technological and scientific resources and their direction towards
> achieving specific goals, in a manner that is difficult to coordinate
> in peacetime. But those goals are seldom positive, frequently
> destructive, and wouldn't it be better to achieve such mobilization
for
> creative and constructive ends instead?
> 

And if a society is ideologically opposed to creativity and construction
(as many communist regimes have pretty much been) then going to war with
them is still not extropic?  Do you consider WWII to have been extropic
or anti-extropic?

Michael




From charlie at antipope.org  Thu Dec 25 14:08:21 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 14:08:21 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <000001c3caeb$9a163da0$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>
References: <000001c3caeb$9a163da0$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>
Message-ID: <CBCA0E03-36E3-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 25 Dec 2003, at 13:32, Matus wrote:
>>
> Charlie Stross said:
>
>> I'd like to add to that: war seems to me to be about as anti-extropic
>> as you can get. The triumph of brute force over enlightenment,
>> destruction, death and despair on a massive scale. An excuse for the
>> enemies of freedom on every side to chip away at civil rights. The
>> ascendency of dehumanization is the *opposite* of transhumanism.
>
> I would like to disagree with that.  War is neither intrinsically
> extropic nor anti-extropic.  If one of the parties at war is less
> extropic, and it wins, then war is anti-extropic.

Sorry, I think you're wrong.

We're talking on two different levels. You're discussing ideology, I'm 
discussing methods.

I'll grant you that it's necessary to address the problem of 
anti-extropic ideologies, and in some cases their proponents will not 
listen to reason. But ...

>   If the other party is
> more extropic, and it wins, the result is clearly extropic.  Would you
> have been content trying to 'enlighten' Hitler or Hirohito or Stalin
> about why war was wrong?

Hitler, Stalin, et all were *symptoms* of the disease of war as much as 
they were driving forces behind it.In Hitler's case, his ascendency was 
arguably the ultimate side-effect of the botched forceps delivery of 
one of Queen Victoria's grand-children in 1859. (Specifically Kaiser 
Wilhelm II, whose physical deformity and conservative, martial 
upbringing combined to give him an inferiority complex directed towards 
his cousins, and led in no small part to his getting involved in a 
minor Balkan fracas and escallating it into a World War. Which in turn 
brought the monarchical system to an unexpected and very sudden end in 
Europe, leaving in its wake a power vacuum in which totalitarianism 
could flourish.) In Stalin's case ... well, if a certain Russian 
bomb-thrower in 1881 had missed his target, we'd probably have had no 
Russian revolution. (Vladimir Illich Ulianov's elder brother was one of 
the student radicals executed by Tsar Alexander III's police during the 
paranoid years following the assassination of Alexander II. He idolized 
his brother, and later ascribed his own radicalization to what he 
perceived as the unfair and brutal execution of the elder sibling. No 
Lenln? Then Stalin -- or rather, Joe Dzugashvilli -- stays a small-time 
bank-robber and terrorist. Or even stays in the seminary and ends up as 
a priest.)

Is this a case of ascribing too much to contingency? Sure. But I feel 
it's important to note that these monsters you point the finger at were 
in every case the outcome of a chain of violent circumstances. Violence 
begets more violence, and in each case (Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito's war 
cabinet) the monstrous fruit grows from a relatively small seed.

>  As I have pointed out many times on this list,
> there has never been a society more anti-extropic than just about every
> incarnation of communism on this planet.  More people have been killed
> by communism than all war dead combined,

Blaah blaah blaah.

I suppose "every incarnation of communism on this planet" doesn't 
include all those family groups that pool their collective assets and 
resources. Or the roughly 75% of the planetary population who live in 
dirt-poor peasant communities and are so poor that they're excluded 
from capital-mediated economic interactions, dealing instead on the 
basis of barter and favours. Right?

The truth is, communism works very well indeed -- at the smallest 
scale. And if you insist that it doesn't, I'm going to have to ask you 
how much your parents charged you for the use of your cot when you were 
a baby.

But I digress ...

> And tell me if a war to free them from that particular oppressive
> murderous regime would not have been extropic.  If any part of extropy
> requires freedoms of any kind, than turning non-free nations free by
> means of war is by definition extropic.

Tell that to the corpses.

Here's a clue: the survivors may (or may not) be better off after a war 
of liberation. But the people who die during such a war are cleary 
*not* better off; they're dead. No amount of "liberation" can help a 
corpse.

> Extropic progress requires freedom of information, ideas, thoughts,
> technology, etc.  In most oppressive states, the internet and computers
> are illegal, non-governmental publications and political disagreement,
> also are, including property and technology in others.

Like, oh, cannabis or heroin or cocaine in the USA?

Here's a thought-experiment for you. Clearly the USA is ruled by an 
oppressive regime that refuses to give its citizens the right to 
experience certain states of consciousness or to posess certain types 
of property. Political disagreement with this platform can (as in the 
recent case of Tommy Chong) make you a target for imprisonment on 
trumped-up charges.

Does this justify carpet-bombing Washington DC and launching a war of 
invasion and subsequent occupation by foreign troops, at a cost of, 
say, 150,000 lives (the equivalent per capita adjusted for the US 
population of the proportion of the Iraqi population killed during this 
years' war) to redress this oppressive situation?

I may be opposed to the war on drugs, but I suspect going to that kind 
of length to end it would be a cure worse than the disease.

War as a cure for social evils is almost invariably worse than the 
social evils it is proposed as a solution for. I find it notable that 
the only really enthusiastic proponents of such wars on the planet 
today are barking mad Islamic fundamentalists -- and Americans, who 
haven't actually experienced a war on their home territory for nearly a 
century and a half!




-- Charlie (who is *NOT* American, and who lives in a country 
             that has been bombed within living memory, and who has lived
             through a terrorist insurgency that killed five or six times
             as many people, as a proportion of total population, as 
9/11)



From dwayne at pobox.com  Thu Dec 25 11:56:25 2003
From: dwayne at pobox.com (dwayne)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 22:56:25 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] happy stolen pagan fertility festival!
Message-ID: <3FEAD069.3EB84CE6@pobox.com>

hey everyone,

wishing you all the best for the festive season, whatever it is you are
celebrating, at least we are all celebrating something :)

enjoy your presents, don't drink too much, don't eat too little, enjoy life
and I'll see you around!


Dwayne
-- 
               mailto:ddraig at pobox.com  
it's nice to be better, but it's much better to be nice
   ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e...
  http://www.barrelfullofmonkeys.org/Data/3-death.jpg
Sheldon: No! No! Not E.T.! Kill! Kill! Kill E.T.! Glock E.T.!
http://www.audioscrobbler.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=top10&file=userinfo&user=ddraig


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Dec 25 14:45:57 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 06:45:57 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <CBCA0E03-36E3-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031225144557.14134.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> -- Charlie (who is *NOT* American, and who lives in a country 
>   that has been bombed within living memory, and who has lived
>   through a terrorist insurgency that killed five or six times
>   as many people, as a proportion of total population, as 9/11)

Ironic twist: Just as Charlie gets done lecturing how dead is dead and
extropic ends don't matter to the dead, it doesn't matter how many died
from communism if only the right people had worn condoms,,,,etc etc....
he engages in a game of "my dead are bigger than your dead"....

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From charlie at antipope.org  Thu Dec 25 14:59:14 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 14:59:14 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031225144557.14134.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20031225144557.14134.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E7B7853A-36EA-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 25 Dec 2003, at 14:45, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
> --- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
>> -- Charlie (who is *NOT* American, and who lives in a country 
>>   that has been bombed within living memory, and who has lived
>>   through a terrorist insurgency that killed five or six times
>>   as many people, as a proportion of total population, as 9/11)
>
> Ironic twist: Just as Charlie gets done lecturing how dead is dead and
> extropic ends don't matter to the dead, it doesn't matter how many died
> from communism if only the right people had worn condoms,,,,etc etc....
> he engages in a game of "my dead are bigger than your dead"....

I will confess I was getting a bit too annoyed at the armchair warriors 
to keep my cool.

Sure the big budget military gets to play with lots of cool high-tech 
toys,
but in the final analysis death is *everyone's* enemy, and as 
extropians we should be seeking to avoid it wherever possible!



-- Charlie



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Thu Dec 25 15:01:58 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 10:01:58 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <000001c3caeb$9a163da0$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>
References: <2D6241DB-36DB-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031225085904.02924eb0@mail.comcast.net>

At 08:32 AM 12/25/2003 -0500, Matus wrote:

>You can debate about the specific ways a war might be carried out, and
>can surely figure some to be anti-extropic, but to absolutely assert
>that *any* war is automatically anti-extropic is egregious.

There are certainly ways a war could be conducted that are more
humane or effective or cheaper than the ways government does, beyond
what Vinge discusses in "The Ungoverned" and what we've observed
here, as when the ethics and effectiveness of political assassination
was discussed.

As interesting as that conversation might be, it is apt to draw a bit more
attention than discussing M-brains. I've been reading the new free-arms
list, where a few proto-extropians have banded, and there's a sad
awareness that GS-11 Brother is watching.

I'm leaving in a few minutes to take my daughter to the airport, and I just
emptied my pockets of everything that's ordinarily there that security
will balk at.

Did you know that bringing a typical pocket knife into a post office is a
Federal crime?  (And was, pre-9/11.)

>And if a society is ideologically opposed to creativity and construction
>(as many communist regimes have pretty much been) then going to war with
>them is still not extropic? Do you consider WWII to have been extropic
>or anti-extropic?

Since we, regrettably, can't know how alternative histories would really
have turned out, I'm not sure. Yes, removing Hitler and freeing Europe
were worthy causes, as such things go, but the ripple effect of our
expedient alliance with Stalin and domestic blindness to communist
infiltration of the US was losing Eastern Europe and decades of
struggle and warfare to free them.

As the powerkills site details, more people were killed under Stalin than
Hitler. I'm not sure who otherwise abridged freedom more. It's harder to
compare, beyond gulag vs. concentration camp.

At the time, we decided Stalin was the lesser of two evils, as we'd
sided with Saddam over Khomeini. Looking back, it isn't clear.


-- David Lubkin.




From natasha at natasha.cc  Thu Dec 25 17:21:42 2003
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 09:21:42 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy Newtonmas, Merry Christmas, Happy Honica,
 Joyous Day off from Work
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20031225091738.0336ce00@pop.earthlink.net>

Extroping transhumans -

May you all live a long and peaceful life - full of love and understanding.

Natasha


Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc
----------
President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.transhuman.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031225/cd9b8865/attachment.html>

From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Dec 25 15:41:50 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 08:41:50 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: OT: Physics humor
Message-ID: <3FEB053E.4E71DBDF@mindspring.com>

A friend of mine majored in Physics here in Rome, Italy. One of his first
exercises was to experimentally calculate G (gravitation constant). Well,
his professor considered as fakes all results too much near to the real
value...


denic

>>> Electron Band Structure In Germanium, My Ass
>>> http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~kovar/hall.html

----------------------

I did this at uni, by means of Cavendish's balls (oo-er). I was out 
by just one order of magnitude, which was considered pretty good 
going.

Rob


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From matus at matus1976.com  Thu Dec 25 15:46:54 2003
From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 10:46:54 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <CBCA0E03-36E3-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3cafe$55d433a0$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>

> On 25 Dec 2003, at 13:32, Matus wrote:
> >>
> > Charlie Stross said:
> >
> >> I'd like to add to that: war seems to me to be about as
anti-extropic
> >> as you can get. The triumph of brute force over enlightenment,
> >> destruction, death and despair on a massive scale. An excuse for
the
> >> enemies of freedom on every side to chip away at civil rights. The
> >> ascendency of dehumanization is the *opposite* of transhumanism.
> >
> > I would like to disagree with that.  War is neither intrinsically
> > extropic nor anti-extropic.  If one of the parties at war is less
> > extropic, and it wins, then war is anti-extropic.
> 
> Sorry, I think you're wrong.
> 
> We're talking on two different levels. You're discussing ideology, I'm
> discussing methods.
> 
> I'll grant you that it's necessary to address the problem of
> anti-extropic ideologies, and in some cases their proponents will not
> listen to reason. But ...

Those who do not subscribe to reason can not be conquered by it.  So,
are you admitting that as a 'method' war can sometimes be extropic?

> 
> >   If the other party is
> > more extropic, and it wins, the result is clearly extropic.  Would
you
> > have been content trying to 'enlighten' Hitler or Hirohito or Stalin
> > about why war was wrong?
> 
> Is this a case of ascribing too much to contingency? Sure. But I feel
> it's important to note that these monsters you point the finger at
were
> in every case the outcome of a chain of violent circumstances.

Understandable, but that chain of violent circumstances as far back as
history goes can not simply be ignored for want of imagining a world
where war is always bad because no one ever behaved in any manner where
war was required to stop them.  That history is real, and we must deal
with its consequences in the best manner we can.  Your comment is like
saying 'if no one ever behaved in a warlike manner than war would have
never been required and thus war is all bad!'  Its nice, gives one a
happy feeling, but its pure fantasy.  If no one ever assaulted another
person, police wouldn't be required either.  People DO behave in a
warlike manner, how should one who is extropic and values human life
deal with them?  

> Violence
> begets more violence, and in each case (Hitler, Stalin, Hirohito's war
> cabinet) the monstrous fruit grows from a relatively small seed.

By your thinking, it seems even self defense would be anti-extropic.

> 
> >  As I have pointed out many times on this list,
> > there has never been a society more anti-extropic than just about
every
> > incarnation of communism on this planet.  More people have been
killed
> > by communism than all war dead combined,
> 
> Blaah blaah blaah.
> 
> I suppose "every incarnation of communism on this planet" doesn't
> include all those family groups that pool their collective assets and
> resources. 

No it doesn't, I was referring to states that enact communist as a form
of political and economic rule that force the people that live under
them to abide by it wholly even against their own will, states that have
killed 170 million people this century.  

> Or the roughly 75% of the planetary population who live in
> dirt-poor peasant communities and are so poor that they're excluded
> from capital-mediated economic interactions, dealing instead on the
> basis of barter and favours. Right?

People who are mostly ruled by corrupt totalitarians or oppressive
theocratic regimes.  

> 
> The truth is, communism works very well indeed -- at the smallest
> scale. And if you insist that it doesn't, I'm going to have to ask you
> how much your parents charged you for the use of your cot when you
were
> a baby.
> 

Im sure it does, if you want to live in a hippy commune, be my guess.
Just don't toss fellow members who change their mind in gulags to work
themselves to death.

> But I digress ...
> 
> > And tell me if a war to free them from that particular oppressive
> > murderous regime would not have been extropic.  If any part of
extropy
> > requires freedoms of any kind, than turning non-free nations free by
> > means of war is by definition extropic.
> 
> Tell that to the corpses.
> 
> Here's a clue: the survivors may (or may not) be better off after a
war
> of liberation. But the people who die during such a war are cleary
> *not* better off; they're dead. No amount of "liberation" can help a
> corpse.

Ok, so whether a war was extropic or not is measured by how many people
are killed?  Is extropy *solely* a measure of intelligent life, and
nothing else?  If you are going to talk about the results of a war being
extropic or not, you must define what is extropic.  In some cases it may
be reasonable to believe inaction would cause more deaths than action,
is action then extropic?  

What of other factors, I would be hard pressed to agree that what is
extropic is merely a measurement of being alive.  As a billion couch
potatoes may be alive, but will hardly be as extropic as 10 productive
motivated scientists.  

To positively assert whether something was extropic or not, you will
have to define what criteria makes something extropic, and how much of
it was present before and how much present afterward.  This would
probably be quite an undertaking, yet you are all ready absolutely
positive that *all* wars are anti-extropic.

> 
> > Extropic progress requires freedom of information, ideas, thoughts,
> > technology, etc.  In most oppressive states, the internet and
computers
> > are illegal, non-governmental publications and political
disagreement,
> > also are, including property and technology in others.
> 
> Like, oh, cannabis or heroin or cocaine in the USA?

Are either of these requirements for extropy?  Hardly, I would argue
that they are probably anti-extropic.  Will a bunch of cocaine addicts
or stoners bring about a singularity?  I doubt it.  Hey, while were at
it, why don't we force everyone to be scientists and engineers and
theoretical physicists and AI programmers.  Now that would surely be
extropic.  Clearly what is extropic is not solely related to everyone
being entirely free and everyone being not free at all.  Specific
freedoms may or may not be extropic, and fighting for extropic freedoms
would result in a more extropic society.  Defeating a clearly
anti-extropic state (say, one that has *no* freedoms, allows no
technology, and no free exchange of information) is clearly extropic.
But of course, by your comments, if even one person is killed it is not,
correct?

> 
> Here's a thought-experiment for you. Clearly the USA is ruled by an
> oppressive regime that refuses to give its citizens the right to
> experience certain states of consciousness or to posess certain types
> of property. Political disagreement with this platform can (as in the
> recent case of Tommy Chong) make you a target for imprisonment on
> trumped-up charges.
> 
> Does this justify carpet-bombing Washington DC and launching a war of
> invasion and subsequent occupation by foreign troops, at a cost of,
> say, 150,000 lives (the equivalent per capita adjusted for the US
> population of the proportion of the Iraqi population killed during
this
> years' war) to redress this oppressive situation?

No it does not justify it, but why are you hitting me with thought
experiments, you are the one who has made the absolutist assertion that
all wars are anti-extropic.  You have merely cited a hypothetical
example of one that is not.  I have not asserted that all wars *are*
extropic in no way shape or form.  Only that some wars, depending on
circumstances, may be considered extropic.

> 
> War as a cure for social evils is almost invariably worse than the
> social evils it is proposed as a solution for. I find it notable that
> the only really enthusiastic proponents of such wars on the planet
> today are barking mad Islamic fundamentalists -- and Americans, who
> haven't actually experienced a war on their home territory for nearly
a
> century and a half!
> 

" almost invariably" ?  Why the 'almost' qualifier, I thought you said
'all' wars were anti-extropic.

Michael




From matus at matus1976.com  Thu Dec 25 16:14:35 2003
From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:14:35 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031225085904.02924eb0@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <000501c3cb02$33747870$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>

David said:
> 
> At 08:32 AM 12/25/2003 -0500, Matus wrote:
> 
> >You can debate about the specific ways a war might be carried out,
and
> >can surely figure some to be anti-extropic, but to absolutely assert
> >that *any* war is automatically anti-extropic is egregious.
> 
> There are certainly ways a war could be conducted that are more
> humane or effective or cheaper than the ways government does, beyond
> what Vinge discusses in "The Ungoverned" and what we've observed
> here, as when the ethics and effectiveness of political assassination
> was discussed.
> 
> As interesting as that conversation might be, it is apt to draw a bit
more
> attention than discussing M-brains. I've been reading the new
free-arms
> list, where a few proto-extropians have banded, and there's a sad
> awareness that GS-11 Brother is watching.
> 

To make this a more directly extropic conversation then, lets attempt to
define extropy.  Charlie asserts that how many people are alive (or were
killed) is a measurement of extropy.  Of course this is part of it, but
surely there is more to extropy than merely being alive.  We need
information, we need technology, we need science, and scientists.  I do
not think it would be accurate to merely associate extropy with freedom
any more than merely extropy with lives, since some freedoms I would
certainly value are probably not extropian (as my examples of cocaine
addicts or stoners) and some intelligent living beings my choose to
abandon intelligence and reason, and thus are not extropian.  

On the Extropy Institute principles page we see: 

Extropy -  The extent of a living or organizational system's
intelligence, functional order, vitality, and capacity and drive for
improvement

Extropic - Actions, qualities, or outcomes that embody or further
extropy

So for an action (I'll drop 'war' out of the discussion and just leave
it as an action) to be extropic it must result in a net increase in one
or many of the above criteria.  But what if one part increases, and
another decreases?  E.g. There are more intelligent people alive, but
they have no capacity for improvement (strict oppressive statism), or
conversely, what if there are fewer intelligent people around, but they
had a much greater capacity for improvement, is that extropic?

All the people in the universe, if they never have any capacity for
improvement, can not be considered more extropic than even *one* person
who has that capacity for improvement.  

I will defer to Charlie then, is what is extropic merely how many people
are alive?  Or are there other variables to consider?  How do we
prioritize these variables?  I doubt that you meant only the number of
living beings was the sole criteria for judging something extropic, you
were getting your point across, but the difficulty is in actually
defining our ethical principles here in cases where one must choose
between different variables, all of which we may dearly value.  

Michael






From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 26 00:36:31 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 16:36:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: dedifferentiation article
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312251633330.16072-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Science Daily is reporting on the dedifferention molecule
work at Scripps:
  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031223062153.htm

If anyone has access to the JACS and can read the technical
article:
  http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/asap.cgi/jacsat/asap/html/ja037390k.html

I would appreciate receiving a copy.

Thanks,
Robert




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Dec 26 01:09:20 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 12:09:20 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
 
> ### I think I shouldn't say it but, whatever: I have some
> privileged information about a new technique which could
> lead to a quantum leap in the repair of cells in adult mammals
> (i.e. rejuvenation of adult tissues, in vivo). Nuff said. This is
> my promise of a big Christmas present for everybody in the
> next few years. Stay tuned.
> 
> I'd be surprised if in the next ten years we don't have a
> treatment (in the form of a few injections) which will prolong
> adult human life by 20 to 30 years. In the year 2014 you can
> look back on this post and either call me prescient, or sadly 
> remark on my unjustified optimism. Time will tell.

Why wouldn't a technology perceived to be a quantum leap
by an informed person now, not be patented and thereby 
disclosed well before 2014 ? 

Regards,
Brett Paatsch




From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Fri Dec 26 01:11:26 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 20:11:26 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com><002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 8:09 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes


> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>
> > ### I think I shouldn't say it but, whatever: I have some
> > privileged information about a new technique which could
> > lead to a quantum leap in the repair of cells in adult mammals
> > (i.e. rejuvenation of adult tissues, in vivo). Nuff said. This is
> > my promise of a big Christmas present for everybody in the
> > next few years. Stay tuned.
> >
> > I'd be surprised if in the next ten years we don't have a
> > treatment (in the form of a few injections) which will prolong
> > adult human life by 20 to 30 years. In the year 2014 you can
> > look back on this post and either call me prescient, or sadly
> > remark on my unjustified optimism. Time will tell.
>
> Why wouldn't a technology perceived to be a quantum leap
> by an informed person now, not be patented and thereby
> disclosed well before 2014 ?
>
### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary patent) and
will be described in articles soon, but it will take years before its
clinical application. I really can't say anything more.

Rafal



From etheric at comcast.net  Fri Dec 26 01:54:09 2003
From: etheric at comcast.net (R.Coyote)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 17:54:09 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Brain Cells Live Hours without Oxygen
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com><002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension><00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <00bf01c3cb53$274ba9a0$0300a8c0@etheric>

This is of  HUGE import methinks.

http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2003-12-24-4


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Fri Dec 26 02:16:43 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 19:16:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Skeptic CD
Message-ID: <3FEB9A0B.7AD8A2F5@mindspring.com>

For those who were inquiring, the Great Skeptic CD sells overseas for 
$A65 (around $US 48).


Barry Williams
Executive Officer
Australian Skeptics
PO Box 268
Roseville  NSW  2069
Australia
02 9417 2071
< http://www.skeptics.com.au >


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Fri Dec 26 05:42:39 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 21:42:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Brain Cells Live Hours without Oxygen
In-Reply-To: <00bf01c3cb53$274ba9a0$0300a8c0@etheric>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312252135370.21494-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Thu, 25 Dec 2003, R.Coyote wrote:

> This is of  HUGE import methinks.
>
> http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2003-12-24-4

Interesting.  Poking around in PubMed it would appear that the
major ion channel involved -- TRPM7 has a major role as a transport
channel for Ca++ and Mg++.  Ca++ I believe plays an important
role in cellular homeostasis and perhaps regulation of apoptosis.
Mg++ may play a role in the transmission of neural impulses
in certain types of neurons.  But according to:
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12508053&dopt=Abstract
the ion channel is also involved in the transmission of a number
of other ++ ions -- from nasty ones (Ni++, Cd++, Co++) to
essential ones (Zn++).

So it would appear to be a key player from both positive
and negative perspectives.  The question would be how
oxygen/glucose deprivation might alter its behavior.

Robert




From samantha at objectent.com  Fri Dec 26 06:01:34 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 22:01:34 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW9-OE38vfhaVL7ku300012561@hotmail.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com> <3FE4B120.4020904@barrera.org>
	<LAW9-OE38vfhaVL7ku300012561@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031225220134.6ffb5a37.samantha@objectent.com>

So why is Windows so important to you?

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:22:36 -0500
"Brian Alexander Lee" <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:

> > From: "Joseph S. Barrera III" <joe at barrera.org>
> > Can't wait until postgres runs on win32 w/o cygwin... coming RSN
> > except that the postgres_win32 team is still figuring out how to natively
> > emulate signals on win32. Aghh.
> 
> 
> dbExperts (http://www.dbexperts.net) offers a native windows port of
> postgresql. They charge around $300 or so. There should be some other
> windows postgres available through google.
> 
> BAL
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From samantha at objectent.com  Fri Dec 26 06:17:51 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 22:17:51 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] converging history
In-Reply-To: <003001c3c83b$93b7ae60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <018301c3c820$d8001aa0$b0994a43@texas.net>
	<003001c3c83b$93b7ae60$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031225221751.79999301.samantha@objectent.com>

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 19:27:49 -0800
"Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> Please look at this figure for a minute:
> 
> file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/spike/Local%20Settings/Temporary%2
> 0Internet%20Files/OLKA6/Intel_Roadmap_2003.gif
> 

I'm supposed to be able to see a figure on hour "C:" drive?

> then explain to me how humanity could be doing anything
> other than converging towards an inevitable singularity.
> Clearly ours is a species in open-loop, with no apparent
> equilibrium point that can possibly be re-established.

Because the only superpower on earth is being run by extremely reactionary forces determined to preserve the status quo (re their current relative importance and power) at all costs?  Add in an "Intellectual Property" structure so intent on extracting every penny that innovation is something only big companies with lots of lawyers can afford in various fields of endeavor.  Or perhaps the lack of any real vision just leaves everything moving too slow and every advance being doled yout bit by byte at as high a cost (read high entropy) as possible to again get mine before some you takes it all.  In short, singularity is far from inevitable. Never underestimate the power of human stupidity and general cussedness.


> Any large star inevitably goes supernova, spewing metals
> into the cosmos, which eventually form planets elsewhere,
> which will form life, given the right mix of elements and 
> conditions. 

Actually, opinion varies a lot about just how extreme and rare the proper conditions for life, much less highly intelligent life, are.

? Life may have long periods of equilibrium,
> such as our own 3 billion years of blue-green algal mats,
> but something like multicellular life must eventually
> happen, or so it would seem. 

There is no "must" to it.  Such a possibility exists but it is by no means inevitable for any particular planet or set of stars.

> If there is multicellular
> life, there is interspecies competition, and every available
> ecological niche is eventually filled.  One obvious ecological
> niche is the one humans inhabit: scentient intelligence
> sufficient to modify the environment to its own needs.
> In that niche exists competition for resources and
> competition for mates, which leads to ever more creativeness
> and ever greater intelligence.  

Not inevitable.  Only enough intelligence and other abilities to be not go extinct is neccessarily  required of living species.  

>Societal equilibria may be
> reached in many or perhaps most of those cases, but
> it only takes one society somewhere to precipitate something 
> analogous to the industrial revolution, which makes it
> inevitable as all hell, and when that happens, automated 
> control of machines is clearly desired, leading
> eventually to mechanical computers, then improvements
> leading to electronics, then artificial intelligence appears
> to me to be absolutely unavoidable in the long run, which
> leads to AI and eventually to uploading and the construction 
> of MBrains, to use all the available metals in the star system.
> 

Geez, and you put down religious people for stringing together a lot of hypotheticals, assumptions, telology and wishful thinking.  

> So the history of life apparently eventually converges on 
> this solution, utterly regardless of the path it takes to 
> get there.  
> 
> Please, what am I doing wrong in this line of reasoning?  
> Where is the stepping off point?
> 

You are assuming what you wish to occur.  You are assuming that it is inevitable, that we really can't fuck it up.  You are building on top of that assumption or perhaps sawing off the limb it rests on by assuming that full on singularity is inevitable everywhere there is any really possibility of life.   In actuality we will be damn lucky not to do something stupid to ourselves or get in the way just a bit too long to insure our survival much less that we upload and live happily ever after.    There is nothing to be taken for granted although there is everything to gain.  

- samantha


From samantha at objectent.com  Fri Dec 26 06:30:08 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 22:30:08 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <01af01c3c83d$dc83eee0$b0994a43@texas.net>
	<20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031225223008.102ef4d4.samantha@objectent.com>

On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:03:45 -0800 (PST)
Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> --- Damien Broderick <thespike at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > McKibben draws upon the wisdom of the extropian list thus:
> > 
> > `On the bulletin boards of the Web, you can find zealous
> > "transhumanists"
> > not just explaining how the world will evolve past our species, but
> > also debating questions like whether it's morally necessary to kill
> > "Luddites" who stand in the way of such progress:
> 
> snip a quote of what was probably one of my posts....

It was floated as at least a "discussion point" by a few people at different times.
> 
> > I recall pointing out at the time how this would come back to bite
> > us on the arse.
> 
> And I seem to recall saying, and if I didn't, I'll say it now: Only a
> freakin luddite would consider *saving* billions of human lives to be
> 'violence'... (of course, because those billions of humans would wind
> up doing violence to the pretty trees and fuzzy animals...)
> 

Violence is violence.  That violence is sometimes necessary does not make not so. History is painted with the blood of those killed for the sake of a "noble ideal".  It behooves us to be very vigilant in not falling into this pattern <again>.   What is required is that those with the vision to create a worthwhile future have the freedom to do so.  That freedom sometimes have to resort to force.  But it is not true, never has been true and never works to kill of a large enough number of those who do not think like you in order to supposedly make the world a better place.   Would it not be a lot more fruitful to concentrate on what you wish to build, sell the hell out of it, and only last of all insist on the right to pursue your dreams, defendable if need by by arms?  Why start out planning to kill off the "luddites"?   How the hell do you expect to keep even those of dream of similar world much less convert anyone to the cause if you lead with death to everyone you judge to !
be in your way?  This loses big.



> I seem to recall that there have been people killed by luddite violence
> and not a one of the perps, I am sure, ever debated the issue, or
> thought to think of it as an ethical issue worthy of debate. Nobody
> here did public protest against these deaths.
>

I have no idea what this blurry accusation has to do with the question at hand.
 
> And while I've been trying to raise the warnings, people round these
> parts have been mighty complacent while the gummint goes about enacting
> the luddite agenda and people like McKibben gain popular renown without
> answer from our side.
>

It is true that people are overly complacent.  But threatening luddites in general or specific ones with death directly or by implications is not the way.
 
> If any sort of violence is not warranted, then what is the excuse for
> the complete and total inaction of the people on this list??? There is
> a broad range of possible reponses between apathy and violence. Nobody
> here has taken a one.
> 


No one?  Nothing at all?  Or nothing you are aware of or that meets your approval?

What actions short of violence do you advocate?

-s


From samantha at objectent.com  Fri Dec 26 06:40:21 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 22:40:21 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <20031222152955.69686.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <12DC51CA-347C-11D8-AC6A-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
	<20031222152955.69686.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031225224021.4d08cc76.samantha@objectent.com>

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 07:29:55 -0800 (PST)
Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:


> 
> You guys getting published are certainly doing your part on the
> propaganda front, no doubt. My ire is reserved more for the armchair
> extropians.
> 

Wouldn't it be a sad world if you had no target at all on which to vent your ire?

> > 
> > What are *you* doing to help us establish what the Trotskyites would 
> > call a Popular Front?
> 
> I'm building the Free State. Don't you know that NH is the number one
> escape destination for people moving out of both Massachusetts AND the
> Bay Area/Silicon Valley??? Revolutionary Theory says no insurgency can
> survive without support from a sheltered base. New Hampshire is the
> place where transhumanists will be able to get trans'ed without luddite interference.


Exactly how does that follow?  The US is not exactly prone to honor state initiatives and decisions that goes against federal wishes.   If we are planning to secede then I suggest that Alaska, with its separation from the continental landmass, would be a far better choice.   Exactly how can we make NH significantly "sheltered"?

- s


From samantha at objectent.com  Fri Dec 26 06:47:28 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 22:47:28 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031222040345.31503.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.2.1.1.2.20031222111720.020c05b8@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <20031225224728.0e5bebe0.samantha@objectent.com>

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 14:33:52 -0500
Robin Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:


> I have mixed feelings about the role of science fiction here.  If we were 
> sure no one else would look at these topics, we should certainly be glad 
> that at least science fiction looked at them.  But I constantly run into 
> academics whose reason for ignoring these issues is because "that's science 
> fiction."  Now perhaps they would still say that if there were not actual 
> science fiction novels about these topics.  But it does seem that the fact 
> that some scenario is popular in science fiction is often taken as a reason 
> not to consider it in "serious" discussions about the future.

To me the greatest virtue of science fiction is raising the vision and imagination to what the future can be, what dangers we may face and get the minds of the readers focused on more than what is right in front of them.  When the imagination is open then new possibilities can be presented, new questions can be asked.  
> 
> Science fiction authors are well aware of the may biases that are 
> introduced into their future scenarios due to the need to have an 
> entertaining story.  Academia has its own biases, but my guess is that they 
> are not as bad.
> 

It is not the purpose of science fiction to write a bias free analysis nor of any fiction.  But science fiction can fire up hearts and minds, especially young ones of whatever age, in ways that academia very seldom acheives.  

- samantha


From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Dec 26 12:31:55 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 13:31:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <20031225220134.6ffb5a37.samantha@objectent.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com>
	<20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org>
	<3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com> <3FE4B120.4020904@barrera.org>
	<LAW9-OE38vfhaVL7ku300012561@hotmail.com>
	<20031225220134.6ffb5a37.samantha@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <20031226123155.GH32264@leitl.org>

On Thu, Dec 25, 2003 at 10:01:34PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> So why is Windows so important to you?

Presumably, because if you're a contractor it's easier to get clients if you
also support Windows.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031226/0eda3b26/attachment.bin>

From charlie at antipope.org  Fri Dec 26 13:20:28 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 13:20:28 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
In-Reply-To: <000501c3cb02$33747870$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>
References: <000501c3cb02$33747870$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>
Message-ID: <46288406-37A6-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 25 Dec 2003, at 16:14, Matus wrote:

> To make this a more directly extropic conversation then, lets attempt 
> to
> define extropy.  Charlie asserts that how many people are alive (or 
> were
> killed) is a measurement of extropy.

No I don't. What I assert is that maximizing the entropy of the folks 
next door is not a positive contribution to extropy. Nor does diverting 
huge quantities of time, energy and resources into (a) displays of 
territorial primate aggression or (b) killing other people seem 
extropic.

Note that these are all framed as negatives. *Refraining* from killing 
people isn't extropic behaviour in and of itself; it's just that 
*killing* people is anti-extropian, as I see it.

Note also that I'm going to concede the self-defense argument before 
you even bring it up, on the grounds that self-defense is usually a 
lesser evil than whatever is being defended against. I would like to 
note, however, that a gram of prevention is worth a ton of 
after-the-fact self-defense.)

> So for an action (I'll drop 'war' out of the discussion and just leave
> it as an action) to be extropic it must result in a net increase in one
> or many of the above criteria.  But what if one part increases, and
> another decreases?  E.g. There are more intelligent people alive, but
> they have no capacity for improvement (strict oppressive statism),

I'm going to dispute the last three words in that extract. A point that 
doesn't get a lot of examination, and that we *really* need to think 
about, is that dictatorships and revolutionary governments seem to have 
a half-life of a decade or so, whereas democracies seem to endure for a 
much longer time.

Think I'm joking? Think again. The USSR -- with a solid ideological 
base _and_ an external threat, collapsed from inside in just 73 years. 
Its eastern European satellites didn't even last that long, falling 
apart in under 45 years. China is still nominally communist but today 
bears very little resemblance to the China of 1977. Spain under the 
butcher Franco lasted 38 years, while Portugal, Greece, and Serbia 
under Milosevic didn't make it to 20. Iran, at 24 years, seems to be in 
the grip of an internal power struggle between a democratic opposition 
and the ageing totalitarian thugs who seized power after the Shah. 
Myanmar under the SLORC is showing signs of unstability at the 20-year 
mark. Argentina (1976?-82) and Chile (1974-1987?) barely made it past 
their decade, and a lot of tyrannies break down before then.

The point I'd like to make is that even a stable dictatorship -- one 
which defeats its external and internal enemies and institutes a reign 
of repression -- finds it very difficult to cling on to power past the 
working life of the guy at the top. Successful dictatorships run by a 
party or cadre may last longer, but still tend to crumble as the 
youngest of the leading cadre grow elderly. The Soviet Union tried to 
establish an ideology-based system as solid as the Catholic Church ... 
and barely survived for an extra generation.

The evidence seems to support a hypothesis: governments stabilized by 
force (dictatorships) do not survive once the source of force (the will 
of the creators of the system) is withdrawn, and are therefore 
restricted by current human lifespans.

In contrast, democracies seem to be self-stabilizing and don't show the 
same degree of instability within the same time period as a human life. 
(Opponents who, in a dictatorship, would be definitively excluded from 
power can, in a democracy, aspire to join in the game and wait for a 
change in public opinion to bring them to power. Thus, opposition to 
the entire system of government is deprived of people who would 
potentially be its best activists.)

Whew. Long digression.

>  or
> conversely, what if there are fewer intelligent people around, but they
> had a much greater capacity for improvement, is that extropic?

Maybe, but it's also elitist -- and potentially dangerous. ("All those 
with an IQ of less than 180, into the computronium rendering hoppers!")


-- Charlie



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Dec 26 14:02:50 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 01:02:50 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <006301c3cbb8$f2e1a140$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

> > Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

> ### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary
> patent) and will be described in articles soon, but it will take
> years before its clinical application. I really can't say anything
> more.

"Preliminary patent" seems like slightly confused lay-speak to me.
I don't think there is any legally significant subset in the set of all
US patents that is meaningful referred to as "preliminary".

I think the process that would be used in the circumstance you've
'outlined' would have been a provisional application for patent.
Such a thing can result in a patent but isn't one. 

I can see how that sort of process might get thought of as and 
expressed as a "preliminary patent" in lay-speak but the only other
person I've heard use "preliminary patent" as though it was a type
of patent was another Exi-list poster.   

Either I'm missing a term in the US IP vocabulary (which is possible
but I couldn't find it at the United States Patent and Trademark
Office  http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/provapp.htm  and its
not used in the biotech conference I've attended) or some Exi-listers
are using and passing on a sort of confusing lay-speak in relation
to patents. If so thats not a good thing and should stop. 

Is "preliminary patent" a valid legal phrase in the US or is it some
sort of lay-speak for ?

Regards,
Brett Paatsch 
 
 







From thespike at earthlink.net  Fri Dec 26 20:19:24 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 14:19:24 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com><002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension><00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<006301c3cbb8$f2e1a140$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <007b01c3cbed$929dab00$d9994a43@texas.net>

From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes


[Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:]
> > ### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary
> > patent)

> "Preliminary patent" seems like slightly confused lay-speak to me.
> I think the process that would be used in the circumstance you've
> 'outlined' would have been a provisional application for patent.

My JD legal adviser informs me that `provisional patent' is indeed what
Rafal would be writing about.

Meanwhile, here's an interesting patent that was granted more than two and
half years ago. It'll fix hangnails, cancer, migrims, Alzheimers, and a
gallon or two should have your car running like new. :)

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1
&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,268,398.WKU.&OS=PN/6,268,398&RS=P
N/6,268,398

Compounds and methods for treating mitochondria-associated diseases


Abstract
Compounds, compositions and methods are disclosed for treating
mitochondria-associated diseases, such as cancer, psoriasis, stroke,
Alzheimer's Disease and diabetes. The compounds of this invention have
structure (I) below, including stereoisomers, prodrugs and pharmaceutically
acceptable salts thereof, wherein Ar and L are as defined herein. The
methods of this invention are directed to treating a mitochondria-associated
disease by administering to a warm-blooded animal in need thereof an
effective amount of a compound of structure (I), typically in the form of a
pharmaceutical composition. ##STR1##


.......
a sample from the lengthy text:

< Oxidatively stressed mitochondria may release a pre-formed soluble factor
that can induce chromosomal condensation, an event preceding apoptosis
(Marchetti et al., Cancer Res. 56:2033-38, 1996). In addition, members of
the Bcl-2 family of anti-apoptosis gene products are located within the
outer mitochondrial membrane (Monaghan et al., J. Histochem. Cytochem.
40:1819-25, 1992) and these proteins appear to protect membranes from
oxidative stress (Korsmeyer et al, Biochim. Biophys. Act. 1271:63, 1995).
Localization of Bcl-2 to this membrane appears to be indispensable for
modulation of apoptosis (Nguyen et al., J. Biol. Chem. 269:16521-24, 1994).
Thus, changes in mitochondrial physiology may be important mediators of
apoptosis. To the extent that apoptotic cell death is a prominent feature of
neuronal loss in AD. mitochondrial dysfunction may be critical to the
progression of this disease and may also be a contributing factor in other
mitochondria associated diseases.

Focal defects in energy metabolism in the mitochondria, with accompanying
increases in oxidative stress, may be associated with AD.  > etc etc

Damien Broderick



From megao at sasktel.net  Fri Dec 26 21:27:18 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 15:27:18 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] weak and non-functional estrogens-mitokor-com
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<006301c3cbb8$f2e1a140$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<007b01c3cbed$929dab00$d9994a43@texas.net>
Message-ID: <3FECA7B6.839EE128@sasktel.net>

Will go get their SEC filings and find out more about them
Still reading but it fits...   weak estrogens  have been useful beyond the
traditional hormone function.  Example-  Estriol   It has  weak estrogenic,
immunomodulatory as well as antioxidant properties.

@MitoKor.com

Compounds

 MitoKor's drug development efforts include estrogen and novel, non-feminizing,
 polycyclic phenolic estrogen analogs, that protect cells and mitochondria under

 the pathological conditions occurring during a stroke or myocardial infarction.

 MitoKor has entered into a strategic alliance with Wyeth Corporation related to
the
 development of estrogens and estrogen-like compounds for treatment of
 Alzheimer's disease. Wyeth is funding a Phase III clinical trial evaluating the
use of
 estrogens in the prevention and treatment of Alzheimer's disease in
 post-menopausal women. This trial is part of the Women's Health Initiative
Study,
 and has enrolled over 7,500 women. MitoKor has also successfully completed a
Phase I clinical trial of a non-feminizing estrogen analog.


Damien Broderick wrote:

> From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
> Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 8:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
>
> [Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:]
> > > ### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary
> > > patent)
>
> > "Preliminary patent" seems like slightly confused lay-speak to me.
> > I think the process that would be used in the circumstance you've
> > 'outlined' would have been a provisional application for patent.
>
> My JD legal adviser informs me that `provisional patent' is indeed what
> Rafal would be writing about.
>
> Meanwhile, here's an interesting patent that was granted more than two and
> half years ago. It'll fix hangnails, cancer, migrims, Alzheimers, and a
> gallon or two should have your car running like new. :)
>
> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1
> &u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,268,398.WKU.&OS=PN/6,268,398&RS=P
> N/6,268,398
>
> Compounds and methods for treating mitochondria-associated diseases
>
> Abstract
> Compounds, compositions and methods are disclosed for treating
> mitochondria-associated diseases, such as cancer, psoriasis, stroke,
> Alzheimer's Disease and diabetes. The compounds of this invention have
> structure (I) below, including stereoisomers, prodrugs and pharmaceutically
> acceptable salts thereof, wherein Ar and L are as defined herein. The
> methods of this invention are directed to treating a mitochondria-associated
> disease by administering to a warm-blooded animal in need thereof an
> effective amount of a compound of structure (I), typically in the form of a
> pharmaceutical composition. ##STR1##
>
> .......
> a sample from the lengthy text:
>
> < Oxidatively stressed mitochondria may release a pre-formed soluble factor
> that can induce chromosomal condensation, an event preceding apoptosis
> (Marchetti et al., Cancer Res. 56:2033-38, 1996). In addition, members of
> the Bcl-2 family of anti-apoptosis gene products are located within the
> outer mitochondrial membrane (Monaghan et al., J. Histochem. Cytochem.
> 40:1819-25, 1992) and these proteins appear to protect membranes from
> oxidative stress (Korsmeyer et al, Biochim. Biophys. Act. 1271:63, 1995).
> Localization of Bcl-2 to this membrane appears to be indispensable for
> modulation of apoptosis (Nguyen et al., J. Biol. Chem. 269:16521-24, 1994).
> Thus, changes in mitochondrial physiology may be important mediators of
> apoptosis. To the extent that apoptotic cell death is a prominent feature of
> neuronal loss in AD. mitochondrial dysfunction may be critical to the
> progression of this disease and may also be a contributing factor in other
> mitochondria associated diseases.
>
> Focal defects in energy metabolism in the mitochondria, with accompanying
> increases in oxidative stress, may be associated with AD.  > etc etc
>
> Damien Broderick
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031226/5938cb53/attachment.html>

From megao at sasktel.net  Fri Dec 26 21:40:40 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 15:40:40 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] MitoKor- deferral of public offering
Message-ID: <3FECAAD8.44CEC716@sasktel.net>

MitoKor, Inc.
11494 Sorrento Valley Road
San Diego, California 92121
(858) 793-7800

March 24, 2003

VIA EDGAR TRANSMISSION

Attn:   Jeffrey P. Reidler, Assistant Director
Suzanne Purdy, Examiner

Securities and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

RE: MITOKOR, INC.?REQUEST TO WITHDRAW REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON FORM S-1
(FILE NO. 333-84050)?ORIGINALLY FILED ON MARCH 8, 2002

Ladies and Gentlemen:

        MitoKor, Inc. (the "Company") hereby requests, pursuant to Rule
477 of Regulation C of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (the
"Securities Act"), that the registration statement on Form S-1,
including all exhibits thereto (File No. 333-84050, as amended), as
originally filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Commission") on March 8, 2002 (the "Registration
Statement") be withdrawn effective immediately. The Company is
withdrawing the Registration Statement because of unfavorable market
conditions. There was no circulation of preliminary prospectuses in
connection with the proposed offering, the Registration Statement was
not declared effective by the Commission, and none of the Company's
securities were sold pursuant to the Registration Statement.

        The Company may undertake a subsequent private offering in
reliance on Rule 155(c) of the Securities Act.

        The Company requests that the Commission consent to this
application on the grounds that the withdrawal of the Registration
Statement is consistent with the public interest and the protection of
investors, as contemplated by paragraph (a) of Rule 477.

        Please provide the Company a facsimile copy of the order
consenting to the withdrawal of the Registration Statement as soon as it
is available. The facsimile number of the Company is (858) 793-7805.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the
undersigned at (858) 793-7800, or Christian Waage of Gray Cary Ware &
Freidenrich LLP at (858) 677-1418.

Sincerely,

/S/ WALTER H. MOOS, PH.D.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Walter H. Moos, Ph.D.
Chief Executive Officer

cc:
Scott Stanton, Esq.?Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich LLP
Paul E. Hurlburt, NASDAQ National Stock Market, Inc.



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 27 00:14:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 16:14:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] MitoKor- deferral of public offering
In-Reply-To: <3FECAAD8.44CEC716@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312261605240.4247-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


With regard to MitoKor.  They made a presentation at the AGE
meeting in June 2002.  The evidence they presented
suggested that estrogen (or its analogues) were effective
antioxidants/free radical sinks within the mitochondria.

This of course explains why in general women live longer
than men.  Of course from a therapy standpoint the question
becomes why should one pay $XXX for an estrogen related
drug vs. $YYY (<< $XXX) for estrogen itself.

The MitoKor executives were very up-front in their presentations
that even though the felt they had compounds that were more
effective than estrogen they felt the investment/drug approval
climate made it pointless to attempt to pursue them.

Robert




From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Sat Dec 27 02:20:14 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 21:20:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com><002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension><00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au><00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<006301c3cbb8$f2e1a140$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <013601c3cc1f$f7138550$6501a8c0@dimension>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes


> > > Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>
> > ### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary
> > patent) and will be described in articles soon, but it will take
> > years before its clinical application. I really can't say anything
> > more.
>
> "Preliminary patent" seems like slightly confused lay-speak to me.
> I don't think there is any legally significant subset in the set of all
> US patents that is meaningful referred to as "preliminary".

### Yes, you are right, I meant provisional patents. Sorry for the
confusion.

Rafal



From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Sat Dec 27 02:29:11 2003
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 21:29:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] MitoKor- deferral of public offering
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312261605240.4247-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <014401c3cc21$37331eb0$6501a8c0@dimension>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MitoKor- deferral of public offering


>
> With regard to MitoKor.  They made a presentation at the AGE
> meeting in June 2002.  The evidence they presented
> suggested that estrogen (or its analogues) were effective
> antioxidants/free radical sinks within the mitochondria.
>
> This of course explains why in general women live longer
> than men.  Of course from a therapy standpoint the question
> becomes why should one pay $XXX for an estrogen related
> drug vs. $YYY (<< $XXX) for estrogen itself.
>
> The MitoKor executives were very up-front in their presentations
> that even though the felt they had compounds that were more
> effective than estrogen they felt the investment/drug approval
> climate made it pointless to attempt to pursue them.

### My boss, the founder of MitoKor, says he will buy an airplane for
himself if they finally go public, but he doesn't have much hope for it.
MitoKor was ready for IPO twice already, but they keep deferring. Well,
small surprise, after the pseudogene debacle, the biotech stock crash, and
being run by chemists rather than mito researchers.

Rafal



From megao at sasktel.net  Sat Dec 27 02:30:12 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 20:30:12 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] MitoKor- patent
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312261605240.4247-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <3FECEEB4.BAE1376F@sasktel.net>

The prospectus is 133 pages so have not read it all but i see 52 million
was spent pre-filing  may 2002, with over 20 million in reserve at that
time.

Given that the male 50% of the population have to rely on phytosterols,
isoflavones and not estrogens to compensate  and that the weak estrogens
, while relatively cheap (about 100$/month) are not gnerally accepted by
HMO's for anything beyond HRT it seems that a market would exist.

I see the logic that if 20-30 analogues each targeted to an orphan
preventive market must each go through the full cost of pre-market
development and  ramp-up costs it represents a formidable cost without a
proven market acceptance.

The add on functional groups might allow for novel All-In-One-Molecule
combinatorial chemistry.
In theory, for example ,  the piracetam molecule could make for  a
candidate as a "Linker Moiety L"

*********************************************
6,268,398.........

Briefly stated, the present invention is directed to the treatment of
mitochondria-associated diseases
by administration to a warm-blooded animal in need thereof an effective
amount of a compound having the following general structure (I):
##STR2##

where Ar is phenyl or naphthyl optionally substituted with 1 to 5
R.sub.2 groups and L is an optional linker moiety.

In one embodiment, Ar is phenyl, naphthyl, 4-bromonaphthyl,
3,5-di-t-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl,
2-methoxy-4-carboxylphenyl, 2-chloro-4-carboxyl-5-methoxyphenyl
3,5-di-tetrafluoromethylphenyl, 3,5-difluorophenyl,
3,4,5-trimethoxyphenyl, 4-n-hexoxyphenyl,
4-fluorophenyl, 3-tri fluorophenyl, 2-carbinolphenyl,
2-chloro-5-methylphenyl, 3-carboxylphenyl,
3-carboxyl-4-hydroxyphenyl, 2-methyl-4-carboxylphenyl, 4-methoxyphenyl,
2-hydroxyphenyl,
4-(N-morphinol)phenyl, 3,4-dihydroxyphenyl, 2,4-dimethylphenyl,
2-methyl-4-hydroxyphenyl,
4-n-octylphenyl, 2-hydroxy-5-n-octylphenyl, 4-chlorophenyl, or
2-methyl-4-chlorophenyl.

In another embodiment the optional linker moiety L is not present, while
in a further embodiment L is
present and is --CH.sub.2 NH--, --CH.sub.2 CH.sub.2, --CH(OH)CH.sub.2
--, --CH.sub.2
N(CH.sub.3)-- or --NHC(.dbd.NH)--.

In still further embodiments, methods are disclosed for treating
mitochondria-associated diseases by
administering one or more compounds of structure (I) in the form of a
pharmaceutical composition.
Thus, pharmaceutical compositions are also disclosed comprising a
compound of structure (I) in
combination with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier or diluent.

In the context of this invention, mitochondria-associated disease
include diseases in which free radical
mediated oxidative injury leads to tissue degeneration. diseases in
which cells inappropriately undergo
apoptosis, and diseases in which cells fail to undergo apoptosis. Thus.
the methods of this invention
include the treatment of a wide number of mitochondria-associated
diseases. including (but not
limited to Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's Disease, Huntington's
Disease, auto-immune disease,
diabetes mellitus (Type I or Type II), congenital muscular dystrophy,
fatal infantile myopathy,
"later-onset" myopathy, MELAS (mitochondrial encephalopathy, lactic
acidosis, and stroke), MIDD
(mitochondrial diabetes and deafness), MERFF (myoclonic epilepsy ragged
red fiber syndrome),
arthritis, NARP (Neuropathy; Ataxia; Retinitis Pigmentosa), MNGIE
(Myopathy and external
ophthalmoplegia; Neuropathy; Gastro-Intestinal; Encephalopathy), LNION
(Leber's; Hereditary;
Optic; Neuropathy), Kearns-Sayre disease, Pearson's Syndrome, PEO
(Progressive External
Ophthalmoplegia), Wolfram syndrome, DIDMOAD (Diabetes Insipidus,
Diabetes Mellitus, Optic
Atrophy, Deafness), Leigh's Syndrome, dystonia, schizophrenia, cancer
and psoriasis.
****************************************

Have not looked to see if or  how the intellectual property was
dispersed.
There seems to be at least 52 million of recapturable  IP possible.
The website is still up but there are no SEC filings aside from the IPO
withdrawal letter of May 2003.

History shows that very useful orphan compounds have been overlooked
before. Piracetam was an orphan since 1973 until an new analogue
levetiracetam began to roll out majorly after 2000.  Levamisole was an
orphan in 1970 and still is, in spite of analogues showing up in the
late 90's.
************************************


"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:

> With regard to MitoKor.  They made a presentation at the AGE
> meeting in June 2002.  The evidence they presented
> suggested that estrogen (or its analogues) were effective
> antioxidants/free radical sinks within the mitochondria.
>
> This of course explains why in general women live longer
> than men.  Of course from a therapy standpoint the question
> becomes why should one pay $XXX for an estrogen related
> drug vs. $YYY (<< $XXX) for estrogen itself.
>
> The MitoKor executives were very up-front in their presentations
> that even though the felt they had compounds that were more
> effective than estrogen they felt the investment/drug approval
> climate made it pointless to attempt to pursue them.
>
> Robert
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 27 03:16:48 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 14:16:48 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312231440290.31621-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<002001c3ca6d$8f41dc50$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<00a701c3cb4c$e47483a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<00d301c3cb4d$30f26c60$6501a8c0@dimension>
	<006301c3cbb8$f2e1a140$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<013601c3cc1f$f7138550$6501a8c0@dimension>
Message-ID: <012901c3cc27$ddb7b1a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:

> > > ### Oh, the technology is patented already (as a preliminary
> > > patent) and will be described in articles soon, but it will take
> > > years before its clinical application. I really can't say anything
> > > more.
> >
> > "Preliminary patent" seems like slightly confused lay-speak to me.
> > I don't think there is any legally significant subset in the set of all
> > US patents that is meaningful referred to as "preliminary".
> 
> ### Yes, you are right, I meant provisional patents. Sorry for the
> confusion.

Thanks for clarifying. I often find your posts to be amongst the best
to read. You seem to appreciate the importance of intellectual property
and to be genuinely engaged with the technology.

I'm am concerned however that all extropes and transhumanist may
have a little bit too much of the all-too-human in us for our own good
- and I include myself in that.

I mean that I think we try and kid ourselves a bit about how easy 
things are, we are tempted to go for sugar coated solutions that we
don't have to work quite so hard to achieve. 

It can be hard to loose the illusions of childhood and when we do
we often seem to want to just replace them with better ones. But 
clear thinking matters. It matters if we are going to get to drink 
better than mirage water. 

Regards,
Brett










 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 27 04:37:53 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 15:37:53 +1100
Subject: [Extropy-chat] Nanosystems or some chapters of it available online?
Message-ID: <014b01c3cc33$312c6fa0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Following an offlist conversation I recently took another look
at my hardcopy version of Nanosystems (published 1992).

Specifically I was looking at Table 16.1 "Differences between
proposed generations of mechanosynthetic assembly systems."

Table 16.1 outlines 4 stages on a route toward mature molecular
nanotechnology, with Stage 1, being the closest to technology
that is available now (or rather, and this is part of my point,
available to 1992 or thereabouts - when Eric Drexler wrote
Nanosystems).

Smalley v Drexler has raised interest and I'd expect that some
folk will go looking to see if they can find Nanosystems (the
magnus opus) online.  At present if they do what I did and google
on nanosystems they will find their way to Zyvex and the promise
that some chapters of Nanosystems (published by Wiley and
sons 1998) are newly available online. Then unless they are
better at finding these chapters than I am - they won't find them. 

This would seem to be a pity.  

Can anyone else locate chapters of Nanosystems (say 
chapters of a 1998 edition) online?

I was specifically interested to see if what Drexler talked about 
in relation to (atomic force microscop-(y)) AFM-based molecular
manipulation (his Stage 1) changed or was developed at all
between 1992 and 1998.  I was also interested to see if he'd
updated references to accomodate scientific advances since
1992.  Perhaps it would be worth making the early paths
onto the ramp that leads from standard "mainstream" science
to molecular nanotechnology as smooth as possible by having
it (a) up to date (this not need be done by Drexler himself - but
perhaps he'd want to oversee it) and (b) accessible online. 

The 1992 chapter 15 stuff talks about synthetic amino acids, and
about protein folding and prediction. I know that there have been
some substantial developments in these areas since 1992.

Just a thought. If I'd gotten my act together better I might have
posted this to foresight or nanodot which I sometimes read but
haven't posted too. If there is merit in any of it some friend of 
foresight may pass it on.

Regards,
Brett








From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 27 05:23:34 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 21:23:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Extropy-chat] Nanosystems or some chapters of it available
	online?
In-Reply-To: <014b01c3cc33$312c6fa0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312262054060.9091-100000@server.aeiveos.com>

j
On Sat, 27 Dec 2003, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Can anyone else locate chapters of Nanosystems (say
> chapters of a 1998 edition) online?

To the best of my knowledge Nanosystems is not currently online
(in contrast to some other books such as Engines of Creation
or Unbounding the Future).

Though part of Nanosystems appears to be in the Amazon full
text database (at least the Glossary though perhaps not Chapter 16).
Raises an interesting question of whether people could drive into
an online status chapters that might promote book sales that would
make publishers happy...

> Perhaps it would be worth making the early paths
> onto the ramp that leads from standard "mainstream" science
> to molecular nanotechnology as smooth as possible by having
> it (a) up to date (this not need be done by Drexler himself - but
> perhaps he'd want to oversee it) and (b) accessible online.

Some of this is being done by Robert Freitas in the various
Nanomedicine volumes which Robert is trying to make available
online in a joint paper/electronic publishing process.  It
is a difficult balancing act.

I would agree that there is not an up-to-date online status
report with respect to nanotechnologyy unfortunately.  It
would be nice if we had one.  It is not however a showstopper
that one is not available.

> The 1992 chapter 15 stuff talks about synthetic amino acids, and
> about protein folding and prediction. I know that there have been
> some substantial developments in these areas since 1992.

Yep.  I cover some of this in my Protein Based Assembly of Nanoscale
Parts (which is available online).

> Just a thought. If I'd gotten my act together better I might have
> posted this to foresight or nanodot which I sometimes read but
> haven't posted too. If there is merit in any of it some friend of
> foresight may pass it on.

It is reasonable to suggest a revised edition of Nanosystems given
that it is over a decade old.  Perhaps incorporationg a detailed
analysis of objections to mechanosynthesis and refutations.

Write a letter to Christine Peterson at Foresight.org.

Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 27 05:39:29 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 21:39:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BIO: Stem Cell Genes
In-Reply-To: <012901c3cc27$ddb7b1a0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312262124200.9091-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sat, 27 Dec 2003, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> I mean that I think we try and kid ourselves a bit about how easy
> things are, we are tempted to go for sugar coated solutions that we
> don't have to work quite so hard to achieve.

No no no.  Its never easy -- I've clearly been in situations
where resources made it appear easy in current time only much
to my regret make it clear that it was difficult in the future.
You should always assume changing the meme set is going to be
very very difficult.  However the rewards (be they saving humanity
or millions of potentially future extropic lives) would seem to
justify the effort.

This raises an interesting point (which trails back into
the recent points made by Matus) -- Is an extropian
fundamentally going aginst their programming?  Is promoting
the survival of another individual with better knowledge/
meme sets a better strategy than promoting the survival
of oneself?  [Begs a strong issue of if ones self
survival probability is low whether one should transfer
that interest to ones offspring or humanity in general.]

For a decade or more I've seen people running around declaring
themselves to be extropians -- but I have yet to see a reasonable
definition of how one breaks this down when push comes to shove.

Simply put -- where do I get in line for the lifeboats being
lowered from the Titanic?

Robert




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Dec 27 08:00:32 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 19:00:32 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Crab politics. Was BIO: Stem Cell Genes
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312262124200.9091-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <019901c3cc4f$80514bc0$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Dec 2003, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> 
> > I mean that I think we try and kid ourselves a bit about
> > how easy things are, we are tempted to go for sugar 
> > coated solutions that we don't have to work quite so hard 
> > to achieve.

I wasn't meaning to pick on extropes or transhumanists in
particular I was just meaning to say that there are natural
tendencies in people to kid themselves - and we ought to be
as on guard against them as any others - certainly not less.

Wild beliefs in singularities or cryonics or friendly AIs or 
molecular manufacturing -without understanding how they
can be brought about in practical terms -  *any* culturally
propagated notion that is not understood personally and
intellectually rather than just embraced emotionally can 
function as a disincentive to action and thought. The same 
action and thought that might make an actual difference. 
Beliefs are the luxury that cannot be afforded. About the
only thing less disfunctional than belief is crazed panic. 

We are by my reckoning *at least* one generation short of 
the time when its smart to be relaxed and comfortable.
Being one generation short gets you just as dead as Benjamin
Franklin, or Blaise Pascal. 

By my reckoning no previous generation could stand to be 
relaxed and comfortable. Yet many of them were and perhaps
they experienced relatively more peace in their lives than the
non-believers - then they died. 

> No no no.  Its never easy -- I've clearly been in situations
> where resources made it appear easy in current time only
> much to my regret make it clear that it was difficult in the
> future.

> You should always assume changing the meme set is going
> to be very very difficult.

Forgetting that is like forgetting gravity. You don't forget for
long before hitting the ground reminds you  :-) Then, if your
lucky you walk away.  

I know its difficult. I also know it would be less difficult if
there were more thinkers and fewer believers. But this side
of the cut off believing rather than thinking is still selected
for. 

>  However the rewards (be they
> saving humanity or millions of potentially future extropic lives)
> would seem to justify the effort.
 
I find the notion of saving "humanity" wildly abstract. The idea
of saving potential future extropic lives is only appealing to me
if those lives are already alive and if I know them or if they are 
known to people I know and so on. Sooner or later I figure
just about everybody would be picked up in that manner but
I don't kid myself that I will miss or feel the loss of people
whos existence I was never even remotely aware of - nor they
me. 

I don't give moral consideration to non-existent life.  

> This raises an interesting point (which trails back into
> the recent points made by Matus) -- Is an extropian
> fundamentally going aginst their programming? 

There is no programming. There is no design. Thats an 
anthropomorphism particularly favored by programmers in an
era of programming. Evolution does not work by design.
Its a process not a personality. 

> Is promoting the survival of another individual with better 
> knowledge/ meme sets a better strategy than promoting the
> survival of oneself?

Depends. By definition it is not better for oneself in the
instance. 

>  [Begs a strong issue of if ones self
> survival probability is low whether one should transfer
> that interest to ones offspring or humanity in general.]

Thats a matter for that one in particular. I don't know what
I'd do. Anything too unpleasant I'm probably biased against.
Anything pleasant I say - might be purely me playing
politics. Bottom line - you really can't tell for sure what
I'd do, because if I told you I might be lying. Even to myself.
Thats my point we (people) lie even to ourselves. Thats what
makes politics so hard. The only conclusive test is the last test. 
 
> For a decade or more I've seen people running around
> declaring themselves to be extropians -- but I have yet
> to see a reasonable definition of how one breaks this 
> down when push comes to shove.
> 
> Simply put -- where do I get in line for the lifeboats being
> lowered from the Titanic?

If you think your on the Titanic - that's a matter for you. You
cannot make policy for other people with an expectation that
they will comply.  Their (and my) guesses as to what you will
do are political (and what you say only influences their views
it doesn't finalised them) just as yours are of what they will
do.

Your not on the Titanic. You have time to build boats if you
want to or to run around on the cruise ship. If you do build
boats those running around will distract you steal your material
and finally when you get some of what you want to get done
they may come along and draw lots or something to see who
gets in them when the iceberg hits. If your skills are in boat
building only and not the important managerial and political
tasks of poll calling, number crunching and outcome fixing, you
may do poorly in the getting a boat at all stakes as your job
may be deemed done and your usefulness moot. Its not 
automatic that you'd get the call on where you get in the line.
Could be that deal is already sown up in some hypothetical
game played between the boat owners to amuse themselves
on a sunny day on the titanic whilst others play and you
work.  Not everyone playing but not working is stupid. 
Some of them are watching you just in case. 

But this is bunk. Your not on the titanic. You alive in 2003
and everyone alive in 2003 rich and poor, powerful and weak
has a death warrant on their head that's been there since birth
and earlier. The question is whether some of us or all of us 
can get rid of that death warrant. 

You are in a bucket of crabs. The big crabs are on top and
they prefer to stay there because its less uncomfortable than
having another wiggling crab on your head. They'd like to be
more comfortable but getting out of the scrambling bucket is
beyond most of their imaginations. A few small crabs near the
edges might dream of the idea but dreams are cheap and the 
privilege of a few lucky small crabs that are probably relatives
of the larger dominant crabs. So long as those small crabs 
don't try and move into the terrain where the larger crabs are
wrestling they play little part in crab politics. Perhaps with
extraordinary coordination the crabs could form a living chain
of crabs. Hoist one of their number over as that one pulled the
next one and so on and they could all get out. But the crabs at
the top are too busy with the crab politics of staying on top of
the other crabs. Crab politics has not changed in generations.
A whole lot more crab generations may have to provide
carcasses to stand on before the bucket rim gets low enough
for enough crabs to get wise that collusion may get them out
of the bucket. But then again they are only crabs. They are
not big on thinking except about staying ahead of other crabs
and making little crabs.  

Maybe 

Or maybe I'm just crabby today :-) 

Brett




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sat Dec 27 12:19:10 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 12:19:10 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] MitoKor- deferral of public offering
Message-ID: <3FED78BE.2070304@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Fri Dec 26, 2003 05:14 pm Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> With regard to MitoKor. They made a presentation at the AGE
> meeting in June 2002. The evidence they presented
> suggested that estrogen (or its analogues) were effective
> antioxidants/free radical sinks within the mitochondria.
>
> This of course explains why in general women live longer
> than men. Of course from a therapy standpoint the question
> becomes why should one pay $XXX for an estrogen related
> drug vs. $YYY (<< $XXX) for estrogen itself.
>

No, it doesn't.

Women live longer because they avoid the risk-taking activities of
testosterone-driven males. Statistical analysis of causes of death shows
that if you remove the deaths due to a high-risk lifestyle, then there
is little difference between the life expectancy of men and women.

Women tend to avoid things like crashing cars at high speed (especially
after a few beers), not wearing seatbelts, smoking-related diseases,
homicide, suicide, motor-cycles, fighting in wars, and women do not have
a lifestyle that involves taking part in 'Jackass' type stunts.
i.e  Women don't behave like idiots - men do.

BillK






From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Sat Dec 27 15:33:39 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 08:33:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [SK] Re: PowerPoint is Evil! ...again
Message-ID: <3FEDA653.E586B0E8@mindspring.com>

< http://norvig.com/Gettysburg/ >
[Lincoln's Gettysburg address in PowerPoint -twc]


>Terry W. Colvin forwarded (from Mike Lorrey):
> > > What if PowerPoint is actually making us stupider?
> >
> > I dispute this. Power Point is used to get the point across to the
> > terminally uninterested. I recall giving talks to contractors and
> > energy conservation officers about market distortions caused by
> > improper implementations of conservation rebates, with very informative
> > Excel generated 3 axis graphs illustrating cost-benefit thresholds and
> > so forth. They used to bitch that I gave them headaches with so much
> > information, at least those that did not glaze over. Then some cute
> > little marketing bimbo would come in from the competitors and make a
> > bunch of unsupported claims with a power point presentation full of
> > bulleted lists and these guys would be yabbering her 'facts' for weeks
> > afterward.... Power Point: comic books for commerce...
>
>---
>
>This example would seem to support the premise that PP is making us
>stupider, wouldn't it?
>Present people with actual well substantiated facts, and they glaze over or
>get headaches. Present them, instead, with a cute bulleted list of
>fabrications, and they "learn" the material and repeat it.
>
>best,
>-SW


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sat Dec 27 17:09:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 09:09:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] REALITY: blurs
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312270901210.20363-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


I'm totally clueless about such things since I do not
play online games and don't own such things as a
Playstation or a Gameboy...  (Q.E.D. [1] I'll probably
be left behind when the singularity arrives).

But I found it interesting that even a Chinese court
has determined that virtual holdings are subject
to compensation in the case of a wrongful theft
of said virtual property...

Gamer wins back virtual booty in court battle
New Scientist 23 Dec. 2003
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994510

Robert

1. http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.



From megao at sasktel.net  Sat Dec 27 17:33:45 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 11:33:45 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] REALITY: virtual and intellectual property rights
	and values
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312270901210.20363-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <3FEDC279.C6A40F6A@sasktel.net>

Might this not  have a kickback into the real world's intellectual
property laws and valuations.  Proper valuations of non-physical
property are off balance sheet and hard to prove value for in disputes
over ownership?

"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:

> I'm totally clueless about such things since I do not
> play online games and don't own such things as a
> Playstation or a Gameboy...  (Q.E.D. [1] I'll probably
> be left behind when the singularity arrives).
>
> But I found it interesting that even a Chinese court
> has determined that virtual holdings are subject
> to compensation in the case of a wrongful theft
> of said virtual property...
>
> Gamer wins back virtual booty in court battle
> New Scientist 23 Dec. 2003
> http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994510
>
> Robert
>
> 1. http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Dec 27 18:04:18 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 10:04:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] REALITY: virtual and intellectual property rights
	and values
In-Reply-To: <3FEDC279.C6A40F6A@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <20031227180418.99377.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

Well, the article does say that gamers do sell virtual assets for real
money on ebay. Such a public market mechanism should very easily
establish commodity pricing of such virtual goods, and thus act as a
benchmark of tangible value.

--- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> Might this not  have a kickback into the real world's intellectual
> property laws and valuations.  Proper valuations of non-physical
> property are off balance sheet and hard to prove value for in
> disputes
> over ownership?
> 
> "Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
> 
> > I'm totally clueless about such things since I do not
> > play online games and don't own such things as a
> > Playstation or a Gameboy...  (Q.E.D. [1] I'll probably
> > be left behind when the singularity arrives).
> >
> > But I found it interesting that even a Chinese court
> > has determined that virtual holdings are subject
> > to compensation in the case of a wrongful theft
> > of said virtual property...
> >
> > Gamer wins back virtual booty in court battle
> > New Scientist 23 Dec. 2003
> > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994510
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > 1. http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From thespike at earthlink.net  Sat Dec 27 20:04:04 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 14:04:04 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] nanotech in Oz press
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312270901210.20363-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <00bd01c3ccb5$e6f3f380$a7994a43@texas.net>

Hey, there's this new technology on the way... who'da thunk it?!

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/12/27/1072308725365.html



From support at imminst.org  Sun Dec 28 10:29:49 2003
From: support at imminst.org (support at imminst.org)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 04:29:49 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update
Message-ID: <3feeb09d245a4@imminst.org>


CHAT: Dec 28 - *6*pm Eastern - Infinite Females (IF )
***********************
Infinite Females monthly chat, Sunday 
6pm Eastern. Topic:  currently open.
http://www.imminst.org/infinitefemales

  
CHAT: Dec 28 - 8pm Eastern - Rudi Hoffman, Cryonics 
***********************
Certified financial planner, Rudi Hoffman explores 
various funding options for cryonics.  Rudi will also 
share his vision for the prospect of physical 
immortality. 
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=2492


Lazarus Long on Cryonics 
***********************
ImmInst director, Kenneth Sills (Lazarus Long) 
answers questions from Joshua about the feasibility 
of cryonics. 
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=61&t=2782&hl=&s=

 
Kenneth Silber - Answering Martin Rees 
***********************
New York City-based writer focused on science, 
technology and economics, Tech Central Station's 
Kenneth Silber says that he's "not so sure" about 
Rees' idea that we can not stay "us" over time 
with the prospect of immortality. 
http://imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=2699&hl=&s=

 
Support ImmInst:  Full Members = 60
***********************
Receive a free copy of ?Physical Immortality?
magazine and a free copy of James Halperin's
best selling book "The First Immortal"

Join Now: http://imminst.org/index_join.php




To be removed from all of our mailing lists, click here:
http://www.imminst.org/archive/mailinglists/mailinglists.php?p=mlist&rem=extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Sun Dec 28 18:09:10 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Alexander Lee)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:09:10 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com><3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com><20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org><3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>
	<3FE4B120.4020904@barrera.org><LAW9-OE38vfhaVL7ku300012561@hotmail.com>
	<20031225220134.6ffb5a37.samantha@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <Law9-OE45uIpt9bvv5200018c7b@hotmail.com>

It controls 97% of the desktop and 40% of the server market. It controls the
largest contingent of developers, etc etc.

As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore Windows.

BAL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Samantha Atkins" <samantha at objectent.com>
Sent: Friday, December 26, 2003 1:01 AM


> So why is Windows so important to you?


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Dec 28 21:54:11 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:54:11 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] INTEL: Camel-turd-net predecessor
Message-ID: <20031228215411.67762.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

Some may recall discussions a year or two ago about an idea I had for
air dropping objects looking like rocks or camel turds in Afghanistan
which would have visual and auditory sensors, wifi capabilities, and
also the ability to be a controllable land mine.

Seems that the CIA had similar ideas in Vietnam, according to Slashdot:
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/28/1412204&mode=thread&tid=103&tid=99

However this tiger turd device was merely for listening for activity
along guerrilla trails.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From jcorb at iol.ie  Mon Dec 29 00:23:15 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 00:23:15 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: 'Tiger team' heads Beagle search
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031229001926.00a8b5f0@pop.iol.ie>


>There is still no sign of life from the British-built Mars probe, Beagle 2.
>All attempts to contact the lander with the Mars Odyssey craft in orbit 
>around the Red Planet and with large radio telescopes on Earth have drawn 
>a blank.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3352521.stm

>Scientists have now set up a "tiger team" to work through all the possible 
>reasons for the lander's silence.
>The small group, based at the British National Space Centre, is drawing up 
>a list of "blind" commands to send to Beagle that might prompt it to respond.
>Both the radio telescopes at Jodrell Bank in the UK and at Stanford 
>University in the US listened out for Beagle late on Sunday - but with no 
>positive result.
>Mars Odyssey will overfly the supposed landing zone on two occasions in 
>the next 24 hours.
>But the Beagle team think their best hope of raising the robot will come 
>next weekend when Mars Express - the "mothership" which carried the 
>"pocket watch" lander to the Red Planet - gets into position to contact 
>its "baby".


Bollocks, bollocks, bollocks....

Touchdown plus 4 days and still nothing.  I am _not_ liking this.




James...







From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 29 00:34:37 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 16:34:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: 'Tiger team' heads Beagle search
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20031229001926.00a8b5f0@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <20031229003437.97742.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- J Corbally <jcorb at iol.ie> wrote:
> 
> >There is still no sign of life from the British-built Mars probe,
> Beagle 2.
> 
> Bollocks, bollocks, bollocks....
> 
> Touchdown plus 4 days and still nothing.  I am _not_ liking this.

Last transmissions from HMS Beagle: 
"I'm King of the World!!!!!"
....
"Stop your grotty ice warnings and leave me alone!"

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Dec 29 00:49:40 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:40 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: 'Tiger team' heads Beagle search
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031229001926.00a8b5f0@pop.iol.ie>
Message-ID: <010501c3cda5$a4483780$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>


J Corbally wrote:

Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: 'Tiger team' heads Beagle search

> >There is still no sign of life from the British-built Mars probe, Beagle
2.
> >All attempts to contact the lander with the Mars Odyssey craft in orbit
> >around the Red Planet and with large radio telescopes on Earth have drawn
> >a blank.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3352521.stm
>
> >Scientists have now set up a "tiger team" to work through all the
possible
> >reasons for the lander's silence.

> Bollocks, bollocks, bollocks....

> Touchdown plus 4 days and still nothing.  I am _not_ liking this.

It is a bummer. But what's a "Tiger team" ? What do tigers have to do
with it?

BTW. I get that the Beagle 2 is probably named after The Beagle that
Darwin another scientist explorer was on.  But if I'm not mistaken a
Beagle is a breed of water-dog used for retrieving water-birds shot
while hunting.

Let's hope "tiger teams" solve problems better than water dogs fly :-)

Regards,
Brett







From etcs.ret at verizon.net  Mon Dec 29 01:46:27 2003
From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 20:46:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tiger Team
Message-ID: <011vuv8qnk8e2omnnh9sdi2lcmhbk2vclt@4ax.com>


On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 11:49:40 +1100
Brett Paatsch  asked

> > >Scientists have now set up a "tiger team" to work through all the
> > >possible
> > >reasons for the lander's silence.

> > >It is a bummer. But what's a "Tiger team" ? What do tigers have 
> > > to do with it?

Ad hoc workgroups, with limited goals and enhanced authority and budget.
Earliest use of the term I can testify to was Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, ca
3Q 1978.  Probably predates that by a few years, and may well have originated
elsewhere.  Tigers were big, in that era - sold gasoline and breakfast cereal.
Also, they lurked dangerously in the jungle and, just a few years previously,
beat up sumpin' fierce on unwary roundeyes.

gds, hans

stencil sends




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 29 02:43:09 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 18:43:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] CO2: Danish ministry defends Lomborg
In-Reply-To: <011vuv8qnk8e2omnnh9sdi2lcmhbk2vclt@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20031229024309.96350.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/24/2027215&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=134

In response to the Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty's
condemnation of Bjorn Lomborg and his arguments against the
anthropogenic global warming thesis, the Danish Ministry of Science has
issued a paper attacking the DCSD's lack of scientific rigor and use of
improper standards in its condemnation. 

DMS (english summary) Paper:
http://www.lomborg.com/files/Case%201650%20-%20The%20Ministry%20evaluation%20of%20DCSD.doc

In addition, iGreen has posted the Sci-Am v Lomborg debates which
Sci-Am has worked to suppress:
http://www.igreens.org.uk/scientific_american_and_lomborg.htm

Also, an abstract of a paper by my climatologist cousin, Andrew, which
supports arguments that Antarctica has been ice bound since the
Miocene:

http://www.ume.maine.edu/iceage/Seminar/glacialgeol.htm

"Title: The unique polygons and sedimentation process of a
debris-covered glacier in Mullins Valley and Beacon Valley, Antarctica

Andrew M. Lorrey, Dept. of Geological Sciences University of Maine 

Beacon Valley is located in the western Dry Valleys, Antarctica,
adjacent to the East Antarctic Ice Sheet (EAIS). Three Wilsonian
shallow-core glaciers are prominent and unusual features contained at
the heads of Beacon Valley tributaries. These Wilsonian, or
debris-covered glaciers, may represent some of the only possible modern
terrestrial analogs to similar ice bodies seen on Mars. Polygons cover
the surface of the debris-covered glacier that fills part of upper
Beacon Valley and Mullins Valley. A survey of the polygons indicates
that landforms mature with distance from the equilibrium line. The
polygon morphology highlights the transport path of the buried ice in
upper Beacon Valley, which can be sourced to the cirque (accumulation
zone) at the head of Mullins Valley. The buried ice in upper Beacon
Valley is part of a coherent, massive ice body of glacial origin.

A gray diamicton is draped over the buried ice in Mullins Valley and
upper Beacon Valley. It has textural and weathering characteristics
akin to englacial, buried ice sediment. This diamicton is classified as
a till that formed from sublimation of buried ice. The sublimation till
(28% sand, 69% gravel, and 3% mud) is sorted by narrow contraction
cracks in the buried ice that results in sand wedge deposits (83% sand,
11% gravel, and 6% mud). The grain-sizes that comprise sublimation till
and sand wedges indicate that sediment is initially derived from
sublimation of the buried ice.

Deep polygon trenches develop over thermal contraction cracks in the
buried ice, and create traps for wind-blown sediment (reworked
sublimation till, sand wedge sediment and volcanic ash.) The tops of
some contraction cracks were void of sediment, indicative of a sediment
starvation. In this case, any primary volcanic ashfall could descend
directly into active sand wedges. As sublimation occurs, sand wedges
containing volcanic ash can slump over the sublimation till and buried
ice.

The stratigraphy of massive weathered sand, with stringers of volcanic
ash, resting on sublimation till and buried ice is widespread in upper
Beacon Valley. Because the contraction cracks and sand wedges are
secondary to the buried ice, the ashes contained in them can afford a
minimum age for the buried ice. This study supports the concept of the
ash chronology previously used (Sugden et al., 1995) to date the buried
ice at late Miocene age, and argues for persistent polar conditions in
Beacon Valley since that time." -end abstract-

He is currently working on using live and subfossil Kauri tree ring
data collected from New Zealand's north island to extend the
dedrochronological record back as far as 50,000 years. Kauri tree-ring
data established to date demonstrates consistency with known El-Nino
Southern Occillation records. 

Preliminary word from Drew says that the El Nino tree-ring record,
combined with his Antarctic work, will lend to the conclusion that
there is no danger of collapse of Antarctic Ice Caps with any amount of
global warming that could be created by anthropic means.


=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Dec 29 11:00:19 2003
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 12:00:19 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law9-OE45uIpt9bvv5200018c7b@hotmail.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312191803190.13508-100000@server.aeiveos.com><3FE3D772.3080401@mindspring.com><20031220131057.GX21411@leitl.org><3FE4A927.5020109@mindspring.com>	<3FE4B120.4020904@barrera.org><LAW9-OE38vfhaVL7ku300012561@hotmail.com>	<20031225220134.6ffb5a37.samantha@objectent.com>
	<Law9-OE45uIpt9bvv5200018c7b@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk>

Brian Alexander Lee wrote:

> As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore Windows.

As someone who hopes to upload it is foolish to trust Windows.

;-)

regards Max M Rasmussen, Denmark



From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Dec 29 11:14:12 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 12:14:12 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] sjbrain calcs
In-Reply-To: <3FE6A614.4010502@mindspring.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312211953570.10683-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<3FE6A614.4010502@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031229111412.GV22167@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 01:06:44AM -0700, Alan Eliasen wrote:
 
>    Can I ask what may be a silly question?  Why would one build so many
> little far-flung nodes instead of a more monolithic structure?  So many

This isn't a silly question at all. I agree with you that the designs Spike
has been floating are way too dilute and too gossamer. This starts even with
orbit control: you need to be able to rearrange mass in order to tilt the
sail (reaction mass is right out). You can't rearrange anything in a flat 1
cm disk 1 um thin (allright, you can tile it with electrostatics-actuated
tiltable MEMS mirros).

> things are simpler, faster, and more efficient with a single
> structure--communications, energy expenditure, time lag, that I guess I
> don't see why the structure wouldn't be made much more compact.

There are several limits at play here. You correctly state that one would tend
to have a compact assembly of switches to minimize lag. However, there's
another limit: you have to be able to cool it (even given largely reversible
computing and fractal cooling channels, that's probably something in the
cubic meter range at best). Hot circuitry runs at up to ~600 K, but some
type of computing circuitry likes it cold -- very cold, few K. Of course you
can recapture the leaks and the IR blackbody of the inner device clouds by
a yet another cloud farther out. Such an object would be impossible to
detect, since radiating some ~MT of energy/s but at few K and many light-min to
light-hours across. 
 
>    For example, let's be way overgenerous and assume each tiny node had
> the computational power of a human brain (probably not possible with
> only 50 billion atoms) and that it switched at a rather conservative 1

Let's say a switch+overhead takes 10^3 atoms. This is not conservative at
all, and in fact rather tight. 50*10^6 switches is an insect, not a human.
To pull a number from /dev/ass, I wouldn't go below a cm^3 for a node (and
not above a m^3, unless it's running in a mode very close to fully
reversible, so power dissipation is negligible). 

It takes a sail/panel several m^2 to feed it, and to provide enough photon
momentum to maneuver, and you'll need some 100 m elbow room between the
nodes.

> THz.  (We'll assume a classical architecture; it gets worse for
> smarter/faster quantum computers.)  This is approximately a factor of a

Don't assume QC, but it's safe to assume reversible computing at least in the
outer, cold device cloud.

> billion times faster than the fastest neurons in the human brain can
> switch.  We'll oversimplify and say that each node thus "thinks" a
> billion times faster than a human brain.

I wouldn't postulate 10^9, but 10^6 speedup is conservative, imo. Basically
you're having a ~ns time scale for processes which take ~ms in biology. ~ps
switching at high device density and nontrivial operation complexity is 
probably pushing the envelope a bit.
 
>    Now, I've talked to people on the other side of the world on the
> phone, and the satellite lags were very noticeable and confusing.  We'd

Relativistic lag takes getting used to. I've had lag up to a minute on VoIP,
now that was really confusing (especially, if the lag varies, and you don't
know how long it is right now)

> pause too long, interpret silences as reticence, or feel we had said
> something wrong, and then both people would start talking at the same
> time, only to interrupt each other a half-second later, and then stop
> and start over again.  And that's a fraction of a second delay.
> 
>    Communicating with someone with a one-minute lag would probably be
> pretty inefficient and painful.

It is very doable. In practice, there will be clustering of units which need
to talk frequently, the algorithm to compute next direction of the hop is
very simple.
 
>    Now, when you have a node that's a billion times faster, and you're

Let's say a million.

> communicating over even a light-second distance, that's an infinity.  It

A ns is 0.3 m, a us is 300 km. There's plenty of resources within that
volume.

> might be like a billion seconds to a human.  A billion seconds is over

At a million speedup a day is about 3 kYrs.

> 31 years.  It might seem that long to a node to ask a question and get
> an answer.  It's like carrying on a conversation with
> 
> Using Frink notation, ( http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/ ) *
> 
>    1 billion seconds -> years
>    31.68876
> 
>    When communicating over a light-minute radius, a node would grow old
> and bored and completely forget the question.  Or at least I would.
> It'd have the responsiveness of an IP-via-carrier-pigeon Internet, which
> was actually proposed:
> 
> http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html
> 
> Data:   "And for a time, I was tempted by her offer."
> Picard: "How long a time?"
> Data:   "0.68 seconds sir. For an android, that is nearly an eternity."
> 
>    So, my question is, why intentionally make it so hard and painful to
> communicate?  I've always thought that future supercomputers would
> cluster as close as possible together so that communications lags would
> be minimized.  Or, why not?  Robustness?

Current dies dissipate more than a heating plate, and are within touching
distance of nuclear reactor core power density. A circumsolar cloud of
computronium marbles in low orbit can be modeled as a blackbody with a low error margin
(because each part of the cloud is basically in equilibrium). 

It doesn't include the sails for active orbit control, but what the heck.

P.S. I had a number of posts in postponement, but I just don't have the time.
Apologies for those who expect an answer for me; they might or might not yet
be forthcoming. I will unsubscribe from a number of nonessential lists, so I
won't be very visible in the new year.

Nice holidays to you all.
 
-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031229/13d16c36/attachment.bin>

From extropy at audry2.com  Mon Dec 29 12:34:45 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 20:34:45 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk> (message from Max M on Mon, 29
	Dec 2003 12:00:19 +0100)
Message-ID: <200312291234.hBTCYjc22593@igor.synonet.com>


Brian Alexander Lee wrote:

> As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore Windows.

Windows is dominant in the market because windows is dominant in the
market. Ho hum.

Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> writes:

> As someone who hopes to upload it is foolish to trust Windows. ;-)

There will be a special circle of hell invented for you for even
suggesting that idea 8-).

Major


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 29 14:46:09 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 06:46:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <20031229144610.7941.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:
> Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> 
> > As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore Windows.
> 
> As someone who hopes to upload it is foolish to trust Windows.

And which of these issues is going to impact your future ability to
upload more: whether you make any money now, or whether Windows
continues to exist in 30 years?

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 29 15:35:35 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:35:35 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already
References: <000001c3caeb$9a163da0$6701a8c0@GREYBOOK>
	<CBCA0E03-36E3-11D8-AFA2-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <019301c3ce21$69e565f0$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charlie Stross" <charlie at antipope.org>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] ENOUGH already


> 
> Hitler, Stalin, et all were *symptoms* of the disease of war as much as 
> they were driving forces behind it.In Hitler's case, his ascendency was 

War exists because in general it is seen as a profitable venture.
Global nuclear war does not exist because it is seen as unprofitable.
In the end it's game theory.
Morality will take a back seat.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Dec 29 15:38:29 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:38:29 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] INTEL: Camel-turd-net predecessor
References: <20031228215411.67762.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01a301c3ce21$cedfc540$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: <extropy-chat at extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 9:54 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] INTEL: Camel-turd-net predecessor


> Some may recall discussions a year or two ago about an idea I had for
> air dropping objects looking like rocks or camel turds in Afghanistan
> which would have visual and auditory sensors, wifi capabilities, and
> also the ability to be a controllable land mine.


Done in Vietnam, to a lesser extent.
As for the mines, see 'gravel mines'.

A large part of the reason for the partial resolution of the N Ireland
situation was the use of electronic intel exactly as you describe.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Dec 29 17:00:46 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:00:46 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <1071950348.1015.2362.camel@alito.homeip.net>
References: <Law9-F106onkhhid3fB0002ffdd@hotmail.com>
	<20031220104501.GQ21411@leitl.org>
	<1071950348.1015.2362.camel@alito.homeip.net>
Message-ID: <20031229170046.GN22167@leitl.org>

On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 05:59:08AM +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:

> Yes, any bad driver can crash a monolithic OS's kawasaki.  Got new

Yeah, this is one of the reasons monolithic systems suck so badly.
Context switches blahblah, you don't design an OS for a given architecture, and
Fiasco shows you can do much better even on x86.

There's zero evolutionary pressure for micro/nanokernels in a desktopcentric
universe.

> hardware, expect problems (and if you got old bits too, crap hardware
> doesn't help).  But it doesn't tend to stay in that state for long. Does
> it make OS design a trillion times easier though?  I'm sure it does. 

I'm not sure there's much to design in a kernel few kBytes code large.
Everything else is userland.

> Look at the state of all desktop microkernels.  

There aren't any. I keep looking, apart from the fringe there's nothing
there.

> On my side, i haven't had a crash in about a year, and that was playing
> with probably (not provably) broken hardware (or at least win2000 on
> another machine didn't like it either). (btw, this doesn't mean my
> uptime is a year. I reboot on average every couple of months after a
> power outage, or to upgrade the kernel)

The server is running fine, it's the desktop that's not so stable
(Radeon-driver-related crashes in some OpenGL screen blankers, rare). Doesn't
matter, I shut it down for the night for noise reasons.

> (ah, yes, this is vanilla 2.4.${MAX(x)} linux, with tainted NVidia
> drivers).  I don't miss those wasted couple of minutes terribly much. 
> Writing this email probably took more time than all of those reboots
> combined.

I'd rather have infinite uptime on a mission-critical.
 
> > I'm disgusted with the engineering aspect of all modern consumer-grade
> > systems, whether hardware or software.
> > 
> From the point of view of a not-yet-calcified member of the younger
> generation (which missed the awesomness of the 70s VMS, and the

I've seen VMS run, but it is massively unsexy.

> everything-has-been-done-in lisp machines) it is going quite well.  DOS
> 4.0 -> linux-2.4.23 and TRS-80 -> duron 1gig have been up all the way
> (as well as every single other aspect of either consumer hardware or
> software (graphics card, network speed, storage capacity, monitor
> size/quality, content viewers, content writers, content organisers,
> content distributors, content availability, programming language
> compatibility with brain (not by much, i admit), interfaces (mice,
> scanners, sound)). I expect (naively perhaps) for these trends to
> continue.

Things are not bad. They could do be a whole lot better, though, and it's this
unborn future I'm mourning.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031229/1cce8bd1/attachment.bin>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 29 18:21:00 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:21:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <20031229182100.92460.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:
> Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> > As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore
> Windows.
> 
> As someone who hopes to upload it is foolish to
> trust Windows.

As someone who uses a computer at all, it is foolish
to trust Windows.  (I don't need to trust the game
computer on my desktop, but I do need to trust the
Linux system running my Web server.)  But "trust" is
not the same as "ignore"...


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Dec 29 20:56:54 2003
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 12:56:54 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nano e-card
References: <20031229182100.92460.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <027b01c3ce4e$4a95ad40$3f80e40c@NANOGIRL>

This is sort of silly, but it is the first nano holiday e-card I have seen:
http://www.sciencentral.com/hcard/postcard.html

Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Foresight Senior Associate member http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Tech-Aid Advisor http://www.tech-aid.info/t/all-about.html
nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."




From kevinfreels at hotmail.com  Mon Dec 29 21:45:34 2003
From: kevinfreels at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 15:45:34 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <20031229182100.92460.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>

As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an operating system
for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the OS run "you", or would
we do away with the entire concept of an OS altogether?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat at pacbell.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


> --- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:
> > Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> > > As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore
> > Windows.
> >
> > As someone who hopes to upload it is foolish to
> > trust Windows.
>
> As someone who uses a computer at all, it is foolish
> to trust Windows.  (I don't need to trust the game
> computer on my desktop, but I do need to trust the
> Linux system running my Web server.)  But "trust" is
> not the same as "ignore"...
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Dec 29 22:13:15 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:13:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312291410510.28568-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:

> As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an operating system
> for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the OS run "you", or would
> we do away with the entire concept of an OS altogether?

It would seem there is some form of an O.S. in place already.
You have I/O mechanisms and something has to decide what
has the priority to access and manage them.

I would imagine that consciousness perhaps takes over the
software & hardware functions of setting priorities and
conflict resolution.

Robert




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Dec 29 22:49:34 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031229224934.20196.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Kevin Freels <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> wrote:
> As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how
> would an operating system
> for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the
> OS run "you", or would
> we do away with the entire concept of an OS
> altogether?

Either architecture could be implemented, really, but
the better one would recognize that you are the OS.
It would be condescending, naive, and wind up with a
limited result to assume that only the operating
system the programmers provide can "actually" run the
hardware, and you are but a software agent being
granted some section of runtime at the whim of a
kernel that runs more important tasks - especially if
some entity not necessarily concerned primarily with
your well being (like, say, a manager of the
corporation which funded development of the upload
hardware) gets to decide what is "important".

Conversely, you yourself, as you are today, have input
and output devices, and perhaps run some processes
(like heartbeat) subconsciously (though responding to
changeable environmental variables, such as alert
level) and others (like breathing) sometimes
subconsciously and sometimes consciously, while others
(like cognitive thought) are always fully conscious.
In many ways, the mind of Human 1.0 is an operating
system, and a faithful upload emulation would take
this as a design principle.  In theory, any OS can be
emulated within another OS, but why waste the CPU
cycles running some other OS?


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Dec 30 02:19:39 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:19:39 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
Message-ID: <012101c3ce7b$60c3cd90$6400a8c0@brainiac>

I kid you not ...

http://tinyurl.com/36ye8

FBI urges police to watch for people carrying almanacs
TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer
Monday, December 29, 2003
?2003 Associated Press
(12-29) 16:18 PST WASHINGTON (AP) -- 

The FBI is warning police nationwide to be alert for people carrying
almanacs, cautioning that the popular reference books covering everything
from abbreviations to weather trends could be used for terrorist planning.

In a bulletin sent Christmas Eve to about 18,000 police organizations, the
FBI said terrorists may use almanacs "to assist with target selection and
pre-operational planning."

It urged officers to watch during searches, traffic stops and other
investigations for anyone carrying almanacs, especially if the books are
annotated in suspicious ways.

"The practice of researching potential targets is consistent with known
methods of al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations that seek to maximize
the likelihood of operational success through careful planning," the FBI
wrote.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of the bulletin this week and verified
its authenticity.

"For local law enforcement, it's just to help give them one more piece of
information to raise their suspicions," said David Heyman, a terrorism
expert for the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International
Studies. "It helps make sure one more bad guy doesn't get away from a
traffic stop, maybe gives police a little bit more reason to follow up on
this."

The FBI noted that use of almanacs or maps may be innocent, "the product of
legitimate recreational or commercial activities." But it warned that when
combined with suspicious behavior -- such as apparent surveillance -- a
person with an almanac "may point to possible terrorist planning."

"I don't think anyone would consider us a harmful entity," said Kevin
Seabrooke, senior editor of The World Almanac. He said the reference book
includes about a dozen pages out of its 1,000 pages total listing the
world's tallest buildings and bridges but includes no diagrams or
architectural schematics. "It's stuff that's widely available on the
Internet," he said.

The publisher for The Old Farmers Almanac said Monday terrorists would
probably find statistical reference books more useful than the collections
of Americana in his famous publication of weather predictions and
witticisms.

"While we doubt that our editorial content would be of particular interest
to people who would wish to do us harm, we will certainly cooperate to the
fullest with national authorities at any level they deem appropriate,"
publisher John Pierce said.

The FBI said information typically found in almanacs that could be useful
for terrorists includes profiles of cities and states and information about
waterways, bridges, dams, reservoirs, tunnels, buildings and landmarks. It
said this information is often accompanied by photographs and maps.

The FBI urged police to report such discoveries to the local U.S. Joint
Terrorism Task Force.

?2003 Associated Press




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Dec 29 22:54:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 14:54:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312291410510.28568-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031229225414.11129.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:
> 
> > As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an
> operating system
> > for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the OS run "you",
> or would
> > we do away with the entire concept of an OS altogether?
> 
> It would seem there is some form of an O.S. in place already.
> You have I/O mechanisms and something has to decide what
> has the priority to access and manage them.
> 
> I would imagine that consciousness perhaps takes over the
> software & hardware functions of setting priorities and
> conflict resolution.

Given the brain is a form of neural network, it is concievable that the
neuron clusters that deal with different I/O functions have their own
processes that manage their own I/O. The memory functions operate their
own, etc. while the conciousness is a network monitor. The phenomena of
I/O filtration and memory editing indicate that there are lots of
processes that the conciousness is not itself aware of and depends on
the reporting done by constituent 'work groups'.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 29 23:11:29 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:11:29 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nano e-card
Message-ID: <197180-2200312129231129156@M2W057.mail2web.com>

Gina Miller wrote:

>This is sort of silly, but it is the first nano holiday e-card I have seen:
>http://www.sciencentral.com/hcard/postcard.html

Very cute "X" :-)

In the spirit of food and drink, here's a nano "punch" card:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,481641,00.asp

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Dec 29 23:11:34 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:11:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nano e-card
Message-ID: <232810-220031212923113480@M2W044.mail2web.com>

Gina Miller wrote:

>This is sort of silly, but it is the first nano holiday e-card I have seen:
>http://www.sciencentral.com/hcard/postcard.html

Very cute "X" :-)

In the spirit of food and drink, here's a nano "punch" card:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,481641,00.asp

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Dec 29 22:42:58 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 23:42:58 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>
References: <20031229182100.92460.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>
	<LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031229224258.GW22167@leitl.org>

On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 03:45:34PM -0600, Kevin Freels wrote:
> As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an operating system
> for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the OS run "you", or would
> we do away with the entire concept of an OS altogether?

The latter. Of course, it wouldn't be a computer as you know it, too...

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031229/f59391bf/attachment.bin>

From jef at jefallbright.net  Tue Dec 30 03:54:46 2003
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:54:46 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312291410510.28568-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <003301c3ce88$ab4bc6d0$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Kevin Freels wrote:
>
>> As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an
>> operating system for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would
>> the OS run "you", or would we do away with the entire concept of an
>> OS altogether?
>
> It would seem there is some form of an O.S. in place already.
> You have I/O mechanisms and something has to decide what
> has the priority to access and manage them.
>
> I would imagine that consciousness perhaps takes over the
> software & hardware functions of setting priorities and
> conflict resolution.

Try as we might, no one has found any central OS acting as the Self in
charge of the mind/body system.  It didn't evolve that way because evolution
doesn't do "design".

Our sense of Self is an illusion, arising out of the interaction of multiple
processes, some competing, others cooperating, interacting with each other
and the environment in a way that blurs the borders of identity.

There is no Master Control Program in the mind.

- Jef

www.jefallbright.net



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 06:01:24 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:01:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The human OS [was: when will computers improve?]
In-Reply-To: <003301c3ce88$ab4bc6d0$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Jef Allbright wrote:

> Our sense of Self is an illusion, arising out of the interaction of multiple
> processes, some competing, others cooperating, interacting with each other
> and the environment in a way that blurs the borders of identity.

Hmmm... I have no problem with my "identity" it is a collection of
knowledge, memories of historical experiences and behavior patterns that
have generally worked.  Sure its a mix of various priorities and agendas
but it remains reasonably stable over time.  The exceptions I would cite
involve what are generally recognized as mental illnesses, e.g.
schizophrenia.

> There is no Master Control Program in the mind.

You have a hard time convincing me of that if there is a program
that can (and in a not insignificant fraction of the population does)
terminate all of the other programs from time to time.

Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 06:19:52 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:19:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <012101c3ce7b$60c3cd90$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292201440.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Olga Bourlin wrote:

> In a bulletin sent Christmas Eve to about 18,000 police organizations, the
> FBI said terrorists may use almanacs "to assist with target selection and
> pre-operational planning."

Its not so unreasonable Olga.  I'd like to think I'd be reasonably dangerous
if I chose to take up terrorism as a profession.  (Not quite Mike's level
obviously but probably someone to be taken reasonably seriously.)  I just
checked my bookcase and I've got 3 Almanac's in it.  Largely dated before
Google became available -- but still very information dense.  I could go
through them and come up with a number of examples of useful information
for terrorists but I would prefer not to publish such data.

I'm always *amazed* at the degree to which there is public discussion
of great targets for terrorists.  Last week it was LPG tankers with
planes loaded with radioactive waste, this week it is citing chlorine
storage facilities as good targets.

Robert



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Dec 30 10:11:03 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:11:03 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The human OS [was: when will computers improve?]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <03e101c3cebd$3ba02e40$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> Jef Allbright wrote:
> 
> > There is no Master Control Program in the mind.

Necessarily if there is no mind. Perhaps not in the brain either. 

> You have a hard time convincing me of that if there is a 
> program that can (and in a not insignificant fraction of the
> population does) terminate all of the other programs from
> time to time.

Suicide does seem to suggest that (at least at the extremes) there
is some sort of over-ride capability in some people. 

This capability does seem to suggest mastery and control (however
momentary), but to me it weakens rather than strengthens the case
that humans are running an OS. 

Running programs do terminate and can cause other programs to 
terminate, but they *don't* yet, so far as I know, *intend* or
*aim* at doing so. 

Seems like some specialties are showing we aren't we (self, mind,
consciousness are not what they used to be - or perhaps rather
what they were thought to be) whilst others are determined to add
a new class of entities to the we group. 

I wonder what sort of dis-illusioned entity, if not a self, will still be
around to pronounce that a machine has passed the Turin test ? 

Regards,
Brett




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Dec 30 10:12:27 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:12:27 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <3FF14F8B.7030502@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:21:00 -0800 (PST) Adrian Tymes wrote:
> As someone who uses a computer at all, it is foolish
> to trust Windows.  (I don't need to trust the game
> computer on my desktop, but I do need to trust the
> Linux system running my Web server.)  But "trust" is
> not the same as "ignore"...
>

Here is a good article which claims that the IT industry is finally
beginning to give up on Microsoft and start the move to open software.
There may well be an element of wishful thinking here but the points
made in the article are sound (i.e. cost, reliability, continual
patching, licensing, security, virus attacks, etc.).
But there is a vast inertia of MS lock-in which has to be overcome
before it will have much effect.

<http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13350>

We can only hope.

BillK




From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec 30 10:32:11 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:32:11 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] New York Times article on dying
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGKEJPCAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

This New York Times article details the process of dying and what happens to
the body and mind as a person dies. As deaths from heart attacks decline and
life expectancy rises, death has become a protracted process for more and
more people. Accompanying this trend is a growing need for medical
professionals and families to understand what happens during the last weeks,
days and hours of life and what kind of action, or inaction, is most likely
to bring a comfortable, peaceful, even beautiful end.
Active dying, the process of total body system failure, usually occurs over
a period of 10 to 14 days, although it can take as little as 24 hours. As
someone nears the end of life, it is not unusual to turn inward and become
less communicative, even as much as three months before death. Loved ones
should not confuse this withdrawal with rejection. Rather, she said, it
reflects the dying person's need to leave the outer world behind and focus
on inner contemplation. Dying patients may also moan or grunt as they
breathe, but rarely is this a sign of pain, she noted. Appropriate pain
relief should always be provided because a patient in pain cannot
communicate effectively or die peacefully. There is no evidence that
pain-relieving drugs hastened death.
This is a very interesting article, the one thing I do not like is the
original title: "Facing Up to the Inevitable, in Search of a Good Death". I
do not think it will stay inevitable for long: there are indications that
someday science will be able to avoid ageing and death.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031230/7c0c85a9/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec 30 10:56:38 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:56:38 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
References: <200312080336.hB83auP07649@finney.org>
Message-ID: <20031230105638.GJ22167@leitl.org>


I'm flushing out a few old replies from the postponed message queue before I
leave the list for a while. I'm sorry if quality is lacking, there is not
time for more.

On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 07:36:56PM -0800, Hal Finney wrote:

> And I also object to some of the tactics being used in this spin
> doctoring.  Smalley is being misrepresented and taken out of context.
> From the Foresight press release: "In the current C&E News exchange,
> Smalley now agrees that assemblers (without impossible "magic fingers")
> could use something like enzymes or ribosomes as tools for doing precise
> chemistry."  This makes it sound like Smalley has conceded that Drexler's
> ideas for nanotech could work.  But in fact, Smalley was attempting
> to show that to the extent that nanotech needs to rely on things like
> enzymes and ribosomes, it will share the limitations of those systems,
> such as reliance on water and the inability to make strong objects,
> hence that nanotech could not meet its claimed goals.

The argument as presented is muddled, and as such worthless for both sides.
Biology has a makeup, and a modus operandi. Both are orthogonal. It is the latter that is
illustrative to outline the differences between classic organic synthesis and
high degree of control in biosynthesis. This is a continuous axis ranging
from low to very high degree of control in machine-phase.

I'm reasonably sure that this distinction is completely lost on the average
synthetic chemist. I don't know whether it's lost on Smalley, he never said
enough to tell, and I'm not going to start guessing. 

I'm not sure it's worth having a public discussion where issues are so
complex one's mainly operating in opinion space. Results shut up critics,
eventually, not talk.
 
> And about this water business, which has also been trumpeted as showing
> that Smalley is ignorant of chemistry (a claim which sounds absurdly
> arrogant to the unbiased spectator).  Maybe there are some enzymes
> which can work in polar solvents or even in gas or vacuum.  But ribosomes

Polar solvents yes, some of them, especially enzymes optimized for a different
solvate, not gas or vacuum, not that.

> don't, and so Smalley's overall point still holds.  The chemistry of water
> dominates virtually everything about proteins, enzymes (which are a subset
> of proteins), and ribosomes (which are built equally of RNA and protein).

Water assembles shape, it is in most cases nothing but a nuisance in the
reaction center. Machine-phase as postulated doesn't autoassemble bottom-up,
so it doesn't need solvate (at least during operation) to maintain the
operation geometry.
 
> So what does Drexler really mean when he says that nanotech will work
> like enzymes?  As Smalley asks, "do you think it is really possible to

Enzymes use control, solvated orgchem doesn't. The more control, the higher
the yield of a specific product. 

> do enzymelike chemistry of arbitrary complexity with only dry surfaces
> and a vacuum?"  I think the answer Drexler would give is basically yes,
> albeit not of "arbitrary" complexity (no system could achieve that goal).

If you've got a good mechanosynthetic reaction library and high-precision control the space of
structures you can build is vastly bigger than anything biology could muster.
Arguably, it could build anything stable, but I guess we can agree that a
tiny subset of all possible structures is enough if there's full self-rep
closure goodness hidden in there.

> He does believe that he can achieve and surpass the power of enzyme-like
> systems using dry surfaces and a vacuum.  He refers to this somewhat

These assumptions are reasonable.

> obliquely in his reply: "Bound groups adjacent to reactive groups can
> provide tailored environments that reproduce familiar effects of solvation
> and catalysis."

Enzymes cut and create bonds, the result is what is important. The manner by
which it is done is quite irrelevant as long as cheap high processivity
constraint is satisfied.
 
> I've read Nanosystems, and it's always bothered me that the technology
> described there is so different from what most nanotech fans are
> familiar with.  Drexler describes the famous robot arm; you can see a
> picture here, http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/images/fig13.14left.jpg.
> He goes into a lot of detail about how it would work and how strong it
> would be for mechanosynthesis.
> 
> But he doesn't use it!  The proposed manufacturing system that he
> describes in some detail only uses giant robot arms in a final assembly
> stage, to manipulate relatively large, pre-built blocks that are a
> cubic micron in size, far larger than the arm above (which is only 0.1
> micron long).  Instead, the actual molecular manipulation and assembly
> is done by means of a "mill".
> 
> This is a system which holds molecular fragments on miniature pallets
> attached to 4 nm wide assembly belts. The belts run past each other such
> that the pallets are pressed together, and possibly rotated or manipulated
> in some way, so that the payload molecules react, transferring one or
> more atoms from one pallet's payload to the other.
> 
> These mills would gradually build up larger and larger pieces, which
> would eventually be transferred to appropriately scaled-up mill systems.
> These would use the same principles, now working with pieces with
> perhaps thousands of atoms, attaching them together in various ways.
> Eventuallly we get up to the micron size, which will have billions of
> atoms, and at that point he uses almost-macro-scale robot arms to start
> attaching these "bricks" together.

It's an illustration, no one is going to build that as is.
 
> This molecular mill system provides a possible context to understand
> Drexler's comparison of nanotech assembly to enzymes.  Enzymes bring
> reactants together in a carefully controlled environment.  The active
> site is surrounded by atoms which provide the exact pattern of positive
> and negative charge, hydrophobic and hydrophilic regions, acidic or base
> pH, necessary to promote the desired reaction.  This is what Smalley

Do you need all of this just to make proteins? Synthetic chemistry has no
trouble making pretty long peptids without needing a kidney, whether of man,
or dog. Enzymes don't zap educts with electric potential, manipulative
proximal probe does.

> means when he talks about biologically catalyzed chemistry occuring
> as the interaction of a dozen or more atoms, which would seemingly be
> impossible using robot arms.

It is obviously unnecessary to replay the exact processes within the cubic nm, or
so, in order to do chemistry. As long as the reaction outcome is the same,
no one cares how exactly you did it. Whether you synthesized your peptide
enzymatically, synthetically, or by pushing around activated monomers absorbed to a
flat substrate, who cares?
 
> But it is conceivable that a mill could provide a similar degree of
> control over the external environment as what we get in an enzymatic
> active site.  The pallets that hold the reactants can be designed
> to have desired patterns of charge, ionization and electron binding.
> When we bring the reactants together, surrounded by the two pallets that
> held them, the environment surrounding the reactants can therefore be
> controlled to a considerable degree.  The reactants can even be held
> in pouches or grooves within the pallets to provide for full 360 degree
> control over the local environment.

You're latching upon a design that's essentially a red herring.
 
> This is what I think Drexler means in the quote above, "Bound groups
> adjacent to reactive groups can provide tailored environments that
> reproduce familiar effects of solvation and catalysis."  The bound groups
> are part of the pallets that hold the reactants; solvation, that is,
> the effects of water molecules, can be mimicked by means of patterns of
> charge; and catalysis achieved by carefully adjusting the properties of
> the atoms lining the pallets so as to provide the necessary lowering of
> energy barriers.

Or you could just drag around stuff on HOPG in cryogenic conditions. Or use
SWNT ducts. Or radical moisture. Whatever.
 
> I think it is rather difficult to interpret Drexler's comment in terms
> of robot arms.  They have a limited flexibility in terms of tailoring
> the environment in the near vicinity of the reaction.  It would be
> extremely complicated to recreate the effects of solvation (the widespread
> presence of water molecules shielding and modifying electrical effects)
> and catalysis using robot arms, raising fat-finger problems.

You're recreating the vis vitalis argument here a bit. You have to abstract
the product from the reaction from the reaction conditions. The product is
what counts, not how you access it.
 
> The point of this rather lengthy digression is that Drexler and other
> nanotech proponents are not doing a good job of explaining their design
> concepts.  This is in part why they are so commonly misunderstood.

This is not something which can be unambiguously explained in plain language.
This is something you can write specialist papers no synthetic chemist or
biologist is going to understand, without learning a couple of whole new
fields.

> And it seems almost willful.  Drexler is trying to explain exactly
> how his system will work: "In machine-phase chemistry, conveyors and
> positioners (not solvents and thermal motion) bring reactants together."
> But this terminology is complete generic and unspecific: conveyors and
> positioners.  It applies to mills, but could also apply to robot arms,
> where reactants are conveyed to the tip and then positioned to be applied
> to the work piece.

Of course, because he's describing a principle, and not a particular
implementation. 
 
> Didn't anyone reading this exchange wonder about Drexler's insistence
> that "fingers" are not needed for his assembly process?  What is a robot
> arm if not a finger, in this context?  Do people realize that Drexler
> has moved away from arm-based assembly, perhaps due to some of the very
> objections that Smalley has (re-) discovered?

The finger issue is what happens when experts start dumbing down the
discussion that everybody can understand it. The issue is that no two
tooltips can occupy the same space simultaneously, and I fail to see how this
is a major constraint on anything. (Unless you start counting every atom
within the reaction site as finger, which is a vis vitalis/holistic
argument).
 
> Of course, I'm not even 100% sure that my interpretation is right, either.
> I've explained above how I think his comments relate to the designs
> in Nanosystems.  But maybe I'm wrong, maybe he does still plan to use
> robot arms.
> 
> Why should I have to guess?  And why should Smalley?  This continued
> evasiveness and refusal to plainly specify a design strategy
> forces nanotech critics to extrapolate their own understanding and
> interpretations.  And once this happens, the nanotech proponents sit back
> and smugly call "strawman".  Drexler and Smalley are talking past each
> other, because Drexler refuses to plainly state how his manufacturing
> system will work, contenting himself with telling Smalley that all his
> guesses are wrong.

The issue boils down to modelling and validating a set of mechanosynthetic
reactions (according to Smalley, these don't exist, however, a 30 sec session
with Google will show everybody that they do exist) experimentally.
 
> This isn't a game of 20 Questions.  If nanotech were the dominant
> paradigm, this lack of specificity might be acceptable.  But when you
> are on the outside looking in, it will not succeed.  All you're going
> to do is make people confused and angry.
> 
> I share Smalley's frustration when he writes, "it would be helpful to
> all of us who take the nanobot assembler idea of 'Engines of Creation'
> seriously if you would tell us more about this nonaqueous enzymelike
> chemistry."  Rather than lobbying and spinning the debate, I'd suggest
> that nanotech proponents work harder at fleshing out and clearly
> describing their proposals.  Give your critics something to criticize, and
> at least the debates won't be as empty as the Smalley-Drexler exchange.

Let's see whether http://foresight.org/stage2/project1A.html
will produce results, so we can stop handwaving, and just tell people to
RTFM.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031230/b3efdffe/attachment.bin>

From gpmap at runbox.com  Tue Dec 30 11:02:02 2003
From: gpmap at runbox.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:02:02 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Space book and role playing game
Message-ID: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGCEKACAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>

Has anyone seen this? This type of material can be useful to spread
transhumanist memes among teenagers.
In the coming decades, technologies like genetic engineering, artificial
intelligence, and nanotechnology will transform humanity. A strange new
world is unfolding -- nightmarish to some, utopian to others. Soon we'll
have the power to reshape our children's genes, build machines that think,
and upload our minds into computers.
And Earth no longer confines us. Space tourism, mining the Moon and
asteroids, a settlement on Mars: all are dreams poised to take wing. The
universe of Transhuman Space is a synthesis of these two visions -- a world
in which ultra-technology and space travel fuse to forge a new destiny for
mankind. Neither utopia nor dystopia, it is a place of hopes, fears, and new
frontiers.
I have not seen the book but from the description on the website it seems a
good way to introduce young persons to these concepts.
It's the year 2100. Humans have colonized the solar system. China and
America struggle for control of Mars. The Royal Navy patrols the asteroid
belt. Nanotechnology has transformed life on Earth forever, and
gene-enhanced humans share the world with artificial intelligences and
robotic cybershells. Our solar system has become a setting as exciting and
alien as any interstellar empire. Pirate spaceships hijacking black holes .
. . sentient computers and artificial "bioroids" demanding human rights . .
. nanotechnology and mind control . . . Transhuman Space is cutting-edge
science fiction adventure that begins where cyberpunk ends.
This book contains a complete roleplaying game: A future history of the next
100 years: the rise of China, the terraforming of Mars, and the birth of the
first artifical intelligence - A gazetteer of solar solar system, from Earth
to thriving colonies on Luna, Mars, and beyond - A detailed encyclopedia of
transhuman space - Dozens of transhuman character templates, from
space-adapted parahumans to digital infomorphs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031230/7e09113c/attachment.html>

From hemm at br.inter.net  Tue Dec 30 11:17:23 2003
From: hemm at br.inter.net (Henrique Moraes Machado)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:17:23 -0200
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] The human OS [was: when will computers
	improve?]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<03e101c3cebd$3ba02e40$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
Message-ID: <00d701c3cec6$7fcf14b0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>


Well, what if suicide is just a bug in the OS? As far as I know, there's no software without bugs.

-----Mensagem Original----- 
De: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
Para: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Enviada em: ter?a-feira, 30 de dezembro de 2003 08:11
Assunto: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] The human OS [was: when will computers improve?]


|(...)
| Suicide does seem to suggest that (at least at the extremes) there
| is some sort of over-ride capability in some people. 
| 
| This capability does seem to suggest mastery and control (however
| momentary), but to me it weakens rather than strengthens the case
| that humans are running an OS. 
|(...)


From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Dec 30 11:42:34 2003
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:42:34 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] happy new year!
Message-ID: <20031230114234.GM22167@leitl.org>


There has been lots of fascinating debate frozen in postponement; it's been
hard, but I've let go all of what has been designated for this list. Oh well,
in some another universe, somewhere, somewhen.

Nice holidays to you all, and happy new year. I'm out of here for time being.

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031230/cb7a8827/attachment.bin>

From extropy at audry2.com  Tue Dec 30 13:07:20 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:07:20 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>
	(kevinfreels@hotmail.com)
References: <20031229182100.92460.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>
	<LAW10-OE66GDd7NyIZ40001a010@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <200312301307.hBUD7KX27988@igor.synonet.com>


"Kevin Freels" <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> writes:

> As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an operating system
> for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the OS run "you", or would
> we do away with the entire concept of an OS altogether?

"you" would the "application", not the "OS"; though I suspect that the
OS would probably be pretty minimal.

I recommend most the fiction of Greg Egan in this regard. His uploads
have a system called the "exoself" which is kind of a dedicated OS for
uploads which takes care of things like save&restore and modification
in those scenarios where the  uploads make conscious decisions to
change themselves.

Major


From reason at exratio.com  Tue Dec 30 13:09:45 2003
From: reason at exratio.com (Reason)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 05:09:45 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <200312301307.hBUD7KX27988@igor.synonet.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKECNEAAA.reason@exratio.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Major

> "Kevin Freels" <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > As far as uploading and Windows are concerned, how would an
> operating system
> > for an upload work? Would "you" be the OS, would the OS run
> "you", or would
> > we do away with the entire concept of an OS altogether?
>
> "you" would the "application", not the "OS"; though I suspect that the
> OS would probably be pretty minimal.
>
> I recommend most the fiction of Greg Egan in this regard. His uploads
> have a system called the "exoself" which is kind of a dedicated OS for
> uploads which takes care of things like save&restore and modification
> in those scenarios where the  uploads make conscious decisions to
> change themselves.

The exoself was more of a platform or application, with the polis software
being the operating system. The sanctity of the exoself from external
modification was a function of the polis software, for example.

Reason
http://www.exratio.com



From jef at jefallbright.net  Tue Dec 30 13:51:19 2003
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 05:51:19 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The human OS [was: when will computers improve?]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Jef Allbright wrote:
>
>> Our sense of Self is an illusion, arising out of the interaction of
>> multiple processes, some competing, others cooperating, interacting
>> with each other and the environment in a way that blurs the borders
>> of identity.
>
> Hmmm... I have no problem with my "identity" it is a collection of
> knowledge, memories of historical experiences and behavior patterns
> that have generally worked.  Sure its a mix of various priorities and
> agendas but it remains reasonably stable over time.  The exceptions I
> would cite involve what are generally recognized as mental illnesses,
> e.g. schizophrenia.
>
>> There is no Master Control Program in the mind.
>
> You have a hard time convincing me of that if there is a program
> that can (and in a not insignificant fraction of the population does)
> terminate all of the other programs from time to time.

Suicide is a useful example.  It is almost always the *result* of the
organism's response to pain, rather than a *goal*, and is seldom carried out
in a clear state of mind.

Note that I am not saying that the Self doesn't exist, nor that the pain
isn't experienced.  I am saying that the sense of self arises out of the
multitude of processes taking place (mostly) in the brain, rather than the
Self somehow driving them.

Killing is also a useful example.  While some may assume it is the ultimate
expression of control of one organism over another (and in a narrow sense
this can be a true statement), it is more illuminating to see killing as the
*result* of organisms reacting to fear, anger, jealously, and other evolved
drives that promoted the fitness of the organism's ancestors but are rapidly
becoming inappropriate now and for the future. (I'm not talking about
self-defense here.)

Militarism and nationalism are examples of the blurring of identity.  Humans
have evolved to operate as groups because this has enhanced the fitness of
the larger group organism over the smaller, less organized organism.  When
persons operate in a group, however, they tend to respond as a group, and
behave in a manner inconsistent with their individual identities.  Human
response to authority, peer pressure, hypnotism, mob behavior, etc., are
examples of the blurring of identity due to external influences.

It's important that we better understand our current nature, so we can make
better-informed, more rational choices for our future.

- Jef
www.jefallbright.net




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 30 15:17:55 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:17:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <Law9-F75zRPVirF1AMP0004a7b7@hotmail.com>




>From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
>Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:21:00 -0800 (PST)
>
>As someone who uses a computer at all, it is foolish
>to trust Windows.  (I don't need to trust the game
>computer on my desktop, but I do need to trust the
>Linux system running my Web server.)  But "trust" is
>not the same as "ignore"...

Note that you can still "trust" windows systems, but they must be designed 
differently than *nix systems. A farm of 6 windows servers can still still 
provide 5 nines as a system the same as a Linux server can (although you'd 
want a farm of linux boxen as well). Windows, while not optimal, is 
acceptable for server applications.

BAL

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of slow downloads? Compare online deals from your local high-speed 
providers now.  https://broadband.msn.com



From jonkc at att.net  Tue Dec 30 15:31:49 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:31:49 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com>
Message-ID: <015c01c3ceea$1d1e4ce0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>

There is a new online biography of Hugh Everett, the man who started the
many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics at
http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/everett/ . One thing I didn't know was that
Everett's daughter believed in it and killed herself because she thought she
would be living in a better parallel world with her father. Apparently she
thought if all the unhappy versions of herself died her consciousness would
remain only in the happy ones. There may be a certain amount of logic to
that but before you do something that drastic you had better be very very
sure the theory is correct. I don't know about you but I'm not THAT certain.

John K Clark     jonkc at att.net




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Dec 30 15:37:34 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:37:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Space book and role playing game
Message-ID: <232810-2200312230153734875@M2W079.mail2web.com>

From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 

>Has anyone seen this? This type of material can be useful to spread
transhumanist memes among teenagers.

Do you mean "Transhuman Space: Starships of the Solar System"
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1556345976/102-7406969-5553758
?v=glance ?

Or:

Transhuman Space by David L. Pulver, et al (Paperback) 
Transhuman Space in the Well by Jonathan Woodward, et al (Paperback) 
Transhuman Space: Deep Beyond by David Pulver (Paperback) 
Transhuman Space Orbital Decay by Patrickmes Sweeney, et al (Paperback) 
Transhuman Space: High Frontier (Transhuman Space) by David Pulver
(Paperback) ?

I haven't read any of these books.

I love the idea of a transhuman space game.  I'm surprised that John
Spencer (Space Tourism, Inc.) hasn't collaborated with Steve Jackson (Steve
Jackson Games) to produce something.  

In fact, I'm going to write to both of them right now about it!

Best,

Natasha




--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From jonkc at att.net  Tue Dec 30 15:51:16 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:51:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
References: <Law9-F75zRPVirF1AMP0004a7b7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <018801c3ceec$cc22eaf0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>

It?s puzzling, in most of the spam I?ve gotten recently they don?t appear to
be selling anything. The subject line may say something about sexual aids or
low interest rates but the body contains nothing but what looks like random
verbiage from some old encyclopedia or novel. I can understand putting in a
little of that to get around the filters but that?s all there is, on this
stuff there is no way they can make any money off me even if I was the most
gullible man on the planet because there is no product they are selling and
no way for me to send them money. It must take time and effort to send those
messages, why do they bother? I guess the new point in spam is not to make
money but just to send spam.

John K Clark       jonkc at att.net




From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 30 16:02:01 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:02:01 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com><015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com>
	<015c01c3ceea$1d1e4ce0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <007a01c3ceee$42bb3810$d2256bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John K Clark" <jonkc at att.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 3:31 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett


> There is a new online biography of Hugh Everett, the man who started the
> many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics at
> http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/everett/ . One thing I didn't know was that
> Everett's daughter believed in it and killed herself because she thought
she
> would be living in a better parallel world with her father. Apparently she
> thought if all the unhappy versions of herself died her consciousness
would
> remain only in the happy ones. There may be a certain amount of logic to
> that but before you do something that drastic you had better be very very
> sure the theory is correct. I don't know about you but I'm not THAT
certain.

As it stands the interpretation can only be verified subjectively, and only
if true.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Dec 30 16:06:21 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:06:21 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] happy new year!
Message-ID: <184670-220031223016621166@M2W037.mail2web.com>

'gene wrote:

Subject: [extropy-chat] happy new year!

"Nice holidays to you all, and happy new year. I'm out of here for time
being."

Likewise!

Natasha

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From extropy at audry2.com  Tue Dec 30 17:30:41 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 01:30:41 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <018801c3ceec$cc22eaf0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001> (jonkc@att.net)
References: <Law9-F75zRPVirF1AMP0004a7b7@hotmail.com>
	<018801c3ceec$cc22eaf0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <200312301730.hBUHUfY29697@igor.synonet.com>


> It's puzzling, in most of the spam I've gotten recently they don't appear to
> be selling anything. The subject line may say something about sexual aids or
> low interest rates but the body contains nothing but what looks like random
> verbiage from some old encyclopedia or novel.

Many of them are using the multipart/alternate MIME type with crud in
the test/plain version and their advertisement in the text/html version.

The crud gets them round the spam filter but is invisible to
outlook/hotmail users who are probably the only people silly enough to
buy prescription pharmaceuticals from a spammer anyhow.

Major


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 30 16:50:25 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 08:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <012101c3ce7b$60c3cd90$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20031230165025.48500.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
> I kid you not ...
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/36ye8
> 
> FBI urges police to watch for people carrying almanacs
> TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer
> Monday, December 29, 2003
> ?2003 Associated Press
> (12-29) 16:18 PST WASHINGTON (AP) -- 
> 
> The FBI is warning police nationwide to be alert for people carrying
> almanacs, cautioning that the popular reference books covering
> everything
> from abbreviations to weather trends could be used for terrorist
> planning.

I don't think something as minor as a Farmer's Almanac is what they are
talking about. It seemed to me that they were talking about those 1000
page plus reference alamanacs you can buy that have data about tons of
things covering the whole country to a far greter degree than the
average road atlas. 
While I can understand the leftist need to ridicule this measure by
decribing it as 'farmers almanac', I doubt very much that such a
suggestion would have been sent out if there were not good intelligence
information. The left often displays a rather high degree of hubristic
arrogance that it is so smart that anybody they don't like must be
stupid. That is, however, the nature of leftism, the concept that
people are too dumb for their own good and need to be told how to spend
their money.
I do recall that the books that bin Laden & company developed to train
their people did in fact mention referencing almanacs. If a number of
al quaeda seized here in the US have been found with them in their
posession, then this is in fact a good tip to discern possible suspects
in the future. Suggest you consider that intelligence people may have
much better information sources than you do.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Dec 30 16:57:31 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 08:57:31 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031230105638.GJ22167@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20031230165731.96224.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

One thing I have not seen people discuss re Smalley's attitude toward
Drexlerian nano: how do you KNOW that Smalley isn't just trying to
downplay luddite 'sky is falling' tactics????

In my opinion, his statements are a perfect means of deflecting the
scare tactics of luddites like the Turning Point Project. Portraying
them as hopelessly overblown and the foolish imaginings of those too
ignorant of science to know better is the only real way we are going to
fight their fear mongering. Having as many well regarded scientists
saying this as possible is even better.
So what if such statements turn out to be wrong? We know better, we
will reach Drexlerian nanotech inevitably, and IMHO much sooner if the
luddites are made the fools in order to derail their attempts to
legislate against Drexlerian nanotech.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 17:10:14 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:10:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <20031230165731.96224.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312300907210.16991-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> So what if such statements turn out to be wrong? We know better, we
> will reach Drexlerian nanotech inevitably, and IMHO much sooner if the
> luddites are made the fools in order to derail their attempts to
> legislate against Drexlerian nanotech.

Mike, you may want to take a look at Howard Lovy's blog entry for
Dec. 24, 2003:
  http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2003_12_21_nanobot_archive.html#107228757469551087

Its an interesting perspective on why people blowing smoke might
be a good thing by ecouraging the serious people to point out the
flaws in the arguments of the various anti-nano individuals & groups.

Robert




From fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Dec 30 17:35:39 2003
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:35:39 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
References: <20031230165025.48500.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <012201c3cefb$57eed950$6400a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>

> I don't think something as minor as a Farmer's Almanac is what they are
> talking about. It seemed to me that they were talking about those 1000
> page plus reference alamanacs you can buy that have data about tons of
> things covering the whole country to a far greter degree than the
> average road atlas.

> While I can understand the leftist need to ridicule this measure by
> decribing it as 'farmers almanac' ...

You understand the leftist need ...? to ridicule ...?  Hmmmm, do you suppose
the right ever ridicules the left? (if not, then please point out how it
does not).  While you may correct that the almanac to which the article
refers may not be the ubiquitous Farmers, it doesn't make that entirely
clear (and the article does invoke a quote from the publisher of the
aforesaid ...).

BTW, at first I thought this was a joke, but now I'm not so certain (do you
think this is serious?):
http://www.thbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6230

>The left often displays a rather high degree of hubristic
> arrogance that it is so smart that anybody they don't like must be
> stupid.

... somewhat like the rather high degree of hubristic arrogance displayed by
the right?

> That is, however, the nature of leftism, the concept that
> people are too dumb for their own good and need to be told how to spend
> their money.

... and what is the *nature* of rightism?  (perhaps, thinking that the
leftists have a "need to ridicule" ...?)

>Suggest you consider that intelligence people may have
> much better information sources than you do.

I have a great deal of respect for intelligence people (as long as they're
rational and intelligent).  I worry about the likes of Ashcroft, and stuff
like:  "Condi Rice is as comfortable speaking publicly about her faith in
God as she is about strategic arms reduction and routing out terrorism."
found in: http://www.christianitytoday.com/cr/2002/005/1.18.html

If the fate of the world rests with people who have conversations with
god(s), all is lost ...

Olga




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 17:36:39 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:36:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <200312301730.hBUHUfY29697@igor.synonet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312300928460.17166-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Major wrote:

> Many of them are using the multipart/alternate MIME type with crud in
> the test/plain version and their advertisement in the text/html version.

Actually I think its "multipart/alternative".  I suspect you could catch
a good amount of it by simply flagging "multipart/alternative" and "text/html".
The other thing I'm noticing is a lot of messages that just have an HTML
pointer to a jpg/gif.

Major is correct about the crap -- it began when Bayesian filters started
becoming popular -- its an attempt to put in enough good words into the
message that a few bad words don't cause the message to be flagged as SPAM.

I suspect that one could catch this with grammer filters but then they
would just start taking paragraphs out of public News/BBS posts or
some other similar source of human authored text.

NY Times had an interesting article about the difficulties SPAMers face
now-a-days:
  An Unrepentant Spammer Vows to Carry On, Wiithin the Law
  http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/30/technology/30spam.html

Robert




From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com  Tue Dec 30 17:59:37 2003
From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:59:37 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] REALITY: virtual and intellectual property
	rightsand values
Message-ID: <56BC65EB2F3963489057F7D978B5E7B740EBA0@amazemail2.amazeent.com>

Greetings all. I bring you a few semi-related thoughts on virtual
economies.

Recently, "Gaming Open Market" opened at
http://www.gamingopenmarket.com/. This is a currency exchange between
many of the different massively multiplayer games and the U.S. dollar.

Now obviously the use of these alternative currencies is currently
restricted to in-game property. Is there any reason that one of the
currencies with a relatively stable exchange rate could be used to
purchase real property? eBay has tons of auctions exchanging virtual
cash or virtual property for real cash, but I've never seen anyone pay
virtual (game) cash for real property.

At what point does the government come in and start taxing your in-game
income?

One complication would be game balancing. It's very hard to balance an
in-game economy, and (foolishly IMHO given the huge budgets) none of the
developers ever hires an economist to do so. Often simple adjustments to
the game can have dramatic consequences to the games economy. Bugs as
well can be introduced and exploited to give exploitative players huge
cash supplies, which devalues the rest of the currency.

There have been several legal actions in the U.S. about this but I can
not find any information on their outcomes at this time. 

More information can be found at http://www.nyls.edu/pages/1905.asp.

Acy

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Lorrey [mailto:mlorrey at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Saturday, 27 December, 2003 12:04
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] REALITY: virtual and intellectual property
rightsand values


Well, the article does say that gamers do sell virtual assets for real
money on ebay. Such a public market mechanism should very easily
establish commodity pricing of such virtual goods, and thus act as a
benchmark of tangible value.

--- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> Might this not  have a kickback into the real world's intellectual
> property laws and valuations.  Proper valuations of non-physical
> property are off balance sheet and hard to prove value for in
> disputes
> over ownership?
> 
> "Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
> 
> > I'm totally clueless about such things since I do not
> > play online games and don't own such things as a
> > Playstation or a Gameboy...  (Q.E.D. [1] I'll probably
> > be left behind when the singularity arrives).
> >
> > But I found it interesting that even a Chinese court
> > has determined that virtual holdings are subject
> > to compensation in the case of a wrongful theft
> > of said virtual property...
> >
> > Gamer wins back virtual booty in court battle
> > New Scientist 23 Dec. 2003
> > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994510
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > 1. http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.
> >

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 30 18:09:42 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:09:42 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
References: <20031230165025.48500.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
	<012201c3cefb$57eed950$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <014101c3cf00$19801580$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Olga Bourlin" <fauxever at sprynet.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs


> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>
> > I don't think something as minor as a Farmer's Almanac is what they are
> > talking about. It seemed to me that they were talking about those 1000
> > page plus reference alamanacs you can buy that have data about tons of
> > things covering the whole country to a far greter degree than the
> > average road atlas.
>
> > While I can understand the leftist need to ridicule this measure by
> > decribing it as 'farmers almanac' ...
>
> You understand the leftist need ...? to ridicule ...?  Hmmmm, do you
suppose
> the right ever ridicules the left? (if not, then please point out how it
> does not).  While you may correct that the almanac to which the article
> refers may not be the ubiquitous Farmers, it doesn't make that entirely
> clear (and the article does invoke a quote from the publisher of the
> aforesaid ...).
>
> BTW, at first I thought this was a joke, but now I'm not so certain (do
you
> think this is serious?):
> http://www.thbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6230
>
> >The left often displays a rather high degree of hubristic
> > arrogance that it is so smart that anybody they don't like must be
> > stupid.
>
> ... somewhat like the rather high degree of hubristic arrogance displayed
by
> the right?
>
> > That is, however, the nature of leftism, the concept that
> > people are too dumb for their own good and need to be told how to spend
> > their money.
>
> ... and what is the *nature* of rightism?  (perhaps, thinking that the
> leftists have a "need to ridicule" ...?)
>
> >Suggest you consider that intelligence people may have
> > much better information sources than you do.
>
> I have a great deal of respect for intelligence people (as long as they're
> rational and intelligent).  I worry about the likes of Ashcroft, and stuff
> like:  "Condi Rice is as comfortable speaking publicly about her faith in
> God as she is about strategic arms reduction and routing out terrorism."
> found in: http://www.christianitytoday.com/cr/2002/005/1.18.html
>
> If the fate of the world rests with people who have conversations with
> god(s), all is lost ...


Now that is a characteristic of the Right - not only talking to God but
getting God-given answers.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 30 18:16:02 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:16:02 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
References: <20031230165025.48500.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <014901c3cf00$fbeb0920$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 4:50 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs


> I do recall that the books that bin Laden & company developed to train
> their people did in fact mention referencing almanacs. If a number of
> al quaeda seized here in the US have been found with them in their
> posession, then this is in fact a good tip to discern possible suspects
> in the future. Suggest you consider that intelligence people may have
> much better information sources than you do.


And another giveaway is that 100% of the terrorists so far identified have
been in possession of swarthy Middle Eastern complexions, often with black
beards.

[Got that direct from the CIA]

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 30 18:32:31 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:32:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <018801c3ceec$cc22eaf0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <004801c3cf03$4c246150$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

John K Clark wrote,
> It's puzzling, in most of the spam I've gotten recently they 
> don't appear to be selling anything. The subject line may say 
> something about sexual aids or low interest rates but the 
> body contains nothing but what looks like random verbiage 
> from some old encyclopedia or novel. I can understand putting 
> in a little of that to get around the filters but that's all 
> there is, on this stuff there is no way they can make any 
> money off me even if I was the most gullible man on the 
> planet because there is no product they are selling and no 
> way for me to send them money. It must take time and effort 
> to send those messages, why do they bother? I guess the new 
> point in spam is not to make money but just to send spam.

These are trolling for valid addresses.  They can collect all the bounced
messages and prune their list to active addresses.  They also are testing
various methods and channels to verify that they work before they send the
actual spam.  They also want to verify the anonymity features before putting
their actual product into them.

You will see a spate of these just before any holiday or date when people
are planning to send a lot of spam.  You will also see a bunch of these
whenever a new version of a spam engine is released, as thousands of
spammers start testing the new software.  All of these spams look similar,
because they are all being generated by the same software.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 30 18:45:34 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:45:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <3FF14F8B.7030502@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <004a01c3cf05$1f30bde0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

BillK wrote,
> Here is a good article which claims that the IT industry is 
> finally beginning to give up on Microsoft and start the move 
> to open software. There may well be an element of wishful 
> thinking here but the points made in the article are sound 
> (i.e. cost, reliability, continual patching, licensing, 
> security, virus attacks, etc.). But there is a vast inertia 
> of MS lock-in which has to be overcome before it will have 
> much effect.
> 
<http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=13350>

A lot of people and companies have literally given up on Microsoft.  Most
security people don't even try to claim that Microsoft products can be made
secure.  Many corporations have so many thousands of PC's, that it is a
major disaster every time Microsoft releases an automatic update that breaks
something.  All of a sudden across their enterprise, thousands of machines
break.  Since most large corporations have good security and firewalls to
keep hackers out, almost all of their problems are literally caused by
Microsoft itself.  When they used to receive daily updates from Microsoft,
they had whole teams just responding to whatever Microsoft broke.  Now that
Microsoft is bundling all these patches into monthly releases, many
companies are literally having tiger teams standing by on the day of the
Microsoft release.  These companies literally see Microsoft causing 99% of
their disasters and see hacker problems only a few times a year.

The other problem is compatibility and consistency.  Corporations
standardized on Microsoft to have a single product line to support.  This
did not turn out to work, because Windows 95 fragmented into Windows 98,
Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP and now Windows 2003.
Support groups have to support a half dozen operating systems, each with
their own particular foibles and problems.  They never got the monolithic
pervasive desktop that they dreamed about.  For large corporations,
migrating thousands of critical PCs from one OS to another can take years.
They aren't finished migrating the last of their systems to the new OS
before the next new OS comes out.  Microsoft has clearly decided that
inventing a new OS every couple of years is their preferred strategy over
maintaining the existing one long-term.  This is not what companies wanted.

Unix and Linux now look like long-term, stable operating systems compared to
Microsoft.  They look more consistent and uniform across the board compared
to various Microsoft OSes.  The "old" Unix now looks mature while
Microsoft's stuff is seen as the new, experimental
not-quite-yet-ready-for-prime-time box.

This is quite a shift in mentality among managers.  I believe it is actually
occurring, because this has been well known among the technical geeks for
years.  So this trend represents the knowledge bubbling up from the trenches
to management, and not some new fad that will disappear.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 

 




From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec 30 19:17:35 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:17:35 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312300928460.17166-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <000001c3cf09$9517dc10$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Robert J. Bradbury
> 
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Major wrote:
> 
> > Many of them are using the multipart/alternate MIME type...
> 
> Major is correct about the crap -- it began when Bayesian 
> filters started becoming popular.
> 
> I suspect that one could catch this with grammer filters but then they
> would just start taking paragraphs out of public News/BBS posts or
> some other similar source of human authored text...  Robert


Currently there is an arms race between spammers and
spam filters.  Clearly, both are getting far more
sophisticated, very quickly.  Robert's comment brings 
up an interesting speculation: perhaps we will soon
reach the point where even human level intelligence
will have difficulty distinguishing spam from non-spam.

Anyone who has ever purchased pharmaceuticals, penis 
enhancements or actually anything from any spammer
would be an example of a human level intelligence that
has failed to distinguish the two.  My coworker who
was bilked of 3300 bucks last month is an example of
a brilliant PhD human intelligence, along with at least
two bank employees, which failed the test.

Before we laugh this off, consider the example of my
teenage neices: they are not allowed by their parents 
to use the internet, because very their best efforts have
consistently failed to stop the porno-spam.  

Recall a Jeremiad which I posted about a year ago: 
if spammers get sufficiently sophisticated, our much-loved 
internet becomes useless, buried beneath a deep pile of 
garbage forever.  

spike




From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Dec 30 19:27:01 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:27:01 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <200312291234.hBTCYjc22593@igor.synonet.com>
References: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk>
	<200312291234.hBTCYjc22593@igor.synonet.com>
Message-ID: <20031230112701.1157d752.samantha@objectent.com>

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 20:34:45 +0800
Major <extropy at audry2.com> wrote:

> 
> Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> 
> > As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore Windows.
> 
> Windows is dominant in the market because windows is dominant in the
> market. Ho hum.

Well, since the lion share of development I see contractors hired for is in Java and Java is platform independent, I think wanting to be employed is not a reason for caring a lot about Windows per se.

-s


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 30 19:31:10 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:31:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <20031230165025.48500.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031230193110.9750.qmail@web80405.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I don't think something as minor as a Farmer's
> Almanac is what they are
> talking about. It seemed to me that they were
> talking about those 1000
> page plus reference alamanacs you can buy that have
> data about tons of
> things covering the whole country to a far greter
> degree than the
> average road atlas.

It's the same problem.  The damage the FBI does to our
economy and our nation by placing an aura of fear
around such things, thus in effect restricting their
legitimate commercial uses, far outweighs the likely
possible terrorist damage over the current expected
lifetime of anyone involved.  (Not accounting for the
Singularity or other causes of increased longevity.)
But the FBI doesn't have to pay more than lip service
to legitimate uses.  If it can help them brand
someone a terrorist, then it furthers their careers,
whether or not it actually keeps people safe.

> That is, however, the nature of leftism, the
> concept that
> people are too dumb for their own good and need to
> be told how to spend
> their money.

If that's leftism, then I'm not leftist, and yet I
oppose this particular action too.  I oppose it
primarily because it *is*, in effect, keeping people
in ignorance, and telling them how to spend their
money (or, in this case, how not to: don't spend on
almanacs, whether or not you might otherwise want to).

> I do recall that the books that bin Laden & company
> developed to train
> their people did in fact mention referencing
> almanacs. If a number of
> al quaeda seized here in the US have been found with
> them in their
> posession, then this is in fact a good tip to
> discern possible suspects
> in the future.

The number of almanac users far outstrips the number
of al Quaeda operatives.  The anti-terrorist officials
have demonstrated a lack of appreciation of this type
of thing before, for instance when they suggested that
all Middle Eastern males in a certain age range be
harrassed by the INS, by being made to register with
the (to the public) apparently arbitrary risk of
indefinite arrest without charges.  The courts, upon
investigating, excoriated these arrests for lack of
any evidence of actual wrongdoing, or any reason for
the arrest at all besides happening to fit a certain
profile.

They've been demonstrating a certain consistent
logical fallacy, which causes great harm to the public
when put into action without actually increasing
security.  This alert shows all the same signs.

> Suggest you consider that
> intelligence people may have
> much better information sources than you do.

And they may be making things up to please the
administration, as they have been previously shown to
do.  We can only judge on the evidence we are aware
of; it does not help that, in the few cases they
claim "national security" but that claim is breached,
there usually turns out to have been weak or no
actual justification in the first place.  (How far
things have changed from times of old, when such
breaches, when they happened, usually turned up actual
substance - or so I hear.)

It's the same issue as with scientific claims: they
need to be backed up with evidence, and in practice,
those who hide their "evidence" often turn out to have
done so because they have no evidence.


From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Dec 30 19:28:17 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:28:17 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <20031229144610.7941.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk>
	<20031229144610.7941.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031230112817.57eab195.samantha@objectent.com>

Can you reduce morality and the question of what should we strive for to simply making more money to supposedly buy the uploading that will be developed on <blank out> by <blank out>?

-s

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 06:46:09 -0800 (PST)
Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> --- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:
> > Brian Alexander Lee wrote:
> > 
> > > As a developer for hire, it's foolish to ignore Windows.
> > 
> > As someone who hopes to upload it is foolish to trust Windows.
> 
> And which of these issues is going to impact your future ability to
> upload more: whether you make any money now, or whether Windows
> continues to exist in 30 years?
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
>                                        - Gen. John Stark
> "Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
>                                        - Mike Lorrey
> Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
> Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec 30 19:38:07 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:38:07 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <004801c3cf03$4c246150$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000001c3cf0c$73d9b2f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Harvey Newstrom
> 
> ...You will also see a bunch of these
> whenever a new version of a spam engine is released, as thousands of
> spammers start testing the new software... Harvey Newstrom...

Spam engines.  Oh, evolution help us.  Next it will be
spam guns, then spam bazookas, and inevitably, spam
nukes.  We can be confident such things are coming,
for there are plenty of people who would be delighted
to see the internet come crashing down.  How many of you
did most or all of your holiday shopping on the internet?
I did.  The on-line stores are eating the lunch of the 
local merchants, who must pay ruinous sales tax to the
state.  The internet's biggest threat is not spammers 
trying to sell things, but spammers trying to get the
proletariat off-line and back into the tax-generating
local stores, churches, sporting events, commercial 
television, facing Mecca, etc.

Here's one to watch for: one day you get a spam which
shows a shocking image of child pornography or abuse,
which pops up without your doing anything.  Then a
message comes up a little later which claims to be from
a government agency of some sort, saying that it has
detected an illegal downloaded image of child pornography
on the hard disk, making the owner of that computer 
punishable by 10 yrs in the slammer, etc.

It would not surprise me if as many as 10% of the proles
were to fall for that trick, toss the whole infernal device
into the trash.  Actually Im surprised something like that 
hasn't already happened.

spike



From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Dec 30 19:37:26 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:37:26 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <012101c3ce7b$60c3cd90$6400a8c0@brainiac>
References: <012101c3ce7b$60c3cd90$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20031230113726.0829cfd9.samantha@objectent.com>

The FBI and much of the supposed anti-terrorism machinery of the US has lost touch with reality.  I am waiting for:

"FBI requests tracking of all individuals with IQ above 140 as possible terrorism masterminds."

What is next?  Limiting and downgrading all information sources to "combat terrorism"?   It would be better imho to increase the amount of knowledge including giving better means for self-defense and understanding one's true risk to everyone.  This terror mongering is a "the-sky-is-falling" mentaility at best and a cyncical political tool at worse.  

- s

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 18:19:39 -0800
"Olga Bourlin" <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:

> I kid you not ...
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/36ye8
> 
> FBI urges police to watch for people carrying almanacs
> TED BRIDIS, Associated Press Writer
> Monday, December 29, 2003
> ?2003 Associated Press
> (12-29) 16:18 PST WASHINGTON (AP) -- 
> 
> The FBI is warning police nationwide to be alert for people carrying
> almanacs, cautioning that the popular reference books covering everything
> from abbreviations to weather trends could be used for terrorist planning.
> 
> In a bulletin sent Christmas Eve to about 18,000 police organizations, the
> FBI said terrorists may use almanacs "to assist with target selection and
> pre-operational planning."
> 
> It urged officers to watch during searches, traffic stops and other
> investigations for anyone carrying almanacs, especially if the books are
> annotated in suspicious ways.
> 
> "The practice of researching potential targets is consistent with known
> methods of al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations that seek to maximize
> the likelihood of operational success through careful planning," the FBI
> wrote.
> 
> The Associated Press obtained a copy of the bulletin this week and verified
> its authenticity.
> 
> "For local law enforcement, it's just to help give them one more piece of
> information to raise their suspicions," said David Heyman, a terrorism
> expert for the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International
> Studies. "It helps make sure one more bad guy doesn't get away from a
> traffic stop, maybe gives police a little bit more reason to follow up on
> this."
> 
> The FBI noted that use of almanacs or maps may be innocent, "the product of
> legitimate recreational or commercial activities." But it warned that when
> combined with suspicious behavior -- such as apparent surveillance -- a
> person with an almanac "may point to possible terrorist planning."
> 
> "I don't think anyone would consider us a harmful entity," said Kevin
> Seabrooke, senior editor of The World Almanac. He said the reference book
> includes about a dozen pages out of its 1,000 pages total listing the
> world's tallest buildings and bridges but includes no diagrams or
> architectural schematics. "It's stuff that's widely available on the
> Internet," he said.
> 
> The publisher for The Old Farmers Almanac said Monday terrorists would
> probably find statistical reference books more useful than the collections
> of Americana in his famous publication of weather predictions and
> witticisms.
> 
> "While we doubt that our editorial content would be of particular interest
> to people who would wish to do us harm, we will certainly cooperate to the
> fullest with national authorities at any level they deem appropriate,"
> publisher John Pierce said.
> 
> The FBI said information typically found in almanacs that could be useful
> for terrorists includes profiles of cities and states and information about
> waterways, bridges, dams, reservoirs, tunnels, buildings and landmarks. It
> said this information is often accompanied by photographs and maps.
> 
> The FBI urged police to report such discoveries to the local U.S. Joint
> Terrorism Task Force.
> 
> ?2003 Associated Press
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Dec 30 19:39:18 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:39:18 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292201440.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <012101c3ce7b$60c3cd90$6400a8c0@brainiac>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292201440.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031230113918.7a8e277c.samantha@objectent.com>

So, Robert, you believe that playing ostrich is the best guarantee of safety?  Let no one know anything without a (supposedly governmental) need to know?  What becomes of our extropian dreams then?

-s


On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:19:52 -0800 (PST)
"Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2003, Olga Bourlin wrote:
> 
> > In a bulletin sent Christmas Eve to about 18,000 police organizations, the
> > FBI said terrorists may use almanacs "to assist with target selection and
> > pre-operational planning."
> 
> Its not so unreasonable Olga.  I'd like to think I'd be reasonably dangerous
> if I chose to take up terrorism as a profession.  (Not quite Mike's level
> obviously but probably someone to be taken reasonably seriously.)  I just
> checked my bookcase and I've got 3 Almanac's in it.  Largely dated before
> Google became available -- but still very information dense.  I could go
> through them and come up with a number of examples of useful information
> for terrorists but I would prefer not to publish such data.
> 
> I'm always *amazed* at the degree to which there is public discussion
> of great targets for terrorists.  Last week it was LPG tankers with
> planes loaded with radioactive waste, this week it is citing chlorine
> storage facilities as good targets.
> 
> Robert
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 30 19:42:51 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:42:51 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
References: <3FF00943.4070300@mail.tele.dk><20031229144610.7941.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20031230112817.57eab195.samantha@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <017f01c3cf0d$1d245270$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Samantha Atkins" <samantha at objectent.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?


> Can you reduce morality and the question of what should we strive for to
simply making more money to supposedly buy the uploading that will be
developed on <blank out> by <blank out>?


Or simply reduce morality to game theory.
Nice and objective eh?

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From scerir at libero.it  Tue Dec 30 19:59:36 2003
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:59:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com><015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com><015c01c3ceea$1d1e4ce0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
	<007a01c3ceee$42bb3810$d2256bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <001901c3cf0f$743734e0$cbb71b97@administxl09yj>

> As it stands the [MWI] interpretation can only be verified
> subjectively, and only if true.
> Dirk

There are several different "interpretations", or "models",
or "theories", not just one QM. And they are not equivalent,
in physical terms, i.e., the energy conservation law in MWI
is a statistical law; i.e., the von Neumann density operator
depends on the specific subjects performing measurements
on the same system (the "whose knowledge?" issue); etc.

There are measures, probabilities, entropies, informations,
effects dependent on the specific "interpretation" you choose:
Physical collapse interpretation, Copenhagen interpretation,
decoherence and environment interpretation, conditional density
matrices, two-state time symmetrical quantum formalism, instantaneous
non-local influences, superluminal influences, Eberhard's superluminal
"realistic" influences, retro-causality models, modal interpretations,
consistent histories, consciousness, non-local hidden variables,
witnessing interpretations, superselection rules, modified or
non-linear dynamics, statistical interpretation of (proper and
improper) mixtures, Einstein's statistical interpretations, GWR theory,
Brownian quantum theory, Ne'eman's geometric interpretation,
Finkelstein's physics of logic interpretation, Bell's iper-deterministic
interpretation, Bohmian mechanics, Barut's mechanics, MWI, Hugh Everett,
many minds, Pitowsky's reformulation of a local hidden variable theory
based on the Banach-Tarski theorem, quantum diffusion theory,
Ithaca interpretation, informational interpretation(s), etc. etc.).

One of the reasons is that QM (complete or not, in the sense of EPR)
in general (excepting perhaps MWI) is assumed not to be a "closed"
theory, even if it pretends to be universally valid.
As Bohr stated, since the very beginning of QM, the "observer",
measuring a quantum system by means of an "apparatus", remains out,
it is not described by QM. This is the von Neumann "cut", this is
one of the mysteries, this is the source of (many of) the above
"interpretations", or "theories". Although QM would describe
anything, it cannot include everything, and it must introduce
a "cut", an "interface", somewhere, from which the probability
rules can be derived. As you have maybe already realized there are,
perhaps, also Goedelian issues in QM, because the theory is not
closed, it is not self-supporting. These issues are many, i.e.
the subject-object separability is unclear (Albert-Peres self-
measurements, Finkelstein's 'introspective' systems); i.e., it is 
well known the fact that linear combinations of "elements of reality", 
as defined by EPR, may not be themselves "elements of reality", 
thus also the mathematical framework of QM (but not the experimental) 
seems to be "fuzzy". About all that, and many more, see, in example, 
T.Breuer at http://www.staff.fh-vorarlberg.ac.at/tb/tbpublisteengl.html

But, on the experimental side, a lot of work has been done, and now
the situation is much different from that described by Bohr
(a realist, but "sui generis"), and von Neumann (the "cut"), and
London and Bauer and Wigner and the young Heisenberg (the
"consciousness"), and Pauli (the "occasio", or "creation").
Now quantum macro-objects are under direct "investigation",
and the Nobel laureate A. Leggett wrote this interesting paper
www.nobel.se/physics/symposia/ncs-2001-1/leggett.pdf
against the "macro-realism", as he calls it. We could say
that the observer and the apparatus are, thus, close to
become objects of performed physical experiments.

It is important to remember here the precise domain of validity
of Bell's theorem. Its proof requires the observed system to be
*deterministic*, while the observer is *not*. (As Bell himself
realized, if the observer too is deterministic, there is no problem
at all with QM, and local hidden variables, because everything
would be pre-determined, our free will be entangled with quantum
systems, by a totalitarian conspiratorially theory). Thus Bell's
theorem, requiring determinism and direct counterfactual reasoning
(if we would measure ... if instead we would measure ...) has a 
limited validity within a theory based on intrinsic randomness and
indeterminism.

As you maybe already realized, if you wish to disprove QM,
or one of its "interpretations", you have many different
narrow "avenues".

I do not agree with the usual song that if you want to disprove
MWI you must just disprove QM. That is a bit simplistic. Because,
in example, we can schrink the entire QM into a set of 5 or 6 axioms,
with are robust indeed.

Being MWI (or MWI + decoherence) a "realistic" theory, in the sense
of EPR (*), if you wish to disprove this theory you could start
from a precise criterion (still to be invented, to my knowledge) 
to distinguish, by performing experiments, a coherent superposition 
of states, from a (proper or improper) mixture of states. 

Algorithmic information theory could provide some insight here. 
And also some new development of the theory of entanglements. 
(For mixed states, it is harder to establish a good measure of 
entanglement, since such a measure has to distinguish between 
entropy arising from classical correlations in the state, and 
entropy due to purely quantum correlations. Two measures of entanglement 
that have explicit physical meaning in the processing of quantum 
information have emerged, the entanglement cost of a quantum state and 
the distillable entanglement of a quantum state).

s.

(*) ""if, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict
with certainty (i.e. with probability equal to unity) the
value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element
of physical reality corresponding to this physical quantity."
>From the specific point of view of MWI, the statement above
is perfectly right, true, valid, consistent. (From the MWI
pov EPR were a bit incorrect, regarding the specific observables
whose values can be predicted).





From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 30 19:49:15 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:49:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <000001c3cf0c$73d9b2f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20031230194915.65995.qmail@web80411.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Here's one to watch for: one day you get a spam
> which
> shows a shocking image of child pornography or
> abuse,
> which pops up without your doing anything.  Then a
> message comes up a little later which claims to be
> from
> a government agency of some sort, saying that it has
> detected an illegal downloaded image of child
> pornography
> on the hard disk, making the owner of that computer 
> punishable by 10 yrs in the slammer, etc.
> 
> It would not surprise me if as many as 10% of the
> proles
> were to fall for that trick, toss the whole infernal
> device
> into the trash.  Actually Im surprised something
> like that 
> hasn't already happened.

Bring it on.  Most of those who would fall for it are
probably those who also fall for spam commerce; with
them off the 'Net, spammers would lose most of their
external revenue, and thus probably eventually start
shutting down when they can not afford to go on (no
matter if they're still deluded about the profit
potential).  Careful crafting of the message could
make non-American suckers believe that the US is
trying to assert its law over everyone in the world in
this matter, and thus that they personally have
something to fear.  Between the diplomatic fallout
from this, and protest from the clued-in fraction of
American Netizens, the US government would likely
suddenly take the lead in being *very* spam-hostile.


From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Dec 30 19:49:58 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:49:58 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
In-Reply-To: <Law9-F75zRPVirF1AMP0004a7b7@hotmail.com>
References: <Law9-F75zRPVirF1AMP0004a7b7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20031230114958.7d3e862a.samantha@objectent.com>

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 10:17:55 -0500
"Brian Lee" <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> >From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
> >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
> >Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 10:21:00 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >As someone who uses a computer at all, it is foolish
> >to trust Windows.  (I don't need to trust the game
> >computer on my desktop, but I do need to trust the
> >Linux system running my Web server.)  But "trust" is
> >not the same as "ignore"...
> 
> Note that you can still "trust" windows systems, but they must be designed 
> differently than *nix systems. A farm of 6 windows servers can still still 
> provide 5 nines as a system the same as a Linux server can (although you'd 
> want a farm of linux boxen as well). Windows, while not optimal, is 
> acceptable for server applications.
> 
> Except MS makes it difficult, costly  and severely constrains the architecture to build such a farm to start with.  N windows machines are not that much more difficult to crack with known security exploits than 1.  

- samantha


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 19:57:48 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:57:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <20031230113918.7a8e277c.samantha@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301146500.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> So, Robert, you believe that playing ostrich is the best guarantee of
> safety?  Let no one know anything without a (supposedly governmental)
> need to know?  What becomes of our extropian dreams then?

No -- let us not be ostrichs.  But each of us have different hazard
profiles (remember how I'm always going on about hazard functions...).
In my particular case I've flown probably something like 600,000+ miles
over the last couple of decades.  I would guess that is significantly
higher than the average person.  So it would be wiser for me to take
that into account when looking at aggressive (some might say stupid)
policies by governments to capture terrorists.  One only has to look
at the recent assasination attempts in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and
the daily death count in Iraq to understand that these people mean
business.  We have had long discussions in the past about the cultural
clashes and what the best solutions might be.

Ignoring anything from terrorist threats to Mad Cow disease can
eliminate ones Extropian dream.  In both cases it may require
a little more government oversight or interference to fix the
problems and/or minimize the risks.  If you had asked me 3
years ago whether I would be in favor of more power to big
brother I would have looked at you like you were crazy (remember
I'm the person whose father almost threw him out of the house
for refusing to return his draft card in the mid-'70s).  If
you ask me now -- I still don't like many of the people in
power and I think the patriot act(s) are mostly very poor laws.
But if you ask me if we should have officials drawing attention
to Almanacs and requiring marshals on planes then I'm going
to have to think long and hard now about whether the risks
outweight the benefits.

I also found another couple of Almanacs in my book collection
so now I'm up to 5.  I'm clearly a dangerous person.  :-)

Robert




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 20:03:28 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:03:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <000001c3cf09$9517dc10$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301159450.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Spike wrote:

> > I suspect that one could catch this with grammer filters but then they
> > would just start taking paragraphs out of public News/BBS posts or
> > some other similar source of human authored text...  Robert

No sooner are the words out of my mouth -- checking my messages
from yesterday that got through my combination of spambouncer
(rule-based filtering) and spamprobe (Bayesian filtering) and
I find a message that has a text portion with ~100K of English
text discussing Darwin, Wallace, evolution, finches, etc.
and a HTML portion that contains the damn SPAM for debt
consolidation.  Interesting I had trained spamprobe to
treat it as SPAM and the keywords that show up as SPAM
indicators include things like "finches".

Frak!
Robert




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 30 20:06:17 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:06:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] REALITY: virtual and intellectual property
	rightsand values
In-Reply-To: <56BC65EB2F3963489057F7D978B5E7B740EBA0@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <20031230200617.60385.qmail@web80408.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Acy James Stapp <astapp at fizzfactorgames.com>
wrote:
> At what point does the government come in and start
> taxing your in-game
> income?

When it can be directly used to purchase significant
amounts of out-of-game property, which in this case
would be when it's converted to ("sold for", from
their
perspective) real world currency.  From their point of
view, you don't realize any actual income until that
point (literally: you "real"-ize it).


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Tue Dec 30 20:30:55 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:30:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: The human OS [was: when will computers improve?]
In-Reply-To: <03e101c3cebd$3ba02e40$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031230152914.02811ff8@mail.comcast.net>

At 09:11 PM 12/30/2003 +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:

>I wonder what sort of dis-illusioned entity, if not a self, will still be
>around to pronounce that a machine has passed the Turin test ?

The answer's shrouded.


-- David.




From jonkc at att.net  Tue Dec 30 20:42:09 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 15:42:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301159450.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <019701c3cf15$856a1290$deff4d0c@hal2001>

I think the entire protocol is going to have to change as spam is fast
making Email unusable. The best idea I've heard is if you want to send me a
message and you are not in my address book then I won't see it until your
machine factors a medium sized randomly generated number my machine gives
yours, a task that should take the average home PC about 10 seconds. This
will not hurt legitimate mass mailers such as the Extropian list as they
would be on my white list and not have to do it, nor will it much cramp the
style of somebody who sends 7 or 8 Emails a day, but if you want to send 7
or 8 million Emails a day it will be a significant burden and will cost you.
The cost per message need not be very high, the percentage of people who
actually buy their snake oil is so low even a tenth of a cent would make
spam uneconomical.

John K Clark     jonkc at att.net




From jonkc at att.net  Tue Dec 30 21:26:29 2003
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:26:29 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com><015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com><015c01c3ceea$1d1e4ce0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
	<007a01c3ceee$42bb3810$d2256bd5@artemis>
Message-ID: <028901c3cf1b$f85eb9d0$deff4d0c@hal2001>

"Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com> Wrote:

> As it stands the interpretation can only be verified subjectively, and
>only  if true.

In a  book called "The Ghost In The Atom" David Deutsch does give what
he considers a definitive test of the Many World Interpretation and
a Quantum Computer is part of it, but it must be intelligent.

In the Deutsch test a conscious quantum computer shoots electrons at a metal
plate that has 2 small slits in it. It does this one at a time. After
leaving the plate the electrons hit a photographic film, but do not look at
the photograph until later.  The quantum mind has detectors near each slit
so it knows which slit the various electrons went through. The quantum mind
now signs a document saying that it has observed each and every electron
and knows what slit each electron went through.  It is very important that
the document does not say which slit the electron went through, it only
says that they went through one slit only, and the mind has knowledge
of which one. Now the mind uses quantum erasure to completely destroy
his memory of the experiment. The only part remaining is the document.
Now develop the photographic plate and look at it. According to Deutsch
if you see interference bands then the many world interpretation is correct.
If you do not see interference bands then there are no worlds but this one
and the conventional interpretation is correct.

Deutsch thinks an experiment like this will actually be performed in the
first half of the next century. The reason it's so difficult to test is not
many world's fault, the reason is that the conventional view says that
conscious observers obey different laws of  physics, many worlds says they
do not, so to test who's right we need a mind that uses quantum properties.

In the Copenhagen interpretation when the results of a measurement enters
the consciousness of an observer the wave function collapses,
in effect all the universes except one disappear without a trace so you get
no interference. In the many worlds model all the other worlds will converge
back into one universe when the electrons hit the photographic film
but their influence will still be felt, you'll see indications that the
electron went through slot A only and indications that it went through
slot B only, and that's what causes interference. Time will tell who's
correct.

  John K Clark     jonkc at att.net





From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 30 21:36:39 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:36:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301146500.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031230213639.65654.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> But if you ask me if we should have officials
> drawing attention
> to Almanacs and requiring marshals on planes

How do these compare?  Requiring marshals on planes
does not itself imply it is okay to trample on
anyone's
rights just because of some factor that has a very
shaky, if any, correlation to terrorists.


From charlie at antipope.org  Tue Dec 30 21:41:07 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:41:07 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <000001c3cf09$9517dc10$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c3cf09$9517dc10$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <E04617C6-3B10-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 30 Dec 2003, at 19:17, Spike wrote:

> Recall a Jeremiad which I posted about a year ago:
> if spammers get sufficiently sophisticated, our much-loved
> internet becomes useless, buried beneath a deep pile of
> garbage forever.

I agree with your spirit, but I submit that there are signs that the 
problem is close to peaking.

Open mail relay hosts are becoming fewer, and tools like the open relay 
blackhole database enables network admins to blackhole their traffic. 
Spammers are forced to become more ingenious to sneak around Bayesian 
filters and collaborative spam filtering tools like Vipul's Razor. Some 
spammers turn to worms, using them to take over zombie hosts and use 
them to relay spam (e.g. Sobig-F). And so on.

Now, the reason spamming worked in the first place is because it's 
*cheap*. It displaces the cost of advertising from the producer onto 
the recipient.

However, there are different types of cost; the cost of bandwidth and 
the cost of human ingenuity required to get around sophisticated 
filters, for example. The increased emphasis on spam filtering is (I 
hope!) pricing the small fry out of the market; they can't simply go 
hunting relay hosts, they've got to actually get ingenious, pay 
programmers, develop sophisticated spamming software, and all of that 
costs money.

Moreover, if they get too ingenious they will get whacked, hard, by the 
police authorities. For example, take the use of worms to install open 
relays. That's flat out illegal, under existing anti-cracking 
legislation. Spammers who write viruses are courting lengthy jail 
sentences.

Then there's the issue of the products being advertised by spam. As the 
costs go up, so it loses attractiveness to low-value commodity items. 
But firms with a reputation to protect won't deal with the criminal 
spammers (see virus-writers, above). So we'll gradually see a 
preponderance of illegal pharmaceutical, porn, and loan sharks similar 
stuff replace the more ordinary merchandise. Which means in turn that 
law enforcement has a stronger motive to go after spammers and more 
public support for doing so.

Another example: all those V1A.GRA ads are, technically, a violation of 
the Medicines Act (1968) in the UK, and carry a potential prison 
sentence -- it's illegal to sell prescription pharmaceuticals in the UK 
without a prescription and from premises which aren't inspected by the 
Royal Pharmaceutical Society and/or CSM Medicines Division. So far the 
drugs ads haven't hit the regulatory authority in the UK -- they're 
mostly ads for cheap parallel imports into the US, they're not 
geographically targeted on .uk -- but as spam becomes more of a 
problem, we can expect to see existing regulatory frameworks used to 
nail the companies who buy spam bandwidth at source.

Most spam these days is already sent by a few professional spamming 
companies. If their only clients are the mafia, if their only tools are 
seriously illegal cracking tools, and if they're unpopular enough to 
get legislators hot under the collar, then how long is it going to take 
before the FBI and similar organizations take them down for 
racketeering?



-- Charlie



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Dec 30 21:58:26 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:58:26 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <E04617C6-3B10-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3cf20$0da62040$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Charlie Stross
 
> On 30 Dec 2003, at 19:17, Spike wrote:
> 
> > Recall a Jeremiad which I posted about a year ago:
> > if spammers get sufficiently sophisticated, our much-loved
> > internet becomes useless, buried beneath a deep pile of
> > garbage forever.
> 
> I agree with your spirit, but I submit that there are signs that the 
> problem is close to peaking.
> 
> Open mail relay hosts are becoming fewer, and tools like the 
> open relay blackhole database enables network admins to blackhole
their traffic... -- Charlie

Charlie, your post was in answer to those spammers
whose motive is to sell things.  My concern is for
the growing army of spammers whose primary motive is 
to mess up the internet.  I have been seeing more 
and more clamor from the bricks and mortar retailing
community about how their sales are suffering from
tax-free internet competition.  This cacophonous 
tininnabulation is now being joined by the local 
governments issuing dire warnings to the proletariat 
that because of our shameless internet buying habits, 
they will soon be unable to supply sufficient law
enforcement, fire protection and (most alarmingly)
road repair.

spike



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Dec 30 21:59:49 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:59:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <20031230213639.65654.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301354160.23039-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> How do these compare?  Requiring marshals on planes
> does not itself imply it is okay to trample on
> anyone's rights just because of some factor that has a very
> shaky, if any, correlation to terrorists.

Its a double edged sword and one that could cause endless
debate that I'm not sure would be productive.  But a
couple of things seem true -- it isn't clear *whose*
laws in effect during international flights so it
isn't clear whose rights you have -- (originating
country, destination country, passport country,
international or UN rules???).  Second though I
think most passengers would be grateful to someone
taking aggressive action towards someone who is
perceived as dangerous -- there are significant
risks to the plane, flight crew and passengers
when firearms are involved.  We have all seen
various hijacking films (real or fictional) and
it isn't clear what the best strategies are.

The same is true for the Almanac checks -- but
I'd be happy to explain why I had an Almanac if
I thought it was going to stop even a single
terrorist act.

Robert




From charlie at antipope.org  Tue Dec 30 22:27:05 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:27:05 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <000001c3cf20$0da62040$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c3cf20$0da62040$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <4C4F2FC6-3B17-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 30 Dec 2003, at 21:58, Spike wrote:
> Charlie, your post was in answer to those spammers
> whose motive is to sell things.  My concern is for
> the growing army of spammers whose primary motive is
> to mess up the internet.  I have been seeing more
> and more clamor from the bricks and mortar retailing
> community about how their sales are suffering from
> tax-free internet competition.  This cacophonous
> tininnabulation is now being joined by the local
> governments issuing dire warnings to the proletariat
> that because of our shameless internet buying habits,
> they will soon be unable to supply sufficient law
> enforcement, fire protection and (most alarmingly)
> road repair.

That's a different problem entirely, although I'll grant you that it's 
a problem.

However, bricks'n'mortar retailing is only an effective political lobby 
in proportion to its ability to buy access to politicians' ears. (I was 
going to add, and insofar as they employ lots of people, but that's not 
much of a concern for most of today's politicians -- especially as 
retail/service jobs are not geographically localized or extensively 
unionized in the way that, say, manufacturing industry jobs are). The 
reason they're screaming about competition is that the competition from 
*real* internet businesses -- say, Amazon -- is now biting into their 
sales. And those internet businesses *also* have the money with which 
to buy access to legislators.

Sales taxes on goods sold over the net are in any case a non-issue. 
Here in the EU, goods sold over the internet *are* liable for VAT, and 
it's damn well collected. This doesn't seem to have stopped internet 
commerce taking off. If anything, the current situation in the USA (of 
ther being no sales tax on goods sold over the net) is a hidden subsidy 
to internet adoption, which is no longer justifiable as the net has 
already become sufficiently close to ubiquitous not to need that kind 
of thing.

Now, if you're saying that conventional retailers are paying spammers 
to mess up the net, I find that rather hard to believe. If so, it's 
almost certainly a serious crime, no?


-- Charlie



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Tue Dec 30 22:30:20 2003
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:30:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
Message-ID: <Law9-F34qix8KZTNKnP0000fc68@hotmail.com>

>From: Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com>g>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] when will computers improve?
>
>Except MS makes it difficult, costly  and severely constrains the 
>architecture to build such a farm to start with.  N windows machines are 
>not that much more difficult to crack with known security exploits than 1.
>
>- samantha

It is both easy and cheap to set up a windows farm (as is a linux farm) for 
a web application using MS web technologies. Any decent web application is 
going to have a firewall that blocks everything but 80 and 443 so all those 
windows security holes are irrelevant.

I'm not saying that windows is the best OS out there nor that every app 
should be built on .Net, but it is a viable architecture (as evidenced by 
the tons of sites and apps using it). It is fatiguing to hear people 
complain about windows all day while pecking out notes on their powerbook. 
Technology should not be a religion.

Give me a couple of linux boxes running java or a couple of 2k boxes running 
.Net and you'll get a reliable, secure application either way.

BAL

_________________________________________________________________
Make your home warm and cozy this winter with tips from MSN House & Home.  
http://special.msn.com/home/warmhome.armx



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 30 22:33:05 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:33:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Space book and role playing game
In-Reply-To: <MAELIJOHMBHKKJLFFKDGCEKACAAA.gpmap@runbox.com>
Message-ID: <20031230223305.73665.qmail@web80410.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <gpmap at runbox.com> wrote:
> Has anyone seen this? This type of material can be
> useful to spread
> transhumanist memes among teenagers.

Not just teenagers, although that would be a large
part of the market.  I've read the books myself (I
tend to collect these kinds of things as inspirations
for stories more than the game value itself), and it
is mostly what it claims to be.

The only significant difference stems from the impact
of long travel times: it does not now take a week to
get anywhere there are humans, but taking only a week
to get to Mars is a pretty decent clip in this
setting.  Imagine spending a week essentially taking a
cruise far from any humanity save what is on the ship
(and fast ships usually have few passengers), doing
whatever you came to do, then spending another week
coming back.  Telecommuting takes the edge off,
perhaps, but this is still in a society being changed
by technology at least as fast as we're experiencing
in 200X.  Space may be open, but it doesn't seem like
it would be as large a part of the day-to-day life of
most people as the setting description implies.

But aside from that, definitely.  How would you like
to be penpals with the super AI who runs Europe's
largest industrial port?  Or running a well-funded
startup with a good chance of finally implementing dry
molecular nanotechnology (what we might call
Drexlerian assemblers)?  Or maybe you'd prefer to work
on what to them is yesteryear's common technology: 3D
printers churning out any of a wide variety of
widgets, where the cheap licensing fees, wired direct
to the patent holders, are the only reason DRM
cracking is usually more bother than it's worth, yet
the sheer volume of transactions means many people can
retire after making just a few useful inventions.  Or
perhaps you'd prefer to design, or be, one of the
staggering variety of genetically engineered beings,
many of which qualify as "human"*.  Or maybe you'd
rather be one of those helping to solve the knotty
social problems that the existance of manufactured
people has introduced?  (No chance of just wishing
them away: they exist, they're people too, and they -
along with many "natural" humans - would like to bring
their brothers and sisters to life without being
hunted down for it.)  And then there are AIs and
robots, with their own degrees of sentience...some of
whom aren't just as good as human, but literally
_were_ human: uploads, many of whom were alive in
200X.  (One of the scenarios: play yourself, either
after surviving through the century thanks to better
medical technology, or having died, maybe
cryo-preserved, and then fairly recently uploaded.
Inhabiting a bioshell clone of your original body,
wired up to be controlled by the AI that just happens
to be you, is optional.)

* Yes, this includes catgirls.  (Catboys, too.)
Someone in the SJ team seems to want to make sure they
get mentioned as examples in all their high-biotech
universes.  Not that I can blame them.


From charlie at antipope.org  Tue Dec 30 22:33:21 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:33:21 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301354160.23039-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301354160.23039-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <2C2FD451-3B18-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 30 Dec 2003, at 21:59, Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

>> How do these compare?  Requiring marshals on planes
>> does not itself imply it is okay to trample on
>> anyone's rights just because of some factor that has a very
>> shaky, if any, correlation to terrorists.
>
> Its a double edged sword and one that could cause endless
> debate that I'm not sure would be productive.  But a
> couple of things seem true -- it isn't clear *whose*
> laws in effect during international flights so it
> isn't clear whose rights you have -- (originating
> country, destination country, passport country,
> international or UN rules???).  Second though I
> think most passengers would be grateful to someone
> taking aggressive action towards someone who is
> perceived as dangerous -- there are significant
> risks to the plane, flight crew and passengers
> when firearms are involved.

You bet. Which is why the latest news in the UK is that BALPA (the 
British Air Line Pilots' Association) is telling their members that 
they don't need to fly if they believe there's an armed stranger on 
their flight.

BALPA's objection isn't merely to security -- airline pilots are not in 
favour of hijackings! -- but they believe that sky marshalls will make 
flights *less* safe. For one thing, a single sky marshall against a 
group of hijackers may merely give them a free firearm. For another 
thing, sky marshalls may accidentally wound or kill non-hijackers, or 
damage the aircraft. They may be mistaken for hijackers by passengers 
and *cause* security incidents -- if you realised the passenger in the 
seat next to you had a concealed weapon, what would you do? And so on.

BALPA want attention focussed instead on heightening security checks 
before passengers board the aircraft, and point to the poor quality of 
many security staff as the biggest problem. Unfortunately it costs a 
*LOT* more to have well-paid, professional, highly-trained airport 
security staff than minimum wage drones plus one or two sky marshalls.



-- Charlie



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Dec 30 22:58:01 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:58:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301354160.23039-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031230225801.82494.qmail@web80401.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> The same is true for the Almanac checks -- but
> I'd be happy to explain why I had an Almanac if
> I thought it was going to stop even a single
> terrorist act.

That's the problem.  Many times, they don't (or are
perceived not to) ask.  "He's got an almanac!  He must
be a terrorist!  ARREST HIM!"

It's the kind of simple policy that can easily be
communicated.  Simple and wrong, perhaps, but that's
what it tends towards when the details are left off,
as they inevitably are.


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 30 23:02:20 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:02:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <000001c3cf0c$73d9b2f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <005e01c3cf29$0263ce90$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> Here's one to watch for: one day you get a spam which
> shows a shocking image of child pornography or abuse,
> which pops up without your doing anything.  Then a
> message comes up a little later which claims to be from
> a government agency of some sort, saying that it has
> detected an illegal downloaded image of child pornography
> on the hard disk, making the owner of that computer 
> punishable by 10 yrs in the slammer, etc.
> 
> It would not surprise me if as many as 10% of the proles
> were to fall for that trick, toss the whole infernal device 
> into the trash.  Actually Im surprised something like that 
> hasn't already happened.

It has already happened.  There was a case this summer where a person was
arrested for distributing child pornography that was found on his hard
drive.  It turned out that it was installed by a worm without his knowledge
and distributed by spammers.  He had no knowledge of the incident.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 30 23:14:23 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:14:23 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com><015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com><015c01c3ceea$1d1e4ce0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
	<007a01c3ceee$42bb3810$d2256bd5@artemis>
	<001901c3cf0f$743734e0$cbb71b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <028a01c3cf2a$a9cdaab0$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "scerir" <scerir at libero.it>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett


> > As it stands the [MWI] interpretation can only be verified
> > subjectively, and only if true.
> > Dirk
>
> There are several different "interpretations", or "models",
> or "theories", not just one QM. And they are not equivalent,
> in physical terms, i.e., the energy conservation law in MWI
> is a statistical law; i.e., the von Neumann density operator
> depends on the specific subjects performing measurements
> on the same system (the "whose knowledge?" issue); etc.

The point is though, that there are no (currently) testable QM theories that
both make different predictions from standard QM and are not already
falsified by experiment.

> There are measures, probabilities, entropies, informations,
> effects dependent on the specific "interpretation" you choose:

None of which are distinguishable experimentally.

> Physical collapse interpretation, Copenhagen interpretation,
> decoherence and environment interpretation, conditional density
> matrices, two-state time symmetrical quantum formalism, instantaneous
> non-local influences, superluminal influences, Eberhard's superluminal
> "realistic" influences, retro-causality models, modal interpretations,
> consistent histories, consciousness, non-local hidden variables,
> witnessing interpretations, superselection rules, modified or
> non-linear dynamics, statistical interpretation of (proper and
> improper) mixtures, Einstein's statistical interpretations, GWR theory,
> Brownian quantum theory, Ne'eman's geometric interpretation,
> Finkelstein's physics of logic interpretation, Bell's iper-deterministic
> interpretation, Bohmian mechanics, Barut's mechanics, MWI, Hugh Everett,
> many minds, Pitowsky's reformulation of a local hidden variable theory
> based on the Banach-Tarski theorem, quantum diffusion theory,
> Ithaca interpretation, informational interpretation(s), etc. etc.).
>
> One of the reasons is that QM (complete or not, in the sense of EPR)
> in general (excepting perhaps MWI) is assumed not to be a "closed"
> theory, even if it pretends to be universally valid.
> As Bohr stated, since the very beginning of QM, the "observer",
> measuring a quantum system by means of an "apparatus", remains out,
> it is not described by QM. This is the von Neumann "cut", this is
> one of the mysteries, this is the source of (many of) the above
> "interpretations", or "theories". Although QM would describe
> anything, it cannot include everything, and it must introduce
> a "cut", an "interface", somewhere, from which the probability
> rules can be derived. As you have maybe already realized there are,
> perhaps, also Goedelian issues in QM, because the theory is not
> closed, it is not self-supporting. These issues are many, i.e.
> the subject-object separability is unclear (Albert-Peres self-
> measurements, Finkelstein's 'introspective' systems); i.e., it is
> well known the fact that linear combinations of "elements of reality",
> as defined by EPR, may not be themselves "elements of reality",
> thus also the mathematical framework of QM (but not the experimental)
> seems to be "fuzzy". About all that, and many more, see, in example,
> T.Breuer at http://www.staff.fh-vorarlberg.ac.at/tb/tbpublisteengl.html

Well, I tend to agree that the measurement problem lies at the heart of any
interpretation, but again, there are no experiments which have thrown
existing formalism into doubt.

> But, on the experimental side, a lot of work has been done, and now
> the situation is much different from that described by Bohr
> (a realist, but "sui generis"), and von Neumann (the "cut"), and
> London and Bauer and Wigner and the young Heisenberg (the
> "consciousness"), and Pauli (the "occasio", or "creation").
> Now quantum macro-objects are under direct "investigation",
> and the Nobel laureate A. Leggett wrote this interesting paper
> www.nobel.se/physics/symposia/ncs-2001-1/leggett.pdf
> against the "macro-realism", as he calls it. We could say
> that the observer and the apparatus are, thus, close to
> become objects of performed physical experiments.

...but still no suprises.

> It is important to remember here the precise domain of validity
> of Bell's theorem. Its proof requires the observed system to be
> *deterministic*, while the observer is *not*. (As Bell himself
> realized, if the observer too is deterministic, there is no problem
> at all with QM, and local hidden variables, because everything
> would be pre-determined, our free will be entangled with quantum
> systems, by a totalitarian conspiratorially theory). Thus Bell's
> theorem, requiring determinism and direct counterfactual reasoning
> (if we would measure ... if instead we would measure ...) has a
> limited validity within a theory based on intrinsic randomness and
> indeterminism.
>
> As you maybe already realized, if you wish to disprove QM,
> or one of its "interpretations", you have many different
> narrow "avenues".

None of which have led anywhere to date.

> I do not agree with the usual song that if you want to disprove
> MWI you must just disprove QM. That is a bit simplistic. Because,
> in example, we can schrink the entire QM into a set of 5 or 6 axioms,
> with are robust indeed.


OK.
Given the physical equivalence of the various interpretations does that mean
quantum suicide experiments will have the same outcome?

> Being MWI (or MWI + decoherence) a "realistic" theory, in the sense
> of EPR (*), if you wish to disprove this theory you could start
> from a precise criterion (still to be invented, to my knowledge)
> to distinguish, by performing experiments, a coherent superposition
> of states, from a (proper or improper) mixture of states.
>
> Algorithmic information theory could provide some insight here.
> And also some new development of the theory of entanglements.
> (For mixed states, it is harder to establish a good measure of
> entanglement, since such a measure has to distinguish between
> entropy arising from classical correlations in the state, and
> entropy due to purely quantum correlations. Two measures of entanglement
> that have explicit physical meaning in the processing of quantum
> information have emerged, the entanglement cost of a quantum state and
> the distillable entanglement of a quantum state).
>
> s.
>
> (*) ""if, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict
> with certainty (i.e. with probability equal to unity) the
> value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element
> of physical reality corresponding to this physical quantity."
> >From the specific point of view of MWI, the statement above
> is perfectly right, true, valid, consistent. (From the MWI
> pov EPR were a bit incorrect, regarding the specific observables
> whose values can be predicted).


Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org




From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Dec 30 23:18:37 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:18:37 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett 
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com><015f01c3cedc$01a9ad50$6501a8c0@int.veeco.com><015c01c3ceea$1d1e4ce0$e3fe4d0c@hal2001>
	<007a01c3ceee$42bb3810$d2256bd5@artemis>
	<028901c3cf1b$f85eb9d0$deff4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <029f01c3cf2b$4110a8a0$d2256bd5@artemis>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John K Clark" <jonkc at att.net>
To: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Many worlds and Hugh Everett


> "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com> Wrote:
>
> > As it stands the interpretation can only be verified subjectively, and
> >only  if true.
>
> In a  book called "The Ghost In The Atom" David Deutsch does give what
> he considers a definitive test of the Many World Interpretation and
> a Quantum Computer is part of it, but it must be intelligent.
>
> In the Deutsch test a conscious quantum computer shoots electrons at a
metal
> plate that has 2 small slits in it. It does this one at a time. After
> leaving the plate the electrons hit a photographic film, but do not look
at
> the photograph until later.  The quantum mind has detectors near each slit
> so it knows which slit the various electrons went through. The quantum
mind
> now signs a document saying that it has observed each and every electron
> and knows what slit each electron went through.  It is very important that
> the document does not say which slit the electron went through, it only
> says that they went through one slit only, and the mind has knowledge
> of which one. Now the mind uses quantum erasure to completely destroy
> his memory of the experiment. The only part remaining is the document.
> Now develop the photographic plate and look at it. According to Deutsch
> if you see interference bands then the many world interpretation is
correct.
> If you do not see interference bands then there are no worlds but this one
> and the conventional interpretation is correct.


I have the feeling that the mere existence of that document will screw the
expt.
Consider it a generalisation of the erased data.
Which highlights another 'grey area' of knowledge v data. It may be that
(somehow) QM can 'sense' data being converted to knowledge.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Dec 30 23:22:28 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:22:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301159450.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <005f01c3cf2b$ce1127c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote,
> No sooner are the words out of my mouth -- checking my 
> messages from yesterday that got through my combination of 
> spambouncer (rule-based filtering) and spamprobe (Bayesian 
> filtering) and I find a message that has a text portion with 
> ~100K of English text discussing Darwin, Wallace, evolution, 
> finches, etc. and a HTML portion that contains the damn SPAM 
> for debt consolidation.  Interesting I had trained spamprobe 
> to treat it as SPAM and the keywords that show up as SPAM 
> indicators include things like "finches".

A worse example is our former Pro-Act site at
<http://www.ProgressAction.com> which has been taken over by spammers.  They
replicated the previous content about Pro-Act with spam inserted throughout.
This is already a common technique.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Dec 30 23:52:31 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:52:31 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: The human OS [was: when will computers
	improve?]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20031230152914.02811ff8@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <059601c3cf2f$fd330e20$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

David Lubkin wrote:

> At 09:11 PM 12/30/2003 +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>
> >I wonder what sort of dis-illusioned entity, if not a self, will still be
> >around to pronounce that a machine has passed the Turin test ?
>
> The answer's shrouded.

Good point ;-)   TurinG  test.   From memory I think they carbon
dated the shroud and there are books around on how to make
your own.

Brett Paatsch






From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Dec 30 23:49:29 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:49:29 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
Message-ID: <3FF20F09.9060907@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Tue Dec 30, 2003 12:38 pm Spike wrote:
> Here's one to watch for: one day you get a spam which
> shows a shocking image of child pornography or abuse,
> which pops up without your doing anything. Then a
> message comes up a little later which claims to be from
> a government agency of some sort, saying that it has
> detected an illegal downloaded image of child pornography
> on the hard disk, making the owner of that computer
> punishable by 10 yrs in the slammer, etc.
>

Apparently similar blackmail type spams started about a year ago.

<http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=internetNews&storyID=4056938>

Cyber Blackmail Wave Targets Office Workers
Tue December 30, 2003 07:50 AM ET
By Bernhard Warner, European Internet Correspondent

LONDON (Reuters) - Cyber blackmail artists are shaking down office
workers, threatening to delete computer files or install pornographic
images on their work PCs unless they pay a ransom, police and security
experts said.

Police say crime gangs have turned cyber extortion into a tidy business
of late.

A preferred tool is the crude, but effective denial-of-service attack on
a company's network, capable of crippling it with an overwhelming flood
of data.

There are scores of cases of companies -- particularly small and
medium-sized firms -- receiving extortion threats that demand the victim
transfer money to the fraudster's bank account or the attacks will grow
in severity, police said.

Fraudsters also send out streams of menacing e-mails with hollow threats
of cyber sabotage. The scam works even if only a handful of the
countless recipients follow through and pay up.

"It's getting simpler," said Hypponen. "If you wanted to extort money
from a small company you would have had to hack them and convince them
you have stolen their information. Here, you don't have to do anything
but send an e-mail around."

---------

The warning is - Not only don't reply to spam, but don't even read it or
they will start playing mind games with you.

BillK





From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec 31 00:16:39 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:16:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <005f01c3cf2b$ce1127c0$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <20031231001639.31732.qmail@web80403.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> A worse example is our former Pro-Act site at
> <http://www.ProgressAction.com> which has been taken
> over by spammers.  They
> replicated the previous content about Pro-Act with
> spam inserted throughout.
> This is already a common technique.

They're still saying it's about Pro-Act, and claims it
was announced at ExI's conferences - and seems to
imply
edorsement by ExI.  Can't you sue them for trademark
infringement?


From jcorb at iol.ie  Wed Dec 31 00:59:05 2003
From: jcorb at iol.ie (J Corbally)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:59:05 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20031231005851.030f6220@pop.iol.ie>


>Message: 11
>Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:38:07 -0800
> >From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Spam
>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <000001c3cf0c$73d9b2f0$6501a8c0 at SHELLY>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > Harvey Newstrom
> >
> > ...You will also see a bunch of these
> > whenever a new version of a spam engine is released, as thousands of
> > spammers start testing the new software... Harvey Newstrom...
>Spam engines. Oh, evolution help us. Next it will be
>spam guns, then spam bazookas, and inevitably, spam
>nukes. We can be confident such things are coming,
>for there are plenty of people who would be delighted
>to see the internet come crashing down. How many of you
>did most or all of your holiday shopping on the internet?
>I did. The on-line stores are eating the lunch of the
>local merchants, who must pay ruinous sales tax to the
>state. The internet's biggest threat is not spammers
>trying to sell things, but spammers trying to get the
>proletariat off-line and back into the tax-generating
>local stores, churches, sporting events, commercial
>television, facing Mecca, etc.

Can't say I shop much online.  The poor state of my credit card sees to that.

I'm sure if online stores start losing out, they'll form some kind of lobby 
to get the problem "fixed".  Who knows, maybe it IS the local merchants who 
are doing the spamming.

>Here's one to watch for: one day you get a spam which
>shows a shocking image of child pornography or abuse,
>which pops up without your doing anything. Then a
>message comes up a little later which claims to be from
>a government agency of some sort, saying that it has
>detected an illegal downloaded image of child pornography
>on the hard disk, making the owner of that computer
>punishable by 10 yrs in the slammer, etc.
>It would not surprise me if as many as 10% of the proles
>were to fall for that trick, toss the whole infernal device
>into the trash. Actually Im surprised something like that
>hasn't already happened.
>spike

Actually, I've seen a pun based on that idea.  It's a small Dos-based file 
that you send to the victim attached to an email.  When the unfortunate 
recipient gets it and runs it, the screen turns black, the speaker blares 
out a warning, and a message informs the user they have access illegal 
pornographic content, that IT and security have been notified and to stay 
at the machine.

Needless to say, the look of abject panic on the face of the jokee is 
priceless...



James...


>------------------------------




From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 31 01:21:33 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:21:33 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <005e01c3cf29$0263ce90$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <000001c3cf3c$6d60e580$6501a8c0@SHELLY>

> Spike wrote,
> > Here's one to watch for: one day you get a spam which
> > shows a shocking image of child pornography or abuse...
> > 
> > It would not surprise me if as many as 10% of the proles
> > were to fall for that trick, toss the whole infernal device 
> > into the trash...
> 
> It has already happened.  There was a case this summer where 
> a person was arrested for distributing child pornography that was
found on his hard
> drive.  It turned out that it was installed by a worm without 
> his knowledge and distributed by spammers.  He had no knowledge of the
incident. 
> -- 
> Harvey Newstrom,...

Ja, this is a related problem, but what I was looking
at is making the internet inaccessible to those who
fear having porno placed on their computers.  For instance,
I just returned from visiting with the relatives, extremely
conservative Seventh Day Adventists all.  Their big crisis:
they cannot get the porno off of their computer.  They kept
asking me how to get these ads off their computer.

The minister had told them how evil hackers can put cookies
on their computer in such a way that they cannot even 
detect or eliminate the vile things.  They may soon cut 
the cord forever.  For them, the internet has already
become functionally inaccessible.

spike



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Dec 31 01:40:33 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:40:33 +1100
Subject: [ok] Re: [extropy-chat] The human OS [was: when will
	computersimprove?]
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312292149480.4863-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<03e101c3cebd$3ba02e40$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>
	<00d701c3cec6$7fcf14b0$fe00a8c0@HEMM>
Message-ID: <063801c3cf3f$14b98e20$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Henrique Moraes Machado wrote:

> Well, what if suicide is just a bug in the OS? As far as I know, 
> there's no software without bugs.

Then it would be *just* a bug in the OS.  And some simple models
of the universe would not need to change at all. We understand
and can fix bugs so it would probably be a relief and a bonus.
Immortality would seem to be *relatively* easy - just port the
program to another substrate - *just* upload. 

Problem is, if it is not that easy, and we get seduced into seeing
the whole universe through a paradigm we just happen to
understand - not because its particularly useful, but because
we understand it, then we don't make real progress towards
the real goal.  

There are reasons that double blind tests are necessary in
drug trials for instance - its not that doctors are stupid or 
unscientific - its that doctors want patients to get better too
- and not all conditions are improvable with just positive thinking.
Conditions that are not psychosomatic need real remedies not 
just placebos and to find the real remedies its necessary to test
carefully and dispassionately making sure that our biases towards
the results that we naturally want don't lead us to false conclusions. 

If humans are just computers, just hardware running software and
we could just upload that would be great. But the word *just* 
implying its easy shouldn't get a look in here.  It definitely will not
be easy.

And if its possible we are no more justified in being certain that it
will be done soon or in a timeframe of interest to us (our lifetime)
than the best step by step plan we have personally seen and 
understood allows us to be. Its the step by step plan that makes 
the difference between reasoning and believing. 

Without that plan and without a personal understanding of it one
system of belief based on leaping over gaps in reasoning is pretty
much as impractical and arbitrary as the next. 

I think its useful to recognize a distinction between human drives
to find a belief system complex enough to make the believer feel
better (having hope even illusory hope can be more functional 
than the alternative for a time) and having a reasoned solution
complete enough to be implemented.

Regards,
Brett Paatsch











 









From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Dec 31 01:44:19 2003
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 17:44:19 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <4C4F2FC6-3B17-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <000001c3cf3f$9bd6a2d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Charlie Stross
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 2:27 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Spam
> 
> 
> 
> On 30 Dec 2003, at 21:58, Spike wrote:
> > ...I have been seeing more
> > and more clamor from the bricks and mortar retailing
> > community about how their sales are suffering from
> > tax-free internet competition...
> 
> 
> Sales taxes on goods sold over the net are in any case a non-issue. 
> Here in the EU, goods sold over the internet *are* liable for 
> VAT, and it's damn well collected...

Ja.  Here the sales tax is collected by the states,
not the fed, and each state has different sales tax
laws.  Some have no sales tax, so internet sales orgs
just set up shop there.  Technically Taxifornia
residents are supposed to send sales taxes to Taxamento
on all internet purchases.  The 30 million citizens
of this state sent them a total of something like a 
dollar 38 cents last year.  I don't even know how to 
pay that.  Who would I send it to?  Would they know 
what to do with a check?  Im tempted to get a bunch of 
guys to bury them in checks for 30, 70, 50 cents.  Tease
em a little.  {8^D

> 
> Now, if you're saying that conventional retailers are paying spammers 
> to mess up the net, I find that rather hard to believe. If so, it's 
> almost certainly a serious crime, no?
> 
> 
> -- Charlie

Not that I know of, perhaps so.  Seems to me that would
be perfectly legal First Amendment stuff.  

As a thought experiment, ignore the means and list those
who would have the motive to mess up the internet, or whose
lives may have been better off without it:

Bricks'n'mortar merchants

Anyone who sells primarily information, such as
	Ministers
	Publishers
	Real estate professionals
	Teachers (some of them)
	Stock and investment advisers (why pay for that which is free?)

Old time scammers (the internet exposes them)

Pedophiles (the internet tells where they live)

Anyone with a criminal record (makes it easy for anyone to find out)

Pornographers (no need to pay for that which is free in sufficient 
quantities that it could never be consumed if one were to do nothing
but gaze at porno 24-7-52)

Anyone who doesn't use the internet

Others?

There are plenty of people who would like to see
the internet slain, perhaps as many as half.

spike
	




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 31 02:59:16 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:59:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <000001c3cf3c$6d60e580$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <007401c3cf4a$17540e20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Spike wrote,
> Ja, this is a related problem, but what I was looking
> at is making the internet inaccessible to those who
> fear having porno placed on their computers.

That is becoming a real problem.

> For them, the internet has already
> become functionally inaccessible.

Regular spam can do this as well.  My mother literally gets over 1000 spams
per day.  She can't look through them all for real messages from people.  So
her e-mail is unusable.  She cannot find or respond to real messages sent to
her mailbox because of all the spam.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 





From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Dec 31 03:49:16 2003
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:49:16 +1100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
References: <000001c3cf3f$9bd6a2d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <066901c3cf51$10659820$2d242dcb@vic.bigpond.net.au>

Spike wrote:

> As a thought experiment, ignore the means and list those
> who would have the motive to mess up the internet, or whose
> lives may have been better off without it:
> 
> Bricks'n'mortar merchants
> 
> Anyone who sells primarily information, such as
> Ministers
> Publishers
> Real estate professionals
> Teachers (some of them)
> Stock and investment advisers (why pay for that which is free?)

> Others?

I've wondered about this too. What about government and major
media outlets which are the means by which most people decide
how to vote or perhaps even what to buy or ask their stock broker
about.

I'm pretty sure I read that there was an internet warfare section
that was active in the Iraq war. *If* the internet was a potent source
of non-manipulated media perhaps government (or agencies of it)
would want to act in accordance with the national interest (or 
rather how the national interest is perceived) by agencies - which
might in fact by the interests of the government of the day.

I don't know. I haven't checked in to this. But if psych warfare
and propaganda are worth anything (and historically they have
been) certain things like exploring the possibility of internet warfare
(taking out communications) not just of enemy combatants but
political adversaries if you can get away with it, seems to make
sense. Perhaps a lot of the crude stuff would be illegal (again I
haven't checked) but some of the technology of the net and
spamming may have jumped ahead of the law making a political
opportunity for a time. 

Regards.
Brett Paatsch




From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Wed Dec 31 04:13:13 2003
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:13:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
In-Reply-To: <007401c3cf4a$17540e20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
References: <007401c3cf4a$17540e20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0312302308410.-94039719@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>


I am using a spam filtering service and so far it is working
pretty well. Of course my email address is fairly new, so
perhaps the "big guys" haven't found me yet, but it might be
worthwhile for your mom to check into such a thing -
especially if she were to get a new email address. It didn't
cost much, my ISP offers it with my account.

http://www.postini.com/

I cannot imagine getting 1000 emails per day. I am swamped
with my 150 from 3 lists!

Regards,
MB


On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:


> Regular spam can do this as well.  My mother literally gets over 1000 spams
> per day.  She can't look through them all for real messages from people.  So
> her e-mail is unusable.  She cannot find or respond to real messages sent to
> her mailbox because of all the spam.
>
>


From megao at sasktel.net  Wed Dec 31 04:28:34 2003
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:28:34 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
References: <007401c3cf4a$17540e20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0312302308410.-94039719@pentium.mb.baumeister.us>
Message-ID: <3FF25072.96B45C3C@sasktel.net>

I have found hotmail to be a spam magnet and the less popular netscape to be much
cleaner.  Our ISP must be helping a bit... I just scrolled up  looked and in the
last couple of days I have hardly any spam, just a couple of  scammers.   I have
never had to resort to filters. 40-90 emails a day is plenty for me.  The single
biggest thing I do with the hotmail account is looking for any messages among all
the junk.
...MFJ

MB wrote:

> I am using a spam filtering service and so far it is working
> pretty well. Of course my email address is fairly new, so
> perhaps the "big guys" haven't found me yet, but it might be
> worthwhile for your mom to check into such a thing -
> especially if she were to get a new email address. It didn't
> cost much, my ISP offers it with my account.
>
> http://www.postini.com/
>
> I cannot imagine getting 1000 emails per day. I am swamped
> with my 150 from 3 lists!
>
> Regards,
> MB
>
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> > Regular spam can do this as well.  My mother literally gets over 1000 spams
> > per day.  She can't look through them all for real messages from people.  So
> > her e-mail is unusable.  She cannot find or respond to real messages sent to
> > her mailbox because of all the spam.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Wed Dec 31 06:57:15 2003
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:57:15 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK)[Risks} Pointless Security
Message-ID: <3FF2734B.360FD821@mindspring.com>

This was posted to the Risks email list.


I live in the UK and my parents live in the USA. Every year, at Christmas, 
I send them a parcel containing food items that are hard or impossible to 
get in the USA, or are prohibitively expensive there.  (Apologies if any of 
this takes on the attributes of a rant. I find it difficult to talk about 
this rationally.)

I find that as of 12th Dec 2004, any food items mailed to the US have to be 
pre-registered with the FDA.  From the Web site 
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/fsbtact.html:

"Nearly 20% of all imports into the U.S. are food and food products. In 
2002 Congress passed the Bioterrorism Act as a part of its ongoing effort 
to combat terrorism - in this instance, by reducing the ability for 
international terrorists to carry out terrorist attacks in the U.S.  by 
contaminating imported foods."

Now for the rant bit. I can appreciate that the US Government wants to 
protect the food supply against bio-terrorism, but what in the name of Ghod 
do they think this is going to achieve? Were I a bio-terrorist, about to 
ship a boxful of Ebola contaminated sausage to the USA, would I register it 
on the FDA site? Or would I write "Books" on the Customs form and send it 
anyway?

And that brings me to the registration process itself, in order that I 
might legally send Christmas Cake, Christmas Pudding and Marmite (*) to my 
poor deprived parents. At least I can do it online (see 
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~pn/pnoview.html). But do I have to register at 
all? "Private residences of individuals" are excluded. Why? My box of Ebola 
could just as easily come from my kitchen as from the local sausage plant. 
And if I'm a terrorist (which I'm not), again I ask, why would I register 
at all? And if I do register (which I haven't), why threaten me with US law 
(which the site repeatedly does.) I know the US Government struggles with 
the concept of extra-terratoriality

In short, what is the point of this? Other than make-work for Government 
employees. Still, at least the website works with Mozilla. I guess I should 
be thankful for small mercies.

"Something must be done. This is something. Therefore we will do it."

(* Yes, I know Americans regard Marmite as a bioweapon, but it isn't. 
Honestly.)

Scott Peterson


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Vietnam veterans,
Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From extropy at audry2.com  Wed Dec 31 12:08:34 2003
From: extropy at audry2.com (Major)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 20:08:34 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK)[Risks} Pointless Security
In-Reply-To: <3FF2734B.360FD821@mindspring.com> (fortean1@mindspring.com)
References: <3FF2734B.360FD821@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <200312311208.hBVC8Ym01027@igor.synonet.com>


"Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> writes:

> Were I a bio-terrorist, about to ship a boxful of Ebola contaminated
> sausage to the USA, would I register it on the FDA site?

As the US government has been warning its people for some time, the
wurst is yet to come.

Major


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Dec 31 11:31:02 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:31:02 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
Message-ID: <3FF2B376.8010908@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

Money Magazine's Hottest Towns

Whether you like big cities or small towns, these are the most desirable
places to live in America.
First, we divided OnBoard's 271-city list into three regions: east,
central and west. Those lists were sorted by population.

Then, based on careful examination of MOSAIC lifestyle segmentation
data, we narrowed the list further by identifying those towns with
demographics that closely mirrored that of the typical MONEY reader:
college educated, working professional, well-above average median income.

In addition, the town had to be located no more than 60 miles from a
major city. That ensures reasonable access art and culture resources.
Only cities with median incomes above $50,000 a year and unemployment
rates below the national average were included in our search.

<http://money.cnn.com/best/bplive/>

Table of Top 81 places
<http://money.cnn.com/best/bplive/cities_table/>

--------

Now the question is: Why no places in New Hampshire in the top 81?
Too much snow? ;)

If you go here, you can set your own priorities,
such as, weather, house prices, culture, etc.
and do a search to find your ideal town.

<http://cgi.money.cnn.com/tools/bestplaces/bplive.jsp>

After a few attempts, I had to restrict my search to the North-East and
put winter low temp and cold index down to the minimum before New
Hampshire appeared in the search results.
So it looks as though you have to be hardy to live in NH.
Not suitable for Florida retiree types!  :)

Concord came highest, followed by Manchester in my search.


BillK




From charlie at antipope.org  Wed Dec 31 12:02:23 2003
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:02:23 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK)[Risks} Pointless Security
In-Reply-To: <3FF2734B.360FD821@mindspring.com>
References: <3FF2734B.360FD821@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <31BA3904-3B89-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>


On 31 Dec 2003, at 06:57, Terry W. Colvin wrote:
> In short, what is the point of this? Other than make-work for 
> Government
> employees. Still, at least the website works with Mozilla. I guess I 
> should
> be thankful for small mercies.
>
> "Something must be done. This is something. Therefore we will do it."

Ahem.

I travel to the USA on business/pleasure (hey, I *enjoy* my work :) 
about twice a year, and I'm planning on increasing that to three or 
four times a year shortly. The UK is one of those countries nationals 
of which are allowed to travel under the visa waiver scheme, by filling 
out a form. There's always an insane queue whenever a 747 arrives, so 
yesterday I looked into the pros and cons of applying for a B-1 visa.

After about thirty minutes I came to the conclusion that sticking to 
the visa waiver scheme was going to be much, *much* less hostile: less 
queuing and it only asks if you were a member of the Nazi party during 
1939-45.

It's not just the three-month wait, the requirement for the US embassy 
to examine my passport and post it back to me -- stopping me travelling 
*anywhere* while they've got it -- the interview, or the fee. Just look 
at the form DS-157, required as a supplementary submission for males 
aged 18-45, wherever they come from! It's
online at http://travel.state.gov/DS-0157.pdf and it says (ho bloody 
ho) that it should take about an hour to fill out. "List all countries 
you have entered in the past ten years", "not including current 
employer list your last two employers" (including phone number -- 
great, if you exclude contract work at least one of those companies 
ceased trading and laid everybody off but never went into 
liquidation!), and "List all professional sociable and charitable 
organizations to which you belong/contribute/have worked with (now or 
ever)". Not to mention "list all educational institutions you've ever 
attended (not including primary schools)" -- again, one of the 
university colleges I attended in the 1980's has merged, twice, with 
other bodies since that time.

Oh yeah. The box for "list all professional sociable and charitable 
organizations ..." is half a line wide and one line deep. Just big 
enough to write in "See Appendix B" when you staple the fifty-page 
attachment to the form. (My best guess for time to fill out the form -- 
including the necessary research -- is roughly two to three days. I 
mean, my old school is several hundred miles away and moved to new 
premises a few years ago -- and they want a telephone contact?)

I can understand this information being needed *sometimes* -- 
specifically, if you're doing a security clearance for someone who's 
about to apply for a job working in the Pentagon -- but as a routine 
check on business travellers it doesn't achieve much. The level of 
bureaucratic insanity is so high that only people who can't use the 
visa waiver scheme (i.e. they *must* be inside the USA for more than 90 
consecutive days, they can't just fly home for a weekend at the end of 
the twelvth week) will bother; meanwhile the deluge of data produced by 
it will end up in a filing cabinet somewhere. It's not structured in 
any useful manner so unless there are hordes of clerks copy-typing 
stuff into a database it's not being used. And making it this difficult 
to apply for a simple non-resident visitor's business visa means that 
those queues at immigration will continue to grow longer because the 
clerks have to validate the visa waiver forms for every incoming 
passenger rather than ID'ing and waving through visa holders.

It's insane! I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that American 
bureaucracy is like the worst possible combination of German and 
British bureaucracy -- officious and intrusive on the one part combined 
with bumbling and inefficient on the other.


-- Charlie



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Dec 31 15:51:47 2003
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:51:47 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK)[Risks} Pointless Security
In-Reply-To: <3FF2734B.360FD821@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <00a601c3cfb6$02dad840$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>

Terry W. Colvin wrote,
> This was posted to the Risks email list.
> [deleted to save space]

I agree totally.  As a security professional, I am constantly reading in my
professional references how the government is ignoring basic security when
they design this stuff.  The homeland security department, electronic voting
machines, and most government security programs are just plain bogus.  They
make no sense to anybody who has security expertise.  They are designed to
make people think they are doing something.  Anybody who investigates the
historical effectiveness of these programs, or analyzes their methods for
correctness, or attempts statistical analysis on them to predict
effectiveness, find that they are critically flawed and unworkable.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com> 




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Dec 31 16:23:52 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:23:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
In-Reply-To: <3FF2B376.8010908@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031231105329.01c54380@mail.comcast.net>

At 11:31 AM 12/31/2003 +0000, BillK wrote:

>Money Magazine's Hottest Towns
>         :
>Now the question is: Why no places in New Hampshire in the top 81?
>Too much snow? ;)

I'm not sure how much their assessment criteria vary year-to-year but 
Nashua, New Hampshire was chosen twice by Money Magazine as the best town 
in America, in 1987 and 1997.  And, as I recall, other towns in Southern NH 
appeared in the top list in those years.  I can't speak to other years; 
those I remember because I drive past the "Welcome to Nashua" sign every day.

As far as I can tell, the only reason why Southern NH towns don't appear 
this year is that the area has a lot of residents who work in high-tech, 
and the recession hit hard.  I suspect that NH will be back in the top list 
next year.

Personally, I like the Places Rated Almanac better as a first step in 
assessing where to live.  A lot more factors considered and tables of data, 
raw or synopsized for your cerebral pleasure.  (Which reminds me:  Nashua 
has two great sushi restaurants -- one we have used to take visiting 
Japanese VIPs to, the other has French bistro desserts.)

>So it looks as though you have to be hardy to live in NH.
>Not suitable for Florida retiree types!  :)

After 16 years here, winters are my only gripe.  If you like to ski, 
however, winter is good.  And a lot of the storms largely miss us -- Boston 
and the Cape get the worst; we get the outer edge.

I'm not particularly hardy, though.  You just need to be adequately 
prepared.  Good jacket, boots, vehicle, snow blower, and a job that lets 
you work from home when you don't feel like braving the snow.


-- David Lubkin.




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 18:05:59 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:05:59 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20031231105329.01c54380@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <20031231180559.75895.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com> wrote:
> At 11:31 AM 12/31/2003 +0000, BillK wrote:
> 
> >Money Magazine's Hottest Towns
> >         :
> >Now the question is: Why no places in New Hampshire in the top 81?
> >Too much snow? ;)
> 
> I'm not sure how much their assessment criteria vary year-to-year but
> 
> Nashua, New Hampshire was chosen twice by Money Magazine as the best
> town 
> in America, in 1987 and 1997.  And, as I recall, other towns in
> Southern NH 
> appeared in the top list in those years. 

Lebanon NH has also been rated second several times as the most livable
small town in the US. Between the dot com meltdown and the escalating
property prices in some parts of the state, it is going to be a couple
years before we are high in the rankings again, though I really
wouldn't worry about it much. Generally any community which makes it
into the top 100-200 in nationwide rankings is a really nice place to
live.
Communities that make it into top rankings tend to drop off within a
few years because such rankings have attracted enough immigration that
some growth problems start popping up, which are no-no's as far as the
rankers is concerned.

The FSP did some extensive analysis of every state on a number of
libertarian factors, which were compiled in an excel spreadsheet. It
allows you to give your own personal weighting to various factors to
come up with a state that is your personal optimum, rather than the
best of other people's judgements. The spreadsheet is downloadable from
their website.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 31 18:06:30 2003
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:06:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy New Year Toast
Message-ID: <168270-220031233118630931@M2W050.mail2web.com>


Before you all step out the door for the Evening's Jolly-making - I wanted
to say, "Happy New Year!"  In case any of you are going to be making a
toast this evening:

"We can't promise you'll be as suave as Humphrey Bogart, but with these
tips you should be able to make a successful toast to the occasion.
Try for Cary Grant's sophistication and Tom Hank's warmth?but not Steve
Martin's cleverness. Too much wit and you'll seem a nitwit, says Paul
Dickson, author of Toasts (Crown Publishers, 1991). Silence would have been
preferable to a toast in the movie "Four Weddings and a Funeral," in which
a friend congratulated the groom on lassoing his bride, since "all his
other girlfriends had been such complete dogs. Let me say how delighted we
are to have so many of them here this evening." 

Be brief. As Mark Twain said, no toast except his own should last longer
than 60 seconds. The more you meander, the deeper in trouble you get.
Think before you quip. The toast "Bottoms up!" at the launching of a boat
race is sure to sink. And don't introduce the governor of the Virgin
Islands as the "Virgin of Governor's Island," as a Washington dignitary
once did. President Reagan once toasted the people of Bolivia while in
Brazil, and President Ford nodded his glass to Israel while visiting Egypt."

Historic toasts:

Throughout history, whenever wine flowed, words were sure to follow. Though
Ulysses drank to Achilles in Homer's Odyssey nearly 3,000 years ago, the
first known toast in English was recorded in 450 A.D. Said the beautiful
Rowena of the Saxons to Vortigern of the Britons: "Louerd King, Waes Hael!"
(Lord King, be of good health!).

The term "toast" itself comes from the 17th-century custom of placing a
crouton in the drinking vessel to absorb impurities.

Thankfully, some traditions are extinct, such as Scandinavians drinking
from the skulls of their fallen enemies?thus the toast "Skoal!" Also quaint
today is "Here's mud in your eye," which originally expressed the wish that
farmers would find soft earth easily turned by a plow.

But some toasts never lose their flavor, such as Humphrey Bogart's to
Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca: "Here's looking at you, kid."

Brief, heartfelt, and to the point, Colonel Sherman Potter of M*A*S*H made
a toast that was everything a toast should be: "To long lives and short
wars!" And who could forget Tiny Tim's magnanimous toast in Charles
Dickens' classic, A Christmas Carol: "God bless us everyone!"

Ulysses drank to Achilles in Homer's Odyssey nearly 3,000 years ago, the
first known toast in English was recorded in 450 A.D. Said the beautiful
Rowena of the Saxons to Vortigern of the Britons: "Louerd King, Waes Hael!"
(Lord King, be of good health!).

The term "toast" itself comes from the 17th-century custom of placing a
crouton in the drinking vessel to absorb impurities.

Thankfully, some traditions are extinct, such as Scandinavians drinking
from the skulls of their fallen enemies?thus the toast "Skoal!" Also quaint
today is "Here's mud in your eye," which originally expressed the wish that
farmers would find soft earth easily turned by a plow.

But some toasts never lose their flavor, such as Humphrey Bogart's to
Ingrid Bergman in Casablanca: "Here's looking at you, kid."

Brief, heartfelt, and to the point, Colonel Sherman Potter of M*A*S*H made
a toast that was everything a toast should be: "To long lives and short
wars!" And who could forget Tiny Tim's magnanimous toast in Charles
Dickens' classic, A Christmas Carol: "God bless us everyone!"

Cheers!

Natasha Vita-More

http://www.natasha.cc


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 18:16:36 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:16:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <012201c3cefb$57eed950$6400a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20031231181636.86909.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> 
> > While I can understand the leftist need to ridicule this measure by
> > decribing it as 'farmers almanac' ...
> 
> You understand the leftist need ...? to ridicule ...?  Hmmmm, do you
> suppose the right ever ridicules the left? (if not, then please
> point out how it does not).  While you may correct that the
> almanac to which the article refers may not be the ubiquitous
> Farmers, it doesn't make that entirely clear (and the article
> does invoke a quote from the publisher of the aforesaid ...).

Ah, the REPORTER from the demonstrably left biased press, quotes the
publisher of a Farmers Almanac. Selection effect, anyone????

> 
> BTW, at first I thought this was a joke, but now I'm not so certain
> (do you think this is serious?):
> http://www.thbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6230
> 
> >The left often displays a rather high degree of hubristic
> > arrogance that it is so smart that anybody they don't like must be
> > stupid.
> 
> ... somewhat like the rather high degree of hubristic arrogance
> displayed by the right?

Oh, they aren't innocent either.

> 
> > That is, however, the nature of leftism, the concept that
> > people are too dumb for their own good and need to be told how to
> > spend their money.
> 
> ... and what is the *nature* of rightism?  (perhaps, thinking that
> the leftists have a "need to ridicule" ...?)

Oh, the nature of the right is that most people are inherently bad and
need to restrained from their root impulses so they can make it to
heaven and not be a bad influence on other people's kids...

> 
> >Suggest you consider that intelligence people may have
> > much better information sources than you do.
> 
> I have a great deal of respect for intelligence people (as long as
> they're rational and intelligent).  I worry about the likes of
> Ashcroft, and stuff like:  

Do you actually think that suggestions like the subject matter are
originating from the likes of Ashcroft or Rice? Don't you think that
that is a bit of projection on your part?

> "Condi Rice is as comfortable speaking
> publicly about her faith in God as she is about strategic arms
> reduction and routing out terrorism."
> found in: http://www.christianitytoday.com/cr/2002/005/1.18.html
> 
> If the fate of the world rests with people who have conversations
> with god(s), all is lost ...

Do you have equal suspicion about people who spend hours meditating in
communion with the collective subconcious to get their answers? No? Why not?

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 18:24:46 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:24:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301146500.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031231182446.84438.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> I also found another couple of Almanacs in my book collection
> so now I'm up to 5.  I'm clearly a dangerous person.  

Good for you Robert!!! As Alex once said of me,"He's a velly dangelous
person." ;) Now, you've got to have a vest made to wear those almanacs,
which will make you impervious to small arms rounds...

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 18:39:58 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:39:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <20031230213639.65654.qmail@web80404.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031231183958.62717.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> > But if you ask me if we should have officials
> > drawing attention
> > to Almanacs and requiring marshals on planes
> 
> How do these compare?  Requiring marshals on planes
> does not itself imply it is okay to trample on
> anyone's
> rights just because of some factor that has a very
> shaky, if any, correlation to terrorists.

There is a distinct difference between trampling someones rights and
placing someone under suspicion based on several factors *including*
having an Almanac in one's posession which is "suspiciously annotated
and dog eared" (to quote the article in question). For example, if I
see someone with an almanac which has margin annotations in arabic on
any page with information about bridges, or tall buildings, or
goverment facilities, or dams, or airports, that is going to be
suspicious.

Would it make me arrest them and subject them to a cavity search on the
spot? Probably not, but I would, were I in law enforcement, check their
IDs against a terrorist watch list, I would likely search their vehicle
or baggage for other items known to be used by terrorist scouts: a
video camera, featuring footage of these same facilities mentioned
above, multiple sets of identification under different names, multiple
passports from different countries, and large amounts of cash. If any
of these items turned up, this would certainly become a 'person of
interest' who I'd like to check for immigration violations in order to
gain more time to investigate the individual.

Would a vehicle search be a civil rights violation? Yup. Does it
matter? Nope. Why? Because national security is not bound by civil
rights laws. Your civil rights being violated is only grounds to
exclude incriminating evidence from trial, it is not a "get out of
Guantanamo Free card". The SCOTUS has ruled on a number of occasions
that violtions of your civil rights taken in defense of national
security are quite acceptable. Terrorism is NOT a civil crime, it is a
military or war crime, and is properly subject to military law, not
civillian law. This is also something that is conveniently ignored by
those on the left.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 18:53:00 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:53:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
In-Reply-To: <3FF2B376.8010908@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031231185300.15744.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> Money Magazine's Hottest Towns
> 
> In addition, the town had to be located no more than 60 miles from a
> major city. That ensures reasonable access art and culture resources.
> Only cities with median incomes above $50,000 a year and unemployment
> rates below the national average were included in our search.

This explains it. What, exactly, is a 'major city'??? If Boston
qualifies but Manchester doesn't, then that explains right there why so
few NH places made it on the list. It is a selection effect that
assumes that smaller communities are always bereft of art and cultural
resources, quite wrongly so. There are actually few towns in NH larger
than 6,000 which DON'T have significant art and cultural resources like
theater groups, art galleries, etc.

It is clear that the Money survey was cheap and based on faulty
assumptions that were lazily made in order to ignore doing real
research.

Beyond the above, the median income assumption ignores local cost of
living handicapping, tax burden, etc. For example, the per capita tax
burden in NH is somewhere around 3% for state and local taxes.
Contrasting this with other states that range from 10-20%, and you are
talking a very significant difference in ACTUAL median income vs gross
median income.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 18:54:14 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:54:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Smalley, Drexler and the monster in Lake Michigan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312300907210.16991-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031231185414.91366.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > So what if such statements turn out to be wrong? We know better, we
> > will reach Drexlerian nanotech inevitably, and IMHO much sooner if
> the
> > luddites are made the fools in order to derail their attempts to
> > legislate against Drexlerian nanotech.
> 
> Mike, you may want to take a look at Howard Lovy's blog entry for
> Dec. 24, 2003:
>  
>
http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2003_12_21_nanobot_archive.html#107228757469551087
> 
> Its an interesting perspective on why people blowing smoke might
> be a good thing by ecouraging the serious people to point out the
> flaws in the arguments of the various anti-nano individuals & groups.
> 

Link is bad.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 19:00:47 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:00:47 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK)[Risks} Pointless Security
In-Reply-To: <31BA3904-3B89-11D8-B6F6-000A95B18568@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20031231190047.96122.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> 
> It's insane! I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that American 
> bureaucracy is like the worst possible combination of German and 
> British bureaucracy -- officious and intrusive on the one part
> combined  with bumbling and inefficient on the other.

Suggest you look into the smart traveller program I've been hearing
good things about. Whether it is available to foreigners I don't know,
perhaps Robert can answer that.

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Dec 31 19:03:49 2003
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 19:03:49 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
Message-ID: <3FF31D95.5090504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

I've done some more searching at
<http://cgi.money.cnn.com/tools/bestplaces/bplive.jsp>

My selection criteria were:

All regions, no population size preference.
All weather marked as Medium and Very important (level 5 of 5)
(I don't like extremes)
Housing price - Medium - Middle important (level 3 of 5)
Low property tax - Middle important
Income Level - Medium - Not important (level 1 0f 5)
Low sales tax - Very important
Low income tax - Important (level 4 of 5)
Low auto insurance premiums - Very important
Major airports - Middle important
Entertainment - All Not important
(Who needs it when you've got the Internet?)
Education - All Not important (no children here)
Health - All Middle important
Crime - All Very important (Safe environment required)

And the results?

The top 23 places were all in Virginia!
So this analysis says that Virginia has a good climate with low crime
rates and low income, sales and property tax rates.

So what are the disadvantages?

BillK









From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Dec 31 19:05:15 2003
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 11:05:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
In-Reply-To: <3FF31D95.5090504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20031231190515.18173.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:> 
> The top 23 places were all in Virginia!
> So this analysis says that Virginia has a good climate with low crime
> rates and low income, sales and property tax rates.
> 
> So what are the disadvantages?

They are all within 60 miles of Washington DC... :)

=====
Mike Lorrey
"Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                                       - Gen. John Stark
"Fascists are objectively pro-pacifist..."
                                       - Mike Lorrey
Do not label me, I am an ism of one...
Sado-Mikeyism: http://mikeysoft.zblogger.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Dec 31 19:36:04 2003
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:36:04 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Best place to live in USA
In-Reply-To: <20031231190515.18173.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <3FF31D95.5090504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20031231141503.0250bfa0@mail.comcast.net>

At 11:05 AM 12/31/2003 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:>
> > The top 23 places were all in Virginia!
> > So this analysis says that Virginia has a good climate with low crime
> > rates and low income, sales and property tax rates.
> >
> > So what are the disadvantages?
>
>They are all within 60 miles of Washington DC... :)

I think Mike's observation is more appropriate without a smiley.  The area 
in question is packed with government installations.  That puts you in a 
local economy dependent on government largesse, and surrounds you with 
high-value targets.  These targets leave you at risk for direct attack, 
indirect consequences of an attack (population fleeing from a disaster area 
into your backyard), and inconvenience or abridgement of liberties from 
preventative security measures.

You should verify the numbers.  For instance, total tax bite is far lower 
for NH than VA.

Climate is personal taste, of course.  Which is worse -- shovelling snow or 
hot, humid, and mosquitos?


-- David Lubkin.




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Dec 31 20:36:49 2003
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:36:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <20031231183958.62717.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20031231203649.65653.qmail@web80403.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Would a vehicle search be a civil rights violation?
> Yup. Does it
> matter? Nope. Why? Because national security is not
> bound by civil
> rights laws.

Yes it is.

> Your civil rights being violated is
> only grounds to
> exclude incriminating evidence from trial, it is not
> a "get out of
> Guantanamo Free card".

No, civil rights also impose limits on government
behavior even when no trial will come of it.
Otherwise, it would be perfectly acceptable to, say,
put a male Arab American under indefinite
investigation - and publicize the fact - just because
he was running for elected office, or because he dared
to vote: "He obviously must be trying to weaken our
defenses against terrorism!"

Ironic that you should use that example, BTW.  Wasn't
it civil rights which was why a bunch of those in
Guantanamo, who otherwise faced indefinite detention
(theoretically pending a military trial, but said
trial showed no signs of being organized in the near
future - result, life in prison w/out trial), were
ordered either into the civil court system (if and
only if formal charges, with evidence, could be
brought in a certain short time frame) or set free?

> The SCOTUS has ruled on a
> number of occasions
> that violtions of your civil rights taken in defense
> of national
> security are quite acceptable.

And it has also ruled that even national security has
its limits as a defense of civil rights violations.
National security is not a "get out of limits on
authority free" card.

> Terrorism is NOT a
> civil crime, it is a
> military or war crime, and is properly subject to
> military law, not
> civillian law.

Even when it becomes an excuse to override civilian
law under any circumstances, and effectively place all
citizens under military law - which can be altered by
those in power at whim?  (Effectively, if not in
statement.  For instance, consider what happens if, at
any time, your rights could be suspended and any
action taken against you for the most tenuous, or even
made up, charges of potential terrorism.  This becomes
a universal excuse whenever anyone in the government
disapproves of your actions.  Running against the
incumbent in an election, and stand a good chance of
winning?  You're a terrorist.  Refuse an office
holder's sexual advances?  You're a terrorist.
Decline to pay the 90% tax rate?  You're not guilty of
tax evasion, since that would require actually
bothering to figure out how much you supposedly owe;
instead, you're just another terrorist.  Get
rear-ended by a drunk police officer?  You're the
terrorist, so you're at fault.  Try researching
biotech, so as to discover a cure for cancer?  Only
terrorists would do that - and it doesn't matter what
you say or what evidence you have, since you're a
terrorist everyone knows you were actually researching
biological weapons.  Refuse to pledge allegiance to
someone else's God?  God damn, are you ever a
terrorist!  And so forth.)

That is what we are objecting to.


From dirk at neopax.com  Wed Dec 31 21:20:55 2003
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 21:20:55 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Spam
References: <007401c3cf4a$17540e20$cc01a8c0@DELLBERT>
Message-ID: <02e901c3cfe3$fa2b8db0$d2256bd5@artemis>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 2:59 AM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Spam


> Regular spam can do this as well.  My mother literally gets over 1000
spams
> per day.  She can't look through them all for real messages from people.
So
> her e-mail is unusable.  She cannot find or respond to real messages sent
to
> her mailbox because of all the spam.


I get about the same number, mostly viruses.
I use Mailwasher to automatically kill them at the ISP.

Dirk

The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millennium
http://www.theconsensus.org



From samantha at objectent.com  Wed Dec 31 21:21:17 2003
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:21:17 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] Alert for Suspicious Farmers' Almanacs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301146500.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <20031230113918.7a8e277c.samantha@objectent.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0312301146500.20501-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20031231132117.17cdc63c.samantha@objectent.com>

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:57:48 -0800 (PST)
"Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> 
> > So, Robert, you believe that playing ostrich is the best guarantee of
> > safety?  Let no one know anything without a (supposedly governmental)
> > need to know?  What becomes of our extropian dreams then?
> 
> No -- let us not be ostrichs.  But each of us have different hazard
> profiles (remember how I'm always going on about hazard functions...).
> In my particular case I've flown probably something like 600,000+ miles
> over the last couple of decades.  I would guess that is significantly
> higher than the average person.  So it would be wiser for me to take
> that into account when looking at aggressive (some might say stupid)
> policies by governments to capture terrorists.  One only has to look
> at the recent assasination attempts in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and
> the daily death count in Iraq to understand that these people mean
> business.  We have had long discussions in the past about the cultural
> clashes and what the best solutions might be.
>

If the policies are indeed stupid then they are ineffectual in protecting you.  If they are not only stupid but highly intrusive on our freedoms and ability to proceed on extropian agendas then they are a deeper threat than terrorism itself.
 
> Ignoring anything from terrorist threats to Mad Cow disease can
> eliminate ones Extropian dream.  In both cases it may require
> a little more government oversight or interference to fix the
> problems and/or minimize the risks.  

Some perhaps.  But not anything, everything some bureaucrat comes up with and inflicts on the population.  At the least we must retain the power  access, change and limit where necessary the types and degree of government involvment.  It is part of our responsibility.

> If you had asked me 3
> years ago whether I would be in favor of more power to big
> brother I would have looked at you like you were crazy (remember
> I'm the person whose father almost threw him out of the house
> for refusing to return his draft card in the mid-'70s).  If
> you ask me now -- I still don't like many of the people in
> power and I think the patriot act(s) are mostly very poor laws.
> But if you ask me if we should have officials drawing attention
> to Almanacs and requiring marshals on planes then I'm going
> to have to think long and hard now about whether the risks
> outweight the benefits.
> 

I have no problem with marshalls on planes.  I would be happier with citizens on planes having the right to carry their own appropriate to airplane defense arms.  But limiting knowledge, the lifeblood of progress and acheiving our dreams, is a different matter entirely.

> I also found another couple of Almanacs in my book collection
> so now I'm up to 5.  I'm clearly a dangerous person.  :-)
> 


Yeah, I shudder to think of what evil you could accomplish!   Hmmm, if the Feds raided my house ("compound") and checked out my library they would probably paint me as an evil and dangerous individual indeed.   Which is why we need to seprate out very carefully actual active threats from mere potential.   We don't prosecute for potential - yet.   We should not go to "enemy combatant" level surveillance and intervention on mere potential either.  If we do then you can forget about the Fourth Amendment rights we in the US supposedly have.   That worries me far more than the threat from any terrorist or group of terrorists.

- samantha



From hal at finney.org  Wed Dec 31 22:46:23 2003
From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:46:23 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] How The Schmirk Stole Nanotechnology
Message-ID: <200312312246.hBVMkNZ10475@finney.org>

J. Storrs Hall, author of the holiday classic "A Visit from Saint Assembler",
<http://home.zylstra.com/comedy/computer/molecular-assembler.txt>,
has a new effort out: "How The Schmirk Stole Nanotechnology", at
<http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2003_12_21_nanobot_archive.html#107220434465462087>.
(If that link doesn't work, just go to nanobot.blogspot.com and scroll
down a bit).

Apologizing to Dr. Suess, JoSH offers this update of the Grinch story,
about the Schmirk (whose brain was "two sizes too small") and his efforts
to thwart the nerds with their Drexlerian nanotech.  It's an artful
and funny poem, but it was spoiled for me by the obvious targetting of
Richard Smalley as the Schmirk.  If the Schmirk is just an anonymous
character then the story reads as a good-natured satire; but when he is
based on a real person, it becomes a mean-spirited attack.

Read it and see if I'm overreacting -

Hal


From thespike at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 31 22:28:54 2003
From: thespike at earthlink.net (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:28:54 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] How The Schmirk Stole Nanotechnology
References: <200312312246.hBVMkNZ10475@finney.org>
Message-ID: <018b01c3cfed$7acd9cc0$a7994a43@texas.net>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hal Finney" <hal at finney.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 4:46 PM

> the Schmirk (whose brain was "two sizes too small") 

>If the Schmirk is just an anonymous
> character then the story reads as a good-natured satire; but when he is
> based on a real person, it becomes a mean-spirited attack.
> 
> Read it and see if I'm overreacting 

You're not over reacting. 

Damien Broderick



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Dec 31 23:59:14 2003
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 15:59:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] How The Schmirk Stole Nanotechnology
In-Reply-To: <200312312246.hBVMkNZ10475@finney.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312311555210.16128-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, Hal Finney wrote:

> Apologizing to Dr. Suess, JoSH offers this update of the Grinch story,
> about the Schmirk (whose brain was "two sizes too small") and his efforts
> to thwart the nerds with their Drexlerian nanotech.  It's an artful
> and funny poem, but it was spoiled for me by the obvious targetting of
> Richard Smalley as the Schmirk.

That isn't clear at all.  See:
  http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/24/0633205

Esp. my comments and Howard's response.  The picture does not
have Smalley replaced by the Schmirk.  As I read the story
I could see lines targeting at least 3, perhaps 4, different
individuals/groups.

Robert