From joe at barrera.org  Sun Aug  1 00:02:08 2004
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 17:02:08 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <410C31C9.80100@cox.net>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040728125955.01ca5968@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<000701c47753$c7f241f0$6101a8c0@main>	<410C1E8B.8C5AAC62@sasktel.net>
	<410C31C9.80100@cox.net>
Message-ID: <410C3300.6070307@barrera.org>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

>  The more interesting question is: what program is doing the
>  re-direct. It sounds like you may have hostile spyware on your
>  system.

That would be my bet.




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  1 03:39:56 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 20:39:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Cool' fuel cells
In-Reply-To: <20040723001940.53740.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040801033956.33362.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at yahoo.com> wrote:> 
> 
> Keeping in mind that one thin film SOFC is just a
> fraction of the size of a human hair with an output of
> 0.8 to 0.9 Volts, a stack of 100 to 120 of these fuel
> cells would generate about 100 volts. When connected
> to a homeowner's natural gas line, the stack would
> provide the needed electrical energy to run the
> household at an efficiency of approximately 65
> percent. This would be a twofold increase over power
> plants today, as they operate at 30 to 35 percent
> efficiency.

Wall voltage of 110/120 VAC is what is called RMS voltage, meaning the
120 volt rating is the root mean square value, or about 72% of peak
voltage (since it's a sine wave). Generating 120 volts DC is fine, but
you need to turn it into alternating current to do work with many home
appliances (AC is also more efficient, since it's just electrons moving
back and forth rather than taking a long trip). Power inverters can be
built which are 97% efficient or better.

> 
> SOFCs, in general, operate at 900 to 1,000 degrees
> Celsius, a very high temperature that requires exotic
> structural materials and significant thermal
> insulation. However, the thin film solid oxide fuel
> cell has an operating temperature of 450 to 500
> degrees Celsius, one half that of current SOFCs. This
> lower temperature is largely a result of the
> drastically decreased thickness of the
> electrolyte-working region of these thin film SOFCs
> and negates the need for exotic structural materials
> and extensive insulation. The lower temperature also
> eliminates the need for catalysts (known as reformers)
> for the fuel cell. All of these features indicate a
> reduced cost for the thin film SOFC and positive
> future impact on the fuel cell market. 

Since fuel cells seem to be so good at producing heat, why don't people
use a liquid cooling system to extract more energy from the waste heat?
Cogeneration would up that already good efficiency even higher.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  1 04:59:02 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 21:59:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <000701c47753$c7f241f0$6101a8c0@main>
Message-ID: <20040801045902.39863.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dennis Roberts <live2scan at bellsouth.net> wrote:

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at satx.rr.com>
> To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 2:01 PM
> Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service
> revealed
> 
> 
> > BUSH: THE MISSING YEARS
> >
> > http://us.gq.com/features/general/articles/040727feco_02
> >
> >
> > _After reading the article this's obvious that GW is not Alfred E.
> Neuman
> he's Forrest Gump.

This article is hilarious. It is interesting that it's coming out at
the same time that John Kerry's Swift Boat mates from 'nam are
demanding that he disclose the truth about his record there and that he
cease and desist using their images in his campaign literature:

http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php

Could it really be that Bush is the secret hero and Kerry is the
duplicitous self-serving traitor?



=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From john at aculink.net  Sun Aug  1 05:57:16 2004
From: john at aculink.net (John M)
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:57:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
In-Reply-To: <200407300505.i6U55Oj01585@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <200408010555.i715tOj20619@tick.javien.com>

Ok, that had a much larger response than I expected!  All my invites have
now been passed out.  If anyone I sent an invite to gets invites to give
away, I'd appreciate returning the favor and letting the list know; there
were a couple of requests I had to turn down as I ran out.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John M
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:05 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> 
> If anybody else needs an invite, e-mail me; I've got a half-dozen or so I
> could part with.  Not all to one person, though; don't be greedy :).
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 2:43 AM
> > To: ExI chat list
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> >
> > I just invited you.
> > G.
> >
> > On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:16:03 +0000, artillo at comcast.net
> > <artillo at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > I applied for a beta gmail account myself, I didn't get any invites
> > though and haven't heard anything yet.
> > >
> > > Artillo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Thanks to a not so anonymous extropian, I've got a gmail account,
> have
> > > > had for a few weeks. Well, I'm gagging for at least one more account
> > > > (for my wife), but I haven't had any invites so far (which I thought
> > > > were supposed to turn up periodically). Does anyone know how this
> > > > works? Have google stopped handing out invites?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Emlyn
> > > >
> > > > http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 fauxever at sprynet.com  Sun Aug  1 06:25:24 2004
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 23:25:24 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
References: <20040801045902.39863.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0c0201c47790$54d4e190$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>

http://us.gq.com/features/general/articles/040727feco_02

> This article is hilarious. It is interesting that it's coming out at
> the same time that John Kerry's Swift Boat mates from 'nam are
> demanding that he disclose the truth about his record there and that he
> cease and desist using their images in his campaign literature:
> 
> http://www.swiftvets.com/index.php
> 
> Could it really be that Bush is the secret hero and Kerry is the
> duplicitous self-serving traitor?

Hmmm, I dunno, Mike.  What do you think?

And since you brought it up ... *talk about disclosing the truth*:

http://home.earthlink.net/~mojo-hand/GeorgeBushResume.html

Olga 




From megao at sasktel.net  Sun Aug  1 05:52:38 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 00:52:38 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
References: <200408010555.i715tOj20619@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <410C8524.78B9FF69@sasktel.net>

Thanks immensely for the invite.
I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail  and redoing my website and
blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of documents  I might or might not
need and saves getting a laptop for the road.

Morris Johnson

John M wrote:

> Ok, that had a much larger response than I expected!  All my invites have
> now been passed out.  If anyone I sent an invite to gets invites to give
> away, I'd appreciate returning the favor and letting the list know; there
> were a couple of requests I had to turn down as I ran out.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John M
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:05 PM
> > To: 'ExI chat list'
> > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> >
> > If anybody else needs an invite, e-mail me; I've got a half-dozen or so I
> > could part with.  Not all to one person, though; don't be greedy :).
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 2:43 AM
> > > To: ExI chat list
> > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> > >
> > > I just invited you.
> > > G.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:16:03 +0000, artillo at comcast.net
> > > <artillo at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > I applied for a beta gmail account myself, I didn't get any invites
> > > though and haven't heard anything yet.
> > > >
> > > > Artillo
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks to a not so anonymous extropian, I've got a gmail account,
> > have
> > > > > had for a few weeks. Well, I'm gagging for at least one more account
> > > > > (for my wife), but I haven't had any invites so far (which I thought
> > > > > were supposed to turn up periodically). Does anyone know how this
> > > > > works? Have google stopped handing out invites?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Emlyn
> > > > >
> > > > > http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From megao at sasktel.net  Sun Aug  1 06:02:47 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:02:47 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040728125955.01ca5968@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<000701c47753$c7f241f0$6101a8c0@main> <410C1E8B.8C5AAC62@sasktel.net>
	<410C31C9.80100@cox.net> <410C3300.6070307@barrera.org>
Message-ID: <410C8775.63ADFC59@sasktel.net>

I did a spywear check and I have 6 pieces documented.  I tried to dump 2
manually without luck.  Those attached to my tax programs , I left in
case they are parts  of the program.  One nagging thing is when I do a
norton defrag and shut everything down
manually , except my basic explorer, I still get ( 3/4 of the time)  a
background program  that interferes with the start up recognition of my
drives.
On my last viruscheck I was clean except one in my dialer.

"Joseph S. Barrera III" wrote:

> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
> >  The more interesting question is: what program is doing the
> >  re-direct. It sounds like you may have hostile spyware on your
> >  system.
>
> That would be my bet.
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Aug  1 08:18:38 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 09:18:38 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <410C8775.63ADFC59@sasktel.net>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040728125955.01ca5968@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<000701c47753$c7f241f0$6101a8c0@main> <410C1E8B.8C5AAC62@sasktel.net>
	<410C31C9.80100@cox.net> <410C3300.6070307@barrera.org>
	<410C8775.63ADFC59@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0408010118598221e8@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 01:02:47 -0500, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures
Inc. <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> I did a spywear check and I have 6 pieces documented.  I tried to dump 2
> manually without luck.  Those attached to my tax programs , I left in
> case they are parts  of the program.  One nagging thing is when I do a
> norton defrag and shut everything down
> manually , except my basic explorer, I still get ( 3/4 of the time)  a
> background program  that interferes with the start up recognition of my
> drives.
> On my last viruscheck I was clean except one in my dialer.
> 

If you insist on using Internet Explorer you will get malware dumped
on your pc every time you go browsing. Yes, it is that insecure.

SpyBot Search & Destroy
<http://www.safer-networking.org/en/index.html>
and Ad-aware
<http://www.lavasoftusa.com/>
will scan and delete most malware.
I have found that sometimes you need to run them twice on heavily
infected pcs to completely clean them.
Running a couple of registry cleaners afterwards, as well, will also
improve matters.

Best wishes, BillK


From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Aug  1 08:33:42 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 10:33:42 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <410C8775.63ADFC59@sasktel.net>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040728125955.01ca5968@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<000701c47753$c7f241f0$6101a8c0@main>
	<410C1E8B.8C5AAC62@sasktel.net> <410C31C9.80100@cox.net>
	<410C3300.6070307@barrera.org> <410C8775.63ADFC59@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <20040801083341.GX1174@leitl.org>

On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 01:02:47AM -0500, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote:

> On my last viruscheck I was clean except one in my dialer.

Get a Mac.

-- 
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/20040801/e2293815/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Aug  1 09:37:35 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 11:37:35 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
In-Reply-To: <410C8524.78B9FF69@sasktel.net>
References: <200408010555.i715tOj20619@tick.javien.com>
	<410C8524.78B9FF69@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <20040801093735.GA1174@leitl.org>

On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:52:38AM -0500, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote:

> Thanks immensely for the invite.
> I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail  and redoing my website and

Do you realize the service is beta, and makes no guarantee on availability
and data integrity? I wouldn't use Gmail for anything business critical.

> blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of documents  I might or might not
> need and saves getting a laptop for the road.

A laptop is a useful thing to have. Given that Windows systems are giving you
issues, consider getting an iBook  (.Mac and VirtualPC and Bluetooth/WiFi might be
worthwhile options for you, also I would get a 512 MB memory extension).

-- 
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/20040801/75c894ee/attachment.bin>

From megao at sasktel.net  Sun Aug  1 14:46:16 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 09:46:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail uses
References: <200408010555.i715tOj20619@tick.javien.com>
	<410C8524.78B9FF69@sasktel.net> <20040801093735.GA1174@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <410D0238.BC23DC09@sasktel.net>

I'm treating gmail like  a briefcase, you unload the new documents back home.
The advantage is that you can travel heavier. As well  hardware theft is not a concern.
I think I'll treat it like a lotus notes environment.
I have several parners and I will see how it works to have all of us access this common
email and document platform.

The big thing will be to see how well the spam is controlled. Lately, our ISP has put in
a system that catches 95% of spam and mistakes perhaps 1% of legitimate mail as spam.
Yes , my first machine was a Zenith 40 meg laptop which I used mostly like
a desktop.

Yes new machines, the home one with 2 or 3 drives and operating systems similarly  and  a
sturdy little very mobile , roadwarrier laptop are in the plans.

google might add features and likely won't just drop everything without lots of warning.
Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:52:38AM -0500, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote:
>
> > Thanks immensely for the invite.
> > I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail  and redoing my website and
>
> Do you realize the service is beta, and makes no guarantee on availability
> and data integrity? I wouldn't use Gmail for anything business critical.
>
> > blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of documents  I might or might not
> > need and saves getting a laptop for the road.
>
> A laptop is a useful thing to have. Given that Windows systems are giving you
> issues, consider getting an iBook  (.Mac and VirtualPC and Bluetooth/WiFi might be
> worthwhile options for you, also I would get a 512 MB memory extension).
>
> --
> 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
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Part 1.1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From artillo at comcast.net  Sun Aug  1 19:23:38 2004
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:23:38 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail uses
In-Reply-To: <410D0238.BC23DC09@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <001801c477fd$1250c150$49635544@bjsmain2>

That's pretty much what I am using my gmail for, too (Thanks again,
Giu1i0!). I am an internet DJ on the weekends again and I am using it to
shuffle MP3's, graphics, and website files to and fro, while also
keeping an up-to-date copy of my most often used documents in a
subfolder in gmail.

Arti

PS - tune in to our station sometime! www.fusedradio.com (you will need
Winamp or Media Player, or stream directly into a plot of land in Second
Life). My first show with them will be this Sunday night 10pm-Midnight
EST. Artillo's Heavy Metal Hoedown is back!!! :D

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Extropian
Agroforestry Ventures Inc.
Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 10:46 AM
To: ExI chat list; cattlelack at sasktel.net; r.mwick at sasktel.net;
buffalom at mts.net
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail uses


I'm treating gmail like  a briefcase, you unload the new documents back
home. The advantage is that you can travel heavier. As well  hardware
theft is not a concern. I think I'll treat it like a lotus notes
environment. I have several parners and I will see how it works to have
all of us access this common email and document platform.

The big thing will be to see how well the spam is controlled. Lately,
our ISP has put in a system that catches 95% of spam and mistakes
perhaps 1% of legitimate mail as spam. Yes , my first machine was a
Zenith 40 meg laptop which I used mostly like a desktop.

Yes new machines, the home one with 2 or 3 drives and operating systems
similarly  and  a sturdy little very mobile , roadwarrier laptop are in
the plans.

google might add features and likely won't just drop everything without
lots of warning. Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 12:52:38AM -0500, Extropian Agroforestry 
> Ventures Inc. wrote:
>
> > Thanks immensely for the invite.
> > I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail  and redoing my 
> > website and
>
> Do you realize the service is beta, and makes no guarantee on 
> availability and data integrity? I wouldn't use Gmail for anything 
> business critical.
>
> > blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of documents  I might or 
> > might not need and saves getting a laptop for the road.
>
> A laptop is a useful thing to have. Given that Windows systems are 
> giving you issues, consider getting an iBook  (.Mac and VirtualPC and 
> Bluetooth/WiFi might be worthwhile options for you, also I would get a

> 512 MB memory extension).
>
> --
> 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
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Part 1.1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
>
>   
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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 artillo at comcast.net  Sun Aug  1 19:29:55 2004
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:29:55 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
In-Reply-To: <200408010555.i715tOj20619@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <001901c477fd$f2ee9610$49635544@bjsmain2>

How does one go about getting invites to hand out to friends??

Arti

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John M
Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 1:57 AM
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?


Ok, that had a much larger response than I expected!  All my invites
have now been passed out.  If anyone I sent an invite to gets invites to
give away, I'd appreciate returning the favor and letting the list know;
there were a couple of requests I had to turn down as I ran out.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- 
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John M
> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:05 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> 
> If anybody else needs an invite, e-mail me; I've got a half-dozen or 
> so I could part with.  Not all to one person, though; don't be greedy 
> :).
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- 
> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 2:43 AM
> > To: ExI chat list
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> >
> > I just invited you.
> > G.
> >
> > On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:16:03 +0000, artillo at comcast.net 
> > <artillo at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > I applied for a beta gmail account myself, I didn't get any 
> > > invites
> > though and haven't heard anything yet.
> > >
> > > Artillo
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Thanks to a not so anonymous extropian, I've got a gmail 
> > > > account,
> have
> > > > had for a few weeks. Well, I'm gagging for at least one more 
> > > > account (for my wife), but I haven't had any invites so far 
> > > > (which I thought were supposed to turn up periodically). Does 
> > > > anyone know how this works? Have google stopped handing out 
> > > > invites?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Emlyn
> > > >
> > > > http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

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



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Aug  1 21:28:56 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 14:28:56 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Art and Space Science at UC Berkeley
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040801142512.01d9b620@mail.earthlink.net>

Greetings!

This message has some funky commands, which I tried to clean up for you 
all, but the content is worth reading.

Create!
Natasha

>Call for proposals for artist in residence at the University of California,
>Berkeley, Space Sciences Laboratory.
>
>Deadline Sept 30 2004
>
>Leonardo and the Leonardo Space Arts Working Group are please to announce
>this following collaboration and opportunity:
>
>Art and Space Science at UC Berkeley
>
>The Interdisciplinary Arts Department at Arts Council England, the Space
>Sciences Laboratory at UC Berkeley and the Leonardo network are pleased to
>announce this unique opportunity available to artists working in any art
>form. One individual will be selected to spend up to 7 months at the Space
>Science Laboratory, starting between January and February 2005. Working
>alongside scientists and educators, the successful applicant will have the
>opportunity to build their professional career through a sustained period of
>research and experimentation.
>
>This Fellowship offers specialist support and funds for practice-based
>research, accommodation, food, travel and a small stipend while at UC
>Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory. The Arts Council=B9s International
>Artists=B9 Fellowship Programme is open to artists working in any art form
>with significant professional experience who are living and working in
>England only. Recent graduates are not eligible. Selection will be by
>competitive application. This initiative is funded by the Interdisciplinary
>Arts Department through the Arts Council=B9s International Artists Fellowsh=
>ip
>Programme and the Space Sciences Laboratory at UC Berkeley with support from
>NASA and the Leonardo network.
>
>The application form and further information are available on the Space
>Sciences Laboratory (SSL) website via http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/spaceart
>Please note that application forms are only available from the SSL website.
>Closing date for applications: 30 September 2004
>
>Arts Council England is England's development agency for the arts. Between
>2003 and 2006, Arts Council England will invest 32 billion of public funds
>in the arts in England, including funding from the National Lottery.
>
>Arts Council England supports talent from every sector of the artistic
>society. We are totally committed to equality and diversity and to ensuring
>that people throughout the country can participate in and experience the
>highest quality arts activities. Applications are sought from artists of ALL
>racial and ethnic backgrounds, including from underrepresented groups.
>
>For further information see http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/spaceart
>
>For information about the Leonardo Space Arts Working Group
>http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-journals/Leonardo/spaceart/spaceartproject.html
>
>NEW ADDRESS! Please note our new contact information as of May 1, 2004:
>
>Leonardo/ISAST
>211 Sutter Street, Suite 800
>San Francisco, CA 94108
>phone: (415) 391-1110
>fax: (415) 391-2385
>Email: mklayman at leonardo.info
>Web: http://www.leonardo.info
>
>
>Promote your programs or exhibitions to your peers in art, science, and
>technology with Leonardo and Leonardo Music Journal. For rates and deadlines
>for display advertisements, contact the MIT Press Journals Department at
>journals-info at mit.edu.
>
>
>
>To: Leonardo Network
>From: Roger Malina
>
>Call for proposals for artist in residence at the University of 
>California, Berkeley, Space Sciences Laboratory.
>
>Deadline Sept 30 2004
>
>
>Leonardo and the Leonardo Space Arts Working Group are please to announce 
>t= his following collaboration and opportunity:
>
>Art and Space Science at UC Berkeley
>
>The Interdisciplinary Arts Department at Arts Council England, the Space 
>Sciences Laboratory at UC Berkeley and the Leonardo network are pleased to 
>announce this unique opportunity available to artists working in any art 
>form . One individual will be selected to spend up to 7 months at the 
>Space Science Laboratory, starting between January and February 2005. 
>Working alongside scientists and educators, the successful applicant will 
>have the opportu= nity to build their professional career through a 
>sustained period of research and experimentation.
>
>This Fellowship offers specialist support and funds for practice-based 
>research, accommodation, food, travel and a small stipend while at UC 
>Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory. The Arts Councils International 
>Artists; Fellowship Programme is open to artists working in any art form 
>with significant professional experience who are living and working in 
>Englan= d only. Recent graduates are not eligible. Selection will be by 
>competi tive application. This initiative is funded by the 
>Interdisciplinary Arts Department through the Arts Councils International 
>Artists Fellowship Programme and the Space Sciences Laboratory at UC 
>Berkeley with support from NASA and the Leonardo network.
>
>The application form and further information are available on the Space 
>Sciences Laboratory (SSL) website via 
><3d.htm>http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/spaceart  Please note that 
>application forms are only available from the SSL website. Closing date f= 
>or applications: 30 September 2004
>
>Arts Council England is England's development agency for the arts. Between 
>= 2003 and 2006, Arts Council England will invest ?2 billion of public = 
>funds in the arts in England, including funding from the National Lottery.
>Arts Council England supports talent from every sector of the artistic 
>soci= ety. We are totally committed to equality and diversity and to 
>ensuring tha= t people throughout the country can participate in and 
>experience the highe= st quality arts activities. Applications are sought 
>from artists of ALL rac= ial and ethnic backgrounds, including from 
>underrepresented groups.
>
>For further information see <3d.htm>http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/spaceart
>
>For information about the Leonardo Space Arts Working Group
><3d.htm>http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-journals/Leonardo/spaceart/spaceartp= 
>roject.html
>
>--
>NEW ADDRESS! Please note our new contact information as of May 1, 2004:
>
>Leonardo/ISAST
>211 Sutter Street, Suite 800
>San Francisco, CA 94108
>phone: (415) 391-1110
>fax: (415) 391-2385
>Email: mklayman at leonardo.info
>Web: <3d.htm>http://www.leonardo.info
>
>
>Promote your programs or exhibitions to your peers in art, science, and 
>technology with Leonardo and Leonardo Music Journal. For rates and 
>deadlines for display advertisements, contact the MIT Press Journals 
>Department at journals-info at mit.edu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040801/6e197afc/attachment.html>

From john at aculink.net  Sun Aug  1 20:30:48 2004
From: john at aculink.net (John M)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 13:30:48 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
In-Reply-To: <001901c477fd$f2ee9610$49635544@bjsmain2>
Message-ID: <200408012028.i71KSlj15273@tick.javien.com>

When I created my account there was a link on the bottom-left telling me I
had 10 accounts to give away (though I created a 2nd account, and it didn't
have the free giveaways).  I've also heard that they periodically give you
more invites to pass out.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Shores
> Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 12:30 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> 
> How does one go about getting invites to hand out to friends??
> 
> Arti
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John M
> Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2004 1:57 AM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> 
> 
> Ok, that had a much larger response than I expected!  All my invites
> have now been passed out.  If anyone I sent an invite to gets invites to
> give away, I'd appreciate returning the favor and letting the list know;
> there were a couple of requests I had to turn down as I ran out.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John M
> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 10:05 PM
> > To: 'ExI chat list'
> > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> >
> > If anybody else needs an invite, e-mail me; I've got a half-dozen or
> > so I could part with.  Not all to one person, though; don't be greedy
> > :).
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 2:43 AM
> > > To: ExI chat list
> > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invites?
> > >
> > > I just invited you.
> > > G.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:16:03 +0000, artillo at comcast.net
> > > <artillo at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > > I applied for a beta gmail account myself, I didn't get any
> > > > invites
> > > though and haven't heard anything yet.
> > > >
> > > > Artillo
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks to a not so anonymous extropian, I've got a gmail
> > > > > account,
> > have
> > > > > had for a few weeks. Well, I'm gagging for at least one more
> > > > > account (for my wife), but I haven't had any invites so far
> > > > > (which I thought were supposed to turn up periodically). Does
> > > > > anyone know how this works? Have google stopped handing out
> > > > > invites?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Emlyn
> > > > >
> > > > > http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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 twodeel at jornada.org  Sun Aug  1 22:11:53 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <20040801045902.39863.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408011511410.4698-100000@hplx.net>

On Sat, 31 Jul 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Could it really be that Bush is the secret hero and Kerry is the
> duplicitous self-serving traitor?

No.



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  2 01:49:28 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 18:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] META:  List Spam
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040731135334.035133e0@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20040802014928.31171.qmail@web60505.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:

> Looks like the list is getting a bit this week.
> 
    Here is a suggestion. List the email address of
the list on the website as 
 
extropy-chat<at>lists.extropy.org

If anyone reading can't figure it out, they probably
aren't smart enough to be worth having on the list.
And it should confuse the agents that spammers have
scavenging email addresses off of every inch of
webspace. It will probably work until the spammers
figure out how to make their webcrawlers parse it to
an actual email address. Sure the newbies will have to
manually type it into their address books (or
cut-edit-paste) but hey the list is free and it isn't
that much work anyways. Hope that helps.




=====
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!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Aug  2 08:03:35 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (thespike at satx.rr.com)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 09:03:35 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Damien and Barbara in London
Message-ID: <67c4c067a29b.67a29b67c4c0@texas.rr.com>

Barbara Lamar and I are visiting the UK briefly (I'm guest of honor at an academic convention about Comonwealth science fiction in Liverpool starting the 5th) and we're in London for a few days. Any Londonish extropes should feel encouraged to say hi (offlist, please), and maybe we can get together if there's time. 

We're staying in the London Bridge area.

Damien Broderick



From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Mon Aug  2 18:47:39 2004
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 14:47:39 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
In-Reply-To: <20040728165538.28632.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040728165538.28632.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6E192D79-E4B4-11D8-8438-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>


Not to beat a dead thread, but -

I had a room mate once, who was incredibly neat and well organized. 
Yes, some people would call him a "neat-freak" or even 
"super-anal-retentive" This wasn't an Odd Couple scenario, with me 
being a slob, but I wasn't as highly structured. From time to time we 
made each other crazy.

So my question is : Who was right?

I heard of an academic expert speaking on Isalm, of course talking the 
sense of it being a religion of peace and the like. The quote that 
stuck with me, was something along the lines of the "problem" is 
radical interpretations of Islamic law, and that most of history 
involving Islam revolves around a small minority.

I tend to keep with the old "Your right to throw a punch ends at my 
face" Heinleinian angle.

But if we have a group that wants to create "the perfect Islamic 
nation-state", and are constantly looking to increase their 
square-footage, are we not having an ideological conflict? I think that 
blaming partisan politics, soviet-era US backing, coddling Israel, and 
all other catch phrases, are failing to acknowledge the fact that this 
does seem to be an ideological problem...?







On Jul 28, 2004, at 12:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:
>> But to now posit an
>> ideological war as being largely the "why" of
>> terrorism and hardly
>> bothering to mention US polcies fueling anger
>> throughout the region
>> says that this Commission was a political puppet of
>> the current
>> adminstration with no credibility whatsoever.
>
> Oh, they mention the policies.  That's part of the
> source of the ideological war.  But whatever the
> cause, the result is still the result - and merely
> removing the cause won't necessarily fix everything
> (even if it would help a lot).
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Aug  3 00:06:25 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:06:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
In-Reply-To: <410C8524.78B9FF69@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <20040803000625.33218.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc."
<megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> Thanks immensely for the invite.
> I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail 
> and redoing my website and
> blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of
> documents  I might or might not
> need and saves getting a laptop for the road.

This is why I turned down the invite I got: I've
already got an email service that does this.  And
should that prove non-viable, I've got my own Web
server on which I can host whatever documents I want
for as long as I want, and anyone who knows the URL
can get 'em (which can be a good thing, so long as
one treats this as no more secure than a password: it
leaks or it doesn't, depending on who knows it and how
it's transmitted and stored).

Although...might it not also work to store the docs
on a USB keychain hard drive?  They seem to have More
Than Enough capacity for this application these days.
(I've seen ones offered with 2 GB, smaller than a
mid-sized swiss army knife.)


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug  3 01:13:40 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:43:40 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
In-Reply-To: <20040803000625.33218.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040803000625.33218.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04080218134488967e@mail.gmail.com>

I'm using mine as a knowledge base; an online store of everything
interesting that I want to remember. It works for this because it's
web based (with an eminently usable front end and a half decent search
engine :-) ), it's got huge capacity for web based email, and it's not
attached to a workplace; rather, it's provided by a pretty big ompany
that's unlikely to go away any time soon. The only worisome aspect is
that it is in beta, so could be pulled.

FWIW, I hardly ever use it for shipping attachments around, I find
it's pretty crap at this (fairly small ceiling on attachments, not
sure what that is), and I don't want to fill my quota. As it is, I
pour high volume mailing lists into it and never delete anything, so I
hope the 1 gig limit is grown over time :-)

I know some people get stressed about google having all their private
email, but really, "private email"? What an oxymoron!

Emlyn


On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:06:25 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc."
> <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> > Thanks immensely for the invite.
> > I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail
> > and redoing my website and
> > blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of
> > documents  I might or might not
> > need and saves getting a laptop for the road.
> 
> This is why I turned down the invite I got: I've
> already got an email service that does this.  And
> should that prove non-viable, I've got my own Web
> server on which I can host whatever documents I want
> for as long as I want, and anyone who knows the URL
> can get 'em (which can be a good thing, so long as
> one treats this as no more secure than a password: it
> leaks or it doesn't, depending on who knows it and how
> it's transmitted and stored).
> 
> Although...might it not also work to store the docs
> on a USB keychain hard drive?  They seem to have More
> Than Enough capacity for this application these days.
> (I've seen ones offered with 2 GB, smaller than a
> mid-sized swiss army knife.)
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From megao at sasktel.net  Tue Aug  3 01:27:17 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:27:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
References: <20040803000625.33218.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
	<710b78fc04080218134488967e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <410EE9F4.DE266D5F@sasktel.net>

I have about 16 megs of attachments to date and everything seems to work.

The main list screen won't resize the individual mail headers  and there
is no indication that the search engine can drill down into say a pdf to
search for text within an attachment.
It would be nice if they docs opened/converted to open  remotely without
downloading.

But maybe  that is part of what a full commercial service might offer?

Morris
mfj.eav<at>gmail.com

Emlyn wrote:

> I'm using mine as a knowledge base; an online store of everything
> interesting that I want to remember. It works for this because it's
> web based (with an eminently usable front end and a half decent search
> engine :-) ), it's got huge capacity for web based email, and it's not
> attached to a workplace; rather, it's provided by a pretty big ompany
> that's unlikely to go away any time soon. The only worisome aspect is
> that it is in beta, so could be pulled.
>
> FWIW, I hardly ever use it for shipping attachments around, I find
> it's pretty crap at this (fairly small ceiling on attachments, not
> sure what that is), and I don't want to fill my quota. As it is, I
> pour high volume mailing lists into it and never delete anything, so I
> hope the 1 gig limit is grown over time :-)
>
> I know some people get stressed about google having all their private
> email, but really, "private email"? What an oxymoron!
>
> Emlyn
>
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:06:25 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
> <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > --- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc."
> > <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> > > Thanks immensely for the invite.
> > > I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail
> > > and redoing my website and
> > > blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of
> > > documents  I might or might not
> > > need and saves getting a laptop for the road.
> >
> > This is why I turned down the invite I got: I've
> > already got an email service that does this.  And
> > should that prove non-viable, I've got my own Web
> > server on which I can host whatever documents I want
> > for as long as I want, and anyone who knows the URL
> > can get 'em (which can be a good thing, so long as
> > one treats this as no more secure than a password: it
> > leaks or it doesn't, depending on who knows it and how
> > it's transmitted and stored).
> >
> > Although...might it not also work to store the docs
> > on a USB keychain hard drive?  They seem to have More
> > Than Enough capacity for this application these days.
> > (I've seen ones offered with 2 GB, smaller than a
> > mid-sized swiss army knife.)
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
>
> --
> Emlyn
>
> http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug  3 03:02:03 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:32:03 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
In-Reply-To: <410EE9F4.DE266D5F@sasktel.net>
References: <20040803000625.33218.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
	<710b78fc04080218134488967e@mail.gmail.com>
	<410EE9F4.DE266D5F@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040802200240559d9e@mail.gmail.com>

I'd say so, it's early days... many things are bare bones (eg: you
can't save a draft of a message!)

On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 20:27:17 -0500, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures
Inc. <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> I have about 16 megs of attachments to date and everything seems to work.
> 
> The main list screen won't resize the individual mail headers  and there
> is no indication that the search engine can drill down into say a pdf to
> search for text within an attachment.
> It would be nice if they docs opened/converted to open  remotely without
> downloading.
> 
> But maybe  that is part of what a full commercial service might offer?
> 
> Morris
> mfj.eav<at>gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> Emlyn wrote:
> 
> > I'm using mine as a knowledge base; an online store of everything
> > interesting that I want to remember. It works for this because it's
> > web based (with an eminently usable front end and a half decent search
> > engine :-) ), it's got huge capacity for web based email, and it's not
> > attached to a workplace; rather, it's provided by a pretty big ompany
> > that's unlikely to go away any time soon. The only worisome aspect is
> > that it is in beta, so could be pulled.
> >
> > FWIW, I hardly ever use it for shipping attachments around, I find
> > it's pretty crap at this (fairly small ceiling on attachments, not
> > sure what that is), and I don't want to fill my quota. As it is, I
> > pour high volume mailing lists into it and never delete anything, so I
> > hope the 1 gig limit is grown over time :-)
> >
> > I know some people get stressed about google having all their private
> > email, but really, "private email"? What an oxymoron!
> >
> > Emlyn
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:06:25 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
> > <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > --- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc."
> > > <megao at sasktel.net> wrote:
> > > > Thanks immensely for the invite.
> > > > I've been loading a mobile office platform on gmail
> > > > and redoing my website and
> > > > blog in tandem.  Saves lugging a briefcase of
> > > > documents  I might or might not
> > > > need and saves getting a laptop for the road.
> > >
> > > This is why I turned down the invite I got: I've
> > > already got an email service that does this.  And
> > > should that prove non-viable, I've got my own Web
> > > server on which I can host whatever documents I want
> > > for as long as I want, and anyone who knows the URL
> > > can get 'em (which can be a good thing, so long as
> > > one treats this as no more secure than a password: it
> > > leaks or it doesn't, depending on who knows it and how
> > > it's transmitted and stored).
> > >
> > > Although...might it not also work to store the docs
> > > on a USB keychain hard drive?  They seem to have More
> > > Than Enough capacity for this application these days.
> > > (I've seen ones offered with 2 GB, smaller than a
> > > mid-sized swiss army knife.)
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > extropy-chat mailing list
> > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Emlyn
> >
> > http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Aug  3 06:48:31 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 07:48:31 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitee thanks you
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040802200240559d9e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20040803000625.33218.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
	<710b78fc04080218134488967e@mail.gmail.com>
	<410EE9F4.DE266D5F@sasktel.net>
	<710b78fc040802200240559d9e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e040802234878928ed0@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 12:32:03 +0930, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd say so, it's early days... many things are bare bones (eg: you
> can't save a draft of a message!)
> 

They welcome suggestions for improvements. I've made several myself.
They recently added address book import. Save to draft is on their to-do list.
I'd like more than 20 filters, personnally.

An individual message can be up to 10MB in size (including all attachments).

BillK


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug  3 12:53:38 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:23:38 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!
Message-ID: <710b78fc04080305537dd4c382@mail.gmail.com>

Shameless plug!

Does anyone remember the Daleks? Check out the newest track from The
Land Canaan, called "Exterminate", on my website (emlynoregan.com). If
you ever wanted to be Davros, this will inspire you!

Also have a listen to a draft track more in the old The Land Canaan
style, "Dido's Lament".

Both tracks are on the front page.

My website performs woefully for downloads, so please be patient. If
anyone knows a decent place to host original mp3s, I'd love some
advice. Also, I think it goes without saying that the track is free
(beer), otherwise I wouldn't put it on my website, ey?

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Tue Aug  3 13:27:22 2004
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 09:27:22 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
In-Reply-To: <6E192D79-E4B4-11D8-8438-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
References: <20040728165538.28632.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
	<6E192D79-E4B4-11D8-8438-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <D9EEE5E6-E550-11D8-894D-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>


Just talking to someone voice -

Yes,  this is nth degree simplification.

But I find for the purpose of dialog or rules-sets, simplicity is the 
key.


On Aug 2, 2004, at 2:47 PM, Bret Kulakovich wrote:

>
> Not to beat a dead thread, but -
>
> I had a room mate once, who was incredibly neat and well organized. 
> Yes, some people would call him a "neat-freak" or even 
> "super-anal-retentive" This wasn't an Odd Couple scenario, with me 
> being a slob, but I wasn't as highly structured. From time to time we 
> made each other crazy.
>
> So my question is : Who was right?
>
> I heard of an academic expert speaking on Isalm, of course talking the 
> sense of it being a religion of peace and the like. The quote that 
> stuck with me, was something along the lines of the "problem" is 
> radical interpretations of Islamic law, and that most of history 
> involving Islam revolves around a small minority.
>
> I tend to keep with the old "Your right to throw a punch ends at my 
> face" Heinleinian angle.
>
> But if we have a group that wants to create "the perfect Islamic 
> nation-state", and are constantly looking to increase their 
> square-footage, are we not having an ideological conflict? I think 
> that blaming partisan politics, soviet-era US backing, coddling 
> Israel, and all other catch phrases, are failing to acknowledge the 
> fact that this does seem to be an ideological problem...?
>



From amara at amara.com  Tue Aug  3 17:56:18 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 18:56:18 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] book: Promethean Ambitions by William R. Newman
Message-ID: <p05100301bd358167b773@[150.146.134.133]>



Yesterday, in the International Herald Tribune (and the New York Times)
an interesting book review appeared:


Promethean Ambitions:
Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature by William R. Newman
Reviewed by Edward Rothstein NYT


http://www.iht.com/articles/532091.html

The following phrases in the Review especially caught my attention:


---------------

{beginning quote}

Even more temperate interpreters of science, though, have been
changing their ideas about alchemy. Historians now treat the
enterprise less as a naive activity supplanted by science than as an
intellectual discipline out of which science gradually evolved. In
"Promethean Ambitions," William R. Newman, who teaches the history and
philosophy of science at Indiana University, goes even further.

For him, alchemy, from its ancient origins as a servant to the
decorative arts to its 17th-century transmutation into modern
chemistry, provided the crucible in which many contemporary ideas
about nature and artifice were first examined.

Today, he writes, "we live in the era of 'Frankenfoods,' cloning, in
vitro fertilization, synthetic polymers, Artificial Intelligence, and
computer generated 'Artificial Life,'" an era in which Pope John Paul
II has warned of the "Promethean ambitions" of biomedical science, and
the President's Council on Bioethics has studied Hawthorne's
alchemical story, "The Birth-Mark."

But Newman argues that most current debates about boundaries between
nature and artifice, or boundaries between proper and improper
scientific exploration, echo debates that run through the history of
alchemy. Critics of alchemy argued that the natural world could not be
replicated or improved and that such goals should not be pursued.
Advocates found porous boundaries between nature and artifice that
could be explored and tested.

In Newman's view, this tension between nature and artifice is
fundamental. Alchemy is primarily an art of transmutation: One metal
is turned into another, one living creature erupts out of the
substance of another. Alchemy is concerned with the character of that
change. It thus pays attention to categories, differences and
boundaries. If one substance is changed into another, does it change
its essence or only some of its properties? Is nature being revealed
or overturned?

{end quote}
---------------

Alchemy is a topic that has intrigued me for some time, and I talked
about it in my article last year:

http://transhumanism.com/index.php/weblog/more/eternal-city-grapsody-5-parmigianinos-golden-transformations/

Eternal City Grapsody #5 - Parmigianino's Golden Transformations


Historians who study European and Eastern medieval life often
encounter two interpretations of the 'art' of alchemy. The methods of
concentration, distillation, maturing, and mixing could be considered
as a physical chemistry exercise or as human psychological
transformation, that is, a disguised form of a spiritual quest. What
confuses the two interpretations is that one of the origins of
alchemy- the Sufis, did indeed work in laboratories performing real
alchemy experiments.

The Sufi student is given an undertaking that may not seem scientific
by contemporary standards, and for the purposes of their
self-development, one must carry it out with complete faith. In the
process of planning and carrying through this effort, one attains
one's spiritual development. Even though the alchemical or other
undertaking might be impossible, it is the framework within which
one's mental and moral development is carried out. It is something
like the perspective that competitive sport or scholastic undertakings
are performed; that is, the mountain or the PhD or the muscular
development are the fixed points, but they are not the element which
is actually being transformed by the effort. 

For the Sufis, in the larger context of humanity, the physical and
spiritual process of alchemy is the regeneration of an essential part
of humanity, called "the Philosopher's Stone", an essence (inside each
man), which is thought to uplift humanity to the next stage. The
function of the Philosopher's Stone is as a universal medicine and a
source of longevity. The interesting fact about this stone is that the
stone or elixir is a state of mind. The elements to produce the Stone
(the essence) are sulphur (kibrit, homonym of kibirat, "greatness,
nobility"), salt (milh, homonym of milh, "goodness, learning"), and
mercury (zibaq, "to open a lock, to break").

---------------

I have not read _Promethean Ambitions_ so I don't know how far
the author takes alchemy, but he might be thinking in similar
ways based on this phrase in the International Herald Tribune review:

"There is more information gathered by Newman than the casual reader
can easily absorb, including difficult analyses of philosophical and
religious arguments taking place over centuries in Latin, Greek and
Arabic. But Newman, a clear and graceful writer, keeps his goal in
view. He is an initiate - tapping, testing and transmuting - until
something different, still called alchemy, gradually takes shape."

This book will go into my reading queue!

Amara

-- 

Amara Graps, PhD
Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI)
Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF),
Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR,
Roma, ITALIA     Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it


From mike99 at lascruces.com  Tue Aug  3 21:53:53 2004
From: mike99 at lascruces.com (mike99)
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:53:53 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: book: Promethean Ambitions by William R. Newman
Message-ID: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKIELLEBAA.mike99@lascruces.com>

Amara,
Another version of the alchemical quest for self-transformation is found in
the so-called Fourth Way teachings of G. I. Gurdjieff and similar teachers.
Gurdjieff had a rather elaborate system (as described in his student P.D.
Ouspenky's book "In Search of the Miraculous"). His belief was that
physiological and biochemical changes took place within individuals who
"worked on themselves" to advance to a higher level of functional existence.
Supposedly, bodily substances were transmuted in a step-wise fashion, where
the output of one step became the input substance for the next. But if one
did not know how to properly conduct this process, one could not advance
very far.

Unfortunately, much of the Gurdjieffian system is a closely guarded secret.
In order to test it, one would have to "buy into" the group-think of the
Gurdjieff Institute. And by going that far, one would probably lose the
objectivity necessary in order to test this theory scientifically.

It's probably a moot point, anyway. Transhumanism is very likely to take us
beyond anywhere that Gurdjieff and his followers could even imagine.


Regards,

Michael LaTorra

mike99 at lascruces.com
mlatorra at nmsu.edu

"For any man to abdicate an interest in science is to walk with open eyes
towards slavery."
-- Jacob Bronowski

"Experiences only look special from the inside of the system."
-- Eugen Leitl

Member:
Extropy Institute: www.extropy.org
World Transhumanist Association: www.transhumanism.org
Alcor Life Extension Foundation: www.alcor.org
Society for Technical Communication: www.stc.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org
> [mailto:wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org]On Behalf Of Amara Graps
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 11:56 AM
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org; wta-talk at transhumanism.org
> Subject: [wta-talk] book: Promethean Ambitions by William R. Newman
>
>
>
>
> Yesterday, in the International Herald Tribune (and the New York Times)
> an interesting book review appeared:
>
>
> Promethean Ambitions:
> Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature by William R. Newman
> Reviewed by Edward Rothstein NYT
>
>
> http://www.iht.com/articles/532091.html
>
> The following phrases in the Review especially caught my attention:
>
>
> ---------------
>
> {beginning quote}
>
> Even more temperate interpreters of science, though, have been
> changing their ideas about alchemy. Historians now treat the
> enterprise less as a naive activity supplanted by science than as an
> intellectual discipline out of which science gradually evolved. In
> "Promethean Ambitions," William R. Newman, who teaches the history and
> philosophy of science at Indiana University, goes even further.
>
> For him, alchemy, from its ancient origins as a servant to the
> decorative arts to its 17th-century transmutation into modern
> chemistry, provided the crucible in which many contemporary ideas
> about nature and artifice were first examined.
>
> Today, he writes, "we live in the era of 'Frankenfoods,' cloning, in
> vitro fertilization, synthetic polymers, Artificial Intelligence, and
> computer generated 'Artificial Life,'" an era in which Pope John Paul
> II has warned of the "Promethean ambitions" of biomedical science, and
> the President's Council on Bioethics has studied Hawthorne's
> alchemical story, "The Birth-Mark."
>
> But Newman argues that most current debates about boundaries between
> nature and artifice, or boundaries between proper and improper
> scientific exploration, echo debates that run through the history of
> alchemy. Critics of alchemy argued that the natural world could not be
> replicated or improved and that such goals should not be pursued.
> Advocates found porous boundaries between nature and artifice that
> could be explored and tested.
>
> In Newman's view, this tension between nature and artifice is
> fundamental. Alchemy is primarily an art of transmutation: One metal
> is turned into another, one living creature erupts out of the
> substance of another. Alchemy is concerned with the character of that
> change. It thus pays attention to categories, differences and
> boundaries. If one substance is changed into another, does it change
> its essence or only some of its properties? Is nature being revealed
> or overturned?
>
> {end quote}
> ---------------
>
> Alchemy is a topic that has intrigued me for some time, and I talked
> about it in my article last year:
>
> http://transhumanism.com/index.php/weblog/more/eternal-city-grapso
> dy-5-parmigianinos-golden-transformations/
>
> Eternal City Grapsody #5 - Parmigianino's Golden Transformations
>
>
> Historians who study European and Eastern medieval life often
> encounter two interpretations of the 'art' of alchemy. The methods of
> concentration, distillation, maturing, and mixing could be considered
> as a physical chemistry exercise or as human psychological
> transformation, that is, a disguised form of a spiritual quest. What
> confuses the two interpretations is that one of the origins of
> alchemy- the Sufis, did indeed work in laboratories performing real
> alchemy experiments.
>
> The Sufi student is given an undertaking that may not seem scientific
> by contemporary standards, and for the purposes of their
> self-development, one must carry it out with complete faith. In the
> process of planning and carrying through this effort, one attains
> one's spiritual development. Even though the alchemical or other
> undertaking might be impossible, it is the framework within which
> one's mental and moral development is carried out. It is something
> like the perspective that competitive sport or scholastic undertakings
> are performed; that is, the mountain or the PhD or the muscular
> development are the fixed points, but they are not the element which
> is actually being transformed by the effort.
>
> For the Sufis, in the larger context of humanity, the physical and
> spiritual process of alchemy is the regeneration of an essential part
> of humanity, called "the Philosopher's Stone", an essence (inside each
> man), which is thought to uplift humanity to the next stage. The
> function of the Philosopher's Stone is as a universal medicine and a
> source of longevity. The interesting fact about this stone is that the
> stone or elixir is a state of mind. The elements to produce the Stone
> (the essence) are sulphur (kibrit, homonym of kibirat, "greatness,
> nobility"), salt (milh, homonym of milh, "goodness, learning"), and
> mercury (zibaq, "to open a lock, to break").
>
> ---------------
>
> I have not read _Promethean Ambitions_ so I don't know how far
> the author takes alchemy, but he might be thinking in similar
> ways based on this phrase in the International Herald Tribune review:
>
> "There is more information gathered by Newman than the casual reader
> can easily absorb, including difficult analyses of philosophical and
> religious arguments taking place over centuries in Latin, Greek and
> Arabic. But Newman, a clear and graceful writer, keeps his goal in
> view. He is an initiate - tapping, testing and transmuting - until
> something different, still called alchemy, gradually takes shape."
>
> This book will go into my reading queue!
>
> Amara
>
> --
>
> Amara Graps, PhD
> Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI)
> Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF),
> Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR,
> Roma, ITALIA     Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it
> _______________________________________________
> wta-talk mailing list
> wta-talk at transhumanism.org
> http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk
>




From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Tue Aug  3 22:07:49 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:07:49 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040803230713.01f30840@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>


You mean, you're back?  Excellent news!



James...


>Message: 7
>Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:23:38 +0930
>From: Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <710b78fc04080305537dd4c382 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
>
>Shameless plug!
>
>
>Does anyone remember the Daleks? Check out the newest track from The
>Land Canaan, called "Exterminate", on my website (emlynoregan.com). If
>you ever wanted to be Davros, this will inspire you!
>
>
>Also have a listen to a draft track more in the old The Land Canaan
>style, "Dido's Lament".
>
>
>Both tracks are on the front page.
>
>
>My website performs woefully for downloads, so please be patient. If
>anyone knows a decent place to host original mp3s, I'd love some
>advice. Also, I think it goes without saying that the track is free
>(beer), otherwise I wouldn't put it on my website, ey?
>
>
>--
>Emlyn





From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Tue Aug  3 22:11:05 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:11:05 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] My time is almost up...
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040803230800.01f2d1d8@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>

Well, the documents are all verified and stamped, the backgrounds been 
checked and cleared, the fingerprints have been scanned, and the final 
stamp's been made.

So hopefully (within the next 2 months or so) I'll be making my move to the 
U.S.

Anyone wanna buy a semi-D in South Dublin? :)



James...




From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug  3 22:24:04 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 07:54:04 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20040803230713.01f30840@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>
References: <5.0.2.1.1.20040803230713.01f30840@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040803152418011e@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, it *does* mean that! Woo hoo! Our youngest child is at about the
age (4) that my eldest was when we first started The Land Canaan, and
for some reason that's getting the creative juices flowing (could be
sleep).

Emlyn

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 23:07:49 +0100, J Corbally <jcorb at irishbroadband.net> wrote:
> 
> You mean, you're back?  Excellent news!
> 
> James...
> 
> >Message: 7
> >Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:23:38 +0930
> >From: Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com>
> >Subject: [extropy-chat] Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!
> >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Message-ID: <710b78fc04080305537dd4c382 at mail.gmail.com>
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> >
> >
> >Shameless plug!
> >
> >
> >Does anyone remember the Daleks? Check out the newest track from The
> >Land Canaan, called "Exterminate", on my website (emlynoregan.com). If
> >you ever wanted to be Davros, this will inspire you!
> >
> >
> >Also have a listen to a draft track more in the old The Land Canaan
> >style, "Dido's Lament".
> >
> >
> >Both tracks are on the front page.
> >
> >
> >My website performs woefully for downloads, so please be patient. If
> >anyone knows a decent place to host original mp3s, I'd love some
> >advice. Also, I think it goes without saying that the track is free
> >(beer), otherwise I wouldn't put it on my website, ey?
> >
> >
> >--
> >Emlyn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Aug  4 04:08:12 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:08:12 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Exterminate! Exterminate! Exterminate!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04080320315f0b4a61@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc04080320315f0b4a61@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4110612C.7010507@pobox.com>

Emlyn wrote:
> 
> Does anyone remember the Daleks? Check out the newest track from The
> Land Canaan, called "Exterminate", on my website (emlynoregan.com). If
> you ever wanted to be Davros, this will inspire you!

I've been compared to Davros:

"The Daleks had Davros, the Berserkers had Goodlife, and now the 
Singularity has Yudkowsky."
	-- Steve (no last name given)

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Aug  4 07:36:46 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 08:36:46 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Sub-replacement fertility spreading rapidly
Message-ID: <ee50357e040804003661bf6709@mail.gmail.com>

<http://www.fpri.org/ww/0505.200407.eberstadt.demography.html>

Four Surprises in Global Demography
By Nicholas Eberstadt     July 2004

(1) the rapid spread of sub-replacement fertility,
(2) the emergence of unnatural gender imbalances among the very young, 
(3) sustained increases in death rates
(4) American "demographic exceptionalism".

"Sub-replacement fertility is clearly no longer mainly a 
developed-nation phenomenon. If the Census Bureau's projections are 
roughly accurate, just about half the world's population lives in 
sub-replacement countries or territories.
Apart from Mongolia, according to the Census Bureau, all of East Asia is 
sub-replacement, as are Thailand and Burma in Southeast Asia, Kazakhstan 
and Sri Lanka in South-Central Asia, many Caribbean societies, and most 
South American countries.
Perhaps the biggest surprise, given received notions about the 
Arab/Muslim expanse, is the recent spread of sub- replacement fertility 
to parts of the Arab and the Muslim world."


Much food for thought in this article about the latest Census Bureau 
figures. Looks like the US just has to continue as normal and wait for 
the rest of the world to dwindle away over the next 50 years.

BillK


From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Aug  4 14:36:07 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 07:36:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryonics:  Support Candidates who support us
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040804072950.02901ec0@mail.earthlink.net>

Greetings -

If you would like to donate to a political candidate who supports cryonics, 
please go here to read more 
http://www.merkle.com/cryo/contributions.html.  (Extropy Institute does not 
suggest any one political persuasion, but we do support those who share our 
expressed vision! )  A link is located on our website at 
http://www.extropy.org

"The Arizona State Legislature considered legislation in its last session 
to regulate cryonics. It might again consider such legislation in the next 
session. As a 501(c)3, Alcor cannot support individual candidates. However, 
individual members, affiliates, supporters and friends are free to support 
those candidates who support the rights of the individual to make their own 
choices about their own lives -- including cryonics."

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/20040804/2dc0e587/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Wed Aug  4 14:19:40 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 15:19:40 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Perseids: July 23 - August 22; Peak: August 12
Message-ID: <p05100303bd36a036710b@[150.146.134.133]>

Perseid Meteor Shower

http://www.skyscan.ca/perseids.htm

Perseids: July 23 - August 22; 
Peak August 12


"The Perseids are the best-known of any meteor shower. Occurring as
they do in mid-August, they can be observed under the warm and
comfortable yet darkening skies of late summer. Because of the
consistent strength of the shower, and its convenient time of year,
the Perseids are observed by more astronomy enthusiasts than any other
shower, and are by far the most likely display to be observed by the
general public."


The Discovery of the Perseids
http://skyandtelescope.com/observing/objects/meteors/article_124_1.asp


(I hope that I will have an awesome view: I'll be in a waning
moon dark sky at Lake Shasta, Calif. during the Perseid Peak:
http://www.mtshasta.com/index.html  click on 'ShastaCam')


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/
***********************************************************************
"Living on earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip
around the sun."   --Ashleigh Brilliant


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Aug  4 13:39:01 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 09:39:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Perseids: July 23 - August 22; Peak: August 12
Message-ID: <184670-2200483413391921@M2W074.mail2web.com>

From: Amara Graps 

>Perseid Meteor Shower
>http://www.skyscan.ca/perseids.htm

>Perseids: July 23 - August 22; 
>Peak August 12

Thank you Amara for the reminder!  Yippee!

Natasha

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




From paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz  Wed Aug  4 21:09:12 2004
From: paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz (paul.bridger)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 09:09:12 +1200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Relevant to cryonics?
Message-ID: <41115078.30907@paradise.net.nz>

ESA researching hibernation.

This should never be used to send weak fleshy humans to the stars. Hopefully 
I can get some of this and fast forward to the future, when glorious shiny 
robots will have taken their rightful place on the throne.

http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040802/full/040802-8.html


From pfallon at ptd.net  Thu Aug  5 14:26:08 2004
From: pfallon at ptd.net (Pat Fallon)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:26:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Perseid predictions
References: <p05100303bd36a036710b@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <001401c47af8$27769f20$3f47bacc@preferrei3lj79>

Here is the abstract and conclusion from the just-published WGN article on
the 2004 outburst by Lyytinen & Van Flandern
Abstract
In 2004, August 11 at about 21h UT, the one revolution dust trail of the
Perseids parent comet Swift-Tuttle is calculated to pass within 0.0013 AU
from the Earth's orbit and we expect this to cause a moderately strong,
short outburst of mainly visually dim meteors. We have drawn conclusions
from our (Lyytinen, TVF) prediction model that has been quite successful in
predicting recent Leonids storms.  We also discuss the possibility of
enhanced yearly rates because perturbations by Jupiter will now direct all
incoming Perseids meteoroids about 0.01 AU closer to the Sun, which allows
the possibility of Earth passing through the densest core of the yearly
stream.

Conclusions
With the Moon at waning crescent phase on August 11, observing conditions
for the 2004 Perseids meteor activity should be excellent everywhere.
Because the radiant is at a high northern declination (+58?), most northern
hemisphere observers may expect to see meteors throughout the night.
Observers will not want to be north of 60? latitude or so because of the
"midnight Sun" in summer. Nor will they want to be below about latitude -32?
because the radiant will never rise above their horizon.

Using techniques that have had considerable success in predicting the times,
locations, and rates for meteor storms and shower peaks for both Leonids and
Ursids, we expect that even the annual activity of the Perseids may be
better than normal this year. Observations possibly confirming this or
rejecting this will be valuable. This will help in mapping the stream and be
used in predicting what to expect in the next similar situation in the year
2016. Even before this, in the year 2009 the planet Saturn makes a similar
even slightly stronger 'dip' into the incoming meteoroids stream.

But as Figure 1 (below) shows, conditions for the following years will
revert to more typical meteor rates. Perseids activity this strong or better
is not predicted again until the year 2028.

In 2004, a possible meteor outburst of mostly fainter-than-average meteors
may be seen on August 11 around 21h UT, with the optimum time occurring at
20h 50m UT. That will be daylight hours for the Western Hemisphere, but in
darkness for most of the Eastern Hemisphere. Asia will be best situated for
observing this outburst. The full width of half-maximum rate is predicted to
last about 40 minutes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

Posted by Pat Fallon

pfallon at ptd.net





From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Aug  5 22:55:36 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 15:55:36 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (PvT) Luddites. I *hate* those guys.
Message-ID: <4112BAE8.F5430CD8@mindspring.com>

< http://www.reason.com/rb/rb080404.shtml >

Prolongevity
Is approaching immortality immoral?
Ronald Bailey

I'm speaking later this week at the World Transhumanist Association's
annual meeting, Transvision 2004. Below is a short version of my remarks.

What if a biomedical researcher discovered that lives were being cut short
because every human being was infected in the womb by a disease organism
that eventually wears down the human immune system's ability to protect
us? Until that discovery, the "natural" average lifespan was the
proverbial three score and ten years.

Once the discovery is made, another brilliant researcher devises a
"vaccine" that kills off the disease organism. Suddenly the average
lifespan doubles to seven score (140 years). In a sense, this is exactly
where we find ourselves today. There are no "vaccines" yet to cure the
disease of aging. But biomedical researchers understand more with each
passing year about the processes that cause the increasing physical and
mental debilities that we define as aging. Aging is no more or less
"natural" than cholera, smallpox, diabetes, arteriosclerosis, or any
disease that cuts short human lives.

Nevertheless, a number of prominent bioethicists and other policy
intellectuals are arguing that we should oppose any such life-doubling
"vaccine" on the grounds that it would interfere with the "natural" course
of human life.

For example, in the current issue of the journal Gerontology, bioethicist
Daniel Callahan claims in a debate with Gregory Stock that doubling human
lifespans would be a net negative for individuals and society.

Callahan makes three arguments. First, he points out that the "problems of
war, poverty, environment, job creation, and social and familial violence"
would not "be solved by everyone living a much longer life." Second, he
asserts that longer lives will lead mostly to more golf games, not new
social energy. "I don't believe that if you give most people longer lives,
even in better health, they are going to find new opportunities and new
initiatives," Callahan writes.

And thirdly, Callahan is worried about what longer lives would do to child
bearing and rearing, Social Security and Medicare. He demands that "each
one of the problems I mentioned has to be solved in advance. The dumbest
thing for us to do would be to wander into this new world and say, 'We'll
deal with the problems as they come along.'"

Callahan's first argument is a non sequitur. People already engage in lots
of activities that do not aim directly at "solving" war, poverty,
environmental problems, job creation, and the rest. Surely we can't stop
everything until we've ended war, poverty, and familial violence.
Anti-aging biomedical research wouldn't obviously exacerbate any of the
problems listed by Callahan and might actually moderate some of them. If
people knew that they were likely to enjoy many more healthy years, they
might be more inclined to longer-term thinking aimed at remedying some of
those problems.

Second, Callahan's "longer life equals more golf" argument is not only
condescending, it ignores the ravages that physical decline visits on
people. Callahan, age 73, sees a lack of "new energy" among his confreres.
Even if people are healthy at age 75, their "energy" levels will be lower
than at age 30. They may not begin "new initiatives" because they can't
expect to live to see them come to fruition.

But diminishing physical energy isn't the only problem; there is also
waning psychic energy. "There's a factor that has nothing to do with
physical energy. That is the boredom and repetition of life," he argues.
"I ran an organization for 27 years. I didn't get physically tired. I just
got bored doing the same thing repetitiously."

It doesn't seem reasonable to conclude that, just because Callahan is
bored with life, we all will become so. Modern material and intellectual
abundance is offering a way out of the lives of quiet desperation suffered
by our impoverished ancestors. The 21st century will offer an
ever-increasing menu of life plans and choices. Surely exhausting the
coming possibilities will take more than one standard lifetime. Besides,
if you do want to play endless games of golf and can afford it, why is
that immoral? And if you become bored with life and golf, well, no one is
making you hang around.

Doubling healthy human life expectancy would create some novel social
problems, to be sure, but would they really be so hard to deal with?
Callahan cites the hoary example of brain-dead old professors blocking the
progress of vibrant young researchers by grimly holding onto tenure. That
seems more of a problem for medieval holdovers like universities than for
modern social institutions like corporations.

Assuming it turns out that, even with healthy long-lived oldsters, there
is an advantage in turnover in top management, then corporations that
adopt that model will thrive and those that do not will be outcompeted.
Besides, even today youngsters don't simply wait around for their elders
to die. They go out and found their own companies and other institutions.
Bill Gates didn't wait to take over IBM; he founded Microsoft at age 20.
Nor did human genome sequencer Craig Venter loiter about until the top
slot at the National Institutes of Health opened up. And in politics, we
already solve the problem of clutching oldsters by term-limiting the
presidency, as well as many state and local offices.

Callahan's failure of imagination when it comes to public policy
conundrums like Social Security and Medicare is breathtaking. Folks will
be chronologically older, but not elderly in the current sense. Thus, the
standard age when those payoffs begin will obviously have to rise, as the
healthy aging will be expected to continue to be productive and support
themselves. Assuming that age-retardation is possible, the many illnesses
and debilities that accompany aging will be postponed. If one is going to
live to be 140, one has a lot of time to plan and save for the future.

And his assumption of a child crisis in a world of long-lived people seems
based on the idea that healthy oldsters would be less interested in
reproducing. A first response might be: so what? Shouldn't the decision to
have children be up to individuals? After all, already countries with the
highest life expectancies have the lowest levels of fertility.

This lack of interest in progeny would have the happy side effect of
making sure that doubling human lifespans doesn't lead to overpopulation.
No one can know for sure, but it could well be that bearing and rearing
children would eventually interest long-lived oldsters who would come to
feel that they had the time and the resources to do it right.

Callahan's final demand that all problems that doubled healthy lifespans
might cause be solved in advance is just silly. Humanity did not solve all
of the problems caused by the introduction of farming, electricity,
automobiles, antibiotics, sanitation, and computers in advance. We
proceeded by trial and error and corrected problems as they arose. We
should be allowed do the same thing with any new age-retardation
techniques that biomedical research may develop. And we'll be happy to do
so.


-- 
"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 > [Southeast Asia
veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  6 03:06:00 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] My time is almost up...
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20040803230800.01f2d1d8@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>
Message-ID: <20040806030600.97043.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- J Corbally <jcorb at irishbroadband.net> wrote:

> Well, the documents are all verified and stamped, the backgrounds
> been checked and cleared, the fingerprints have been scanned, and the
> final stamp's been made.
> 
> So hopefully (within the next 2 months or so) I'll be making my move
> to the U.S.

Excellent, welcome! Where will you be settling down?

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug  6 04:42:31 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 21:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cryonics:  Support Candidates who support us
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040804072950.02901ec0@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20040806044231.37597.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

Excellent! I fully support the recommendations on Merkle's site and
suggest that people do what they can with either money or volunteer
support for campaigns to help make the cryonics movement an effective
lobby in Arizona. Write letters to the editors of AZ newspapers and try
to get on local talk radio shows about the issue.

--- Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:

> Greetings -
> 
> If you would like to donate to a political candidate who supports
> cryonics, please go here to read more 
> http://www.merkle.com/cryo/contributions.html.  

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com


From Claus.Bornich at autocue.co.uk  Fri Aug  6 14:20:52 2004
From: Claus.Bornich at autocue.co.uk (Claus Bornich)
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 15:20:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic music
Message-ID: <ED6B7A40D8CE434293BB3656A160340A32E485@LEONARD.london.autocue.net>


Hello.

Just discovered a new artist with what must be the most transhuman angle I've come across so far. After reading the introduction on his website (below) I was quite excited and although the music is more open to interpretation than it would suggest, I must say it is really good stuff. Maybe not so strange since I already love both technology and electronic music. Here are two snippets of texts describing his music. One from the frontpage on his website and the second from the record company that distributes his records.

"Cursor Miner was found dead on the evening of 28/01/2004. Slumped over his laboratory table amidst a mass of smouldering cables his skull containing 2kg of mercury. 
In a botched attempt to upload his brain the very nature of information itself had become unstable, only the fact that he was using cheap audio cables saved the rest of reality from destruction. The only salvagable data on the machine was 11 pieces of music his mind had managed to write to the disk during the final milliseconds of fevered neural activity. This was a final desperate attempt to describe the sensations of becoming pure data. This album was entitled "Cursor Miner Plays God" and will be released on May 24th on Lo Recordings."

The review of his previous album at Lo Recordings reads:

"Cursor Miner is one of those people who never quite traded in their starry-eyed optimism for cold, hard cynicism. Or lost his fancy for philosophical musings about the possibilities of quantum physics, the likelihood of ever relocating to outer space or being well up for replacing his body parts with supertechnology. Maybe it's na?ve, but, well, fuck it. People scoffed about putting man on the moon, too, and now look where we are, eh? His debut album Explosive Piece Of Mind imagines a vision of the future where the world flourishes in a techno utopia; a place where science uses its powers for good instead of evil. He's a denizen of the fantasyland where we don't actually destroy the earth, we make it a better place. His music is equally ambitious: pop with an edge, that dares to both fuck with you and be irresistibly catchy at the same time: a proper electronic pop album with harmonies, razor sharp lyrics, songs, hooks and all those things you thought the laptop generation had left behind. And twisted, like if Lewis Carroll wrote lyrics for Gary Numan or Squarepusher. Curioser and curioser."

Both albums are quite eclectic in style and quality. Some is amazingly good and some is just so-so. I love most of the cursor miner plays god album though.

You can find his website at http://www.cursorminer.com

There are a few free mp3 clips for download. Although they are too short and few to give a complete idea of all that is on offer, it will give an impression of the style of music.

PS! No I am in no way associated with or even know this guy. I only heard of him two weeks ago, whereas I've been a loyal reader of the extropy forum for almost three years now. It's been a bumpy ride for sure but I've learned a lot from following this forum and it's nice to know there are likeminded individuals out there. Not exactly a frequent poster though...

PSPS! Anyone with any theories on what the Cursor Miner name might be a reference to?

Cheers!

Claus


From paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz  Fri Aug  6 21:24:12 2004
From: paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz (paul.bridger)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 09:24:12 +1200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic music
In-Reply-To: <ED6B7A40D8CE434293BB3656A160340A32E485@LEONARD.london.autocue.net>
References: <ED6B7A40D8CE434293BB3656A160340A32E485@LEONARD.london.autocue.net>
Message-ID: <4113F6FC.8000307@paradise.net.nz>

Claus Bornich wrote:
 > PSPS! Anyone with any theories on what the Cursor Miner name might be a 
reference to?

My interpretation:
Well the cursor in terms of a computer interface is the point of entry, the 
boundary between user and computer, man and machine. Much like coal miners 
dig holes in a rock face, he is tunnelling into the possibilities within 
computers (ie. electronica music).




From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Fri Aug  6 23:41:46 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 00:41:46 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] My time is almost up... 
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040807003952.01f2dab8@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>

Thanks Mike!

We'll be settling in Virginia, most likely in the Roanoke area.  We've 
quite a bit of house hunting to do :)


James...

>Message: 2
>Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 20:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] My time is almost up...
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <20040806030600.97043.qmail at web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>--- J Corbally <jcorb at irishbroadband.net> wrote:
> > Well, the documents are all verified and stamped, the backgrounds
> > been checked and cleared, the fingerprints have been scanned, and the
> > final stamp's been made.
> >
> > So hopefully (within the next 2 months or so) I'll be making my move
> > to the U.S.
>Excellent, welcome! Where will you be settling down?
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>-William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism





From pfallon at ptd.net  Sat Aug  7 19:23:32 2004
From: pfallon at ptd.net (Pat Fallon)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 15:23:32 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropic music
References: <ED6B7A40D8CE434293BB3656A160340A32E485@LEONARD.london.autocue.net>
	<4113F6FC.8000307@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <002501c47cb4$09559e20$3447bacc@preferrei3lj79>

>  > PSPS! Anyone with any theories on what the Cursor Miner name might be a 
> reference to?

my wild-ass guess: ursa minor the constellation of stars
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040807/7455ebbe/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Aug  8 05:09:06 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:09:06 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <1091159712_9671@mail.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <000a01c47d05$d843b180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
Starman wrote:


>I actually thought for a few brief seconds that this story was the real
thing and that Bush 
>had put his fraternity boy personality to patriotic good use...
 
 
 
 
Ja, I have decided I will vote for the other guy.  Assuming I can recall
his name.
Ralph somebody I think.  Hates Corvairs.   spike 
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040807/0d6988b5/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Aug  8 05:29:55 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:29:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040730011535.01c1a150@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000001c47d08$c33690c0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Apologies for the stolen bandwidth folks. Just tried to e Spike Jones 
> offlist, got a `mailbox full' bounce. Is the spam choking you, pal?
> 
> Damien

Oops sorry about that Damien.  I was on a two week vacation, 
riding all over the northwestern US on an antique motorcycle
which I restored this past spring.  Total distance on the 
bike about 5 megameters on the bike, ~140 km on foot.

Hiked, backpacked and camped all over Mount Rainier.
I rigged a platform on the back of the bike to haul the 
backpacks and camping gear, worked great.  Had a great 
time, no major pieces fell off of the bike.  It was a 
*most* excellent adventure.

But yes, I am choking on spam, oy vey, and Im
missing some very important personal email. 
While I was out backpacking and riding, I had
some wonderful ideas to post.  I will start
with this one: we should explore the notion
of using the spoken word to spread extropian
memes, not just in conferences but rather to
create MP3 files which can be carried in one's
palm pilot or equivalent.  It occurred to me
that the spoken word conveys nuances that are
lost in the electronic post.  

I will develop this idea further after I 
clean up my bike and camping gear. 

spike



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sun Aug  8 05:58:01 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 15:28:01 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike
In-Reply-To: <000001c47d08$c33690c0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c47d08$c33690c0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04080722587db60c15@mail.gmail.com>

Have a look at Audio blogging, such as:
http://www.blogger.com/knowledge/2004/06/on-road-with-audioblogger.pyra

I remember seeing a site recently that seemed to let you make your own
playlist from streaming audio all over the web, that might be useful.
Anyone know the site I mean?

Emlyn


On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:29:55 -0700, Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Apologies for the stolen bandwidth folks. Just tried to e Spike Jones
> > offlist, got a `mailbox full' bounce. Is the spam choking you, pal?
> >
> > Damien
> 
> Oops sorry about that Damien.  I was on a two week vacation,
> riding all over the northwestern US on an antique motorcycle
> which I restored this past spring.  Total distance on the
> bike about 5 megameters on the bike, ~140 km on foot.
> 
> Hiked, backpacked and camped all over Mount Rainier.
> I rigged a platform on the back of the bike to haul the
> backpacks and camping gear, worked great.  Had a great
> time, no major pieces fell off of the bike.  It was a
> *most* excellent adventure.
> 
> But yes, I am choking on spam, oy vey, and Im
> missing some very important personal email.
> While I was out backpacking and riding, I had
> some wonderful ideas to post.  I will start
> with this one: we should explore the notion
> of using the spoken word to spread extropian
> memes, not just in conferences but rather to
> create MP3 files which can be carried in one's
> palm pilot or equivalent.  It occurred to me
> that the spoken word conveys nuances that are
> lost in the electronic post.
> 
> I will develop this idea further after I
> clean up my bike and camping gear.
> 
> spike
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sun Aug  8 06:00:05 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 15:30:05 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04080722587db60c15@mail.gmail.com>
References: <000001c47d08$c33690c0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<710b78fc04080722587db60c15@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040807230016586e2b@mail.gmail.com>

Oh yeah, here it is:

*************************
Multimedia Scrapbooks to Share
New York Times July 15, 2004
*************************
Web users are programming their own
virtual TV newscasts and eclectic
collections of video clips using a
free media-sharing tool called
Webjay (www.webjay.org). The site
makes it easy to build, share and
watch playlists of audio and video
links culled from around the...
http://www.kurzweilai.net/email/newsRedirect.html?newsID=3537&m=7529


Gotta love gmail!
Emlyn

On Sun, 8 Aug 2004 15:28:01 +0930, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Have a look at Audio blogging, such as:
> http://www.blogger.com/knowledge/2004/06/on-road-with-audioblogger.pyra
> 
> I remember seeing a site recently that seemed to let you make your own
> playlist from streaming audio all over the web, that might be useful.
> Anyone know the site I mean?
> 
> Emlyn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:29:55 -0700, Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > Apologies for the stolen bandwidth folks. Just tried to e Spike Jones
> > > offlist, got a `mailbox full' bounce. Is the spam choking you, pal?
> > >
> > > Damien
> >
> > Oops sorry about that Damien.  I was on a two week vacation,
> > riding all over the northwestern US on an antique motorcycle
> > which I restored this past spring.  Total distance on the
> > bike about 5 megameters on the bike, ~140 km on foot.
> >
> > Hiked, backpacked and camped all over Mount Rainier.
> > I rigged a platform on the back of the bike to haul the
> > backpacks and camping gear, worked great.  Had a great
> > time, no major pieces fell off of the bike.  It was a
> > *most* excellent adventure.
> >
> > But yes, I am choking on spam, oy vey, and Im
> > missing some very important personal email.
> > While I was out backpacking and riding, I had
> > some wonderful ideas to post.  I will start
> > with this one: we should explore the notion
> > of using the spoken word to spread extropian
> > memes, not just in conferences but rather to
> > create MP3 files which can be carried in one's
> > palm pilot or equivalent.  It occurred to me
> > that the spoken word conveys nuances that are
> > lost in the electronic post.
> >
> > I will develop this idea further after I
> > clean up my bike and camping gear.
> >
> > spike
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Emlyn
> 
> http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug  8 11:12:57 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 04:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <000a01c47d05$d843b180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040808111257.50833.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
>  
> Ja, I have decided I will vote for the other guy.  Assuming I can
> recall
> his name.
> Ralph somebody I think.  Hates Corvairs.   spike 

Nah, the big guy to nader Bush this year is Badnarik, Michael Badnarik.
A good, principled Libertarian. Knows his stuff too. I met with the LP
VP candidate yesterday, Campagna. He's a good candidate too. Badnarik
is above 3% in the polls, and rising. LP vote could reach 6% easy this
year, maybe more, enough to nix Bush unless he pulls a bin Laden out of
his hat.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Aug  8 12:14:42 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 14:14:42 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <20040808111257.50833.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <000a01c47d05$d843b180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<20040808111257.50833.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040808121442.GM1400@leitl.org>

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 04:12:57AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Nah, the big guy to nader Bush this year is Badnarik, Michael Badnarik.

To nader Bush -- to bring Bush again into office? Why would one want to do
that?

http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com/

> A good, principled Libertarian. Knows his stuff too. I met with the LP
> VP candidate yesterday, Campagna. He's a good candidate too. Badnarik
> is above 3% in the polls, and rising. LP vote could reach 6% easy this

Has LP ever achieved over 1% in the US at any point in its history?

> year, maybe more, enough to nix Bush unless he pulls a bin Laden out of
> his hat.

-- 
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/20040808/c37f3fed/attachment.bin>

From artillo at comcast.net  Sun Aug  8 16:04:48 2004
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:04:48 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike
In-Reply-To: <000001c47d08$c33690c0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <001d01c47d61$6eb398a0$49635544@bjsmain2>

Antique motorbike ehh??Hahaa excellent! :: flashes back to Zen & the Art
of Motorcycle Maintenance::

Are you going to have any pictures from your trip anyplace??

Love the idea of your "portable meme transmitter"! I have an older Treo
90, though, I'm not sure if it has an expansion card for an mp3 player,
but I have been thinking about biting the bullet and just getting an
iPod or something I think we would all agree that some things just can't
be effectively communicated without the suttleness of human expression.


Perhaps on a separate note, although along the same lines of thought, I
have been exploring a VR world as of late called Second Life
(www.secondlife.com). I'm not sure how many of you have been to it yet,
but I must say that the potential of this program (above all others I
have tried) has the potential to really emulate the nuances of human
communication in a purely digital simulacrum (IE the Metaverse!). 

SL supports a custom "C++" like scripting language called LSL. With it
you can do any number of typical OO programming things in addition to
directly controlling the 3D environment. The language can be programmed
to affect or BE affected by all parts of the world interface, including
gravity, object collisions, and all kinds of movement behaviors. With
the introduction of version 1.4, they now support Poser animation files!

Well, combine this with the ability to upload music/wav files, pull in
streaming audio from the web, uploading image/textures right from your
HD, and eventually the addition streaming voicechat and possibly even
voice synched avatar facial movements, and you have a system that will
be able to more accurately "render" (pardon the pun) the complexity of
human emotions in communication. This of course, depends largely on the
skill level and technical expertise as well as the artistic vision to
make something so beautiful as human thought into an equally stunning
avatar. And then of course there's the hardware side of things. But
basically, I believe that Life is an Equation, and that the more
precicely we can model things, the closer to understanding that Equation
we will be. Quantum computing will help to bring this about, and having
a full 100% digital simulacrum would be awesome, but the word "digital"
will have to take on new meaning and terminologies. Anyways I am
rambling, maybe this should be shifted to its own thread ehh??

Peace and Happy Building,

Artillo

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Spike
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 1:30 AM
To: 'ExI chat list'; 'Damien Broderick'
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike


> Apologies for the stolen bandwidth folks. Just tried to e Spike Jones
> offlist, got a `mailbox full' bounce. Is the spam choking you, pal?
> 
> Damien

Oops sorry about that Damien.  I was on a two week vacation, 
riding all over the northwestern US on an antique motorcycle which I
restored this past spring.  Total distance on the 
bike about 5 megameters on the bike, ~140 km on foot.

Hiked, backpacked and camped all over Mount Rainier.
I rigged a platform on the back of the bike to haul the 
backpacks and camping gear, worked great.  Had a great 
time, no major pieces fell off of the bike.  It was a 
*most* excellent adventure.

But yes, I am choking on spam, oy vey, and Im
missing some very important personal email. 
While I was out backpacking and riding, I had
some wonderful ideas to post.  I will start
with this one: we should explore the notion
of using the spoken word to spread extropian
memes, not just in conferences but rather to
create MP3 files which can be carried in one's
palm pilot or equivalent.  It occurred to me
that the spoken word conveys nuances that are
lost in the electronic post.  

I will develop this idea further after I 
clean up my bike and camping gear. 

spike

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



From artillo at comcast.net  Sun Aug  8 16:11:02 2004
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:11:02 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04080722587db60c15@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c47d62$4d50bb60$49635544@bjsmain2>

I have both Winamp (supporting html playlists) and the SAM2 Broadcaster
from www.audiorealm.com . The SAM2 html playlists are far superior, and
can display song histories and also enable html requests for songs right
on the site. Plus it outputs your songs in alpha search so it's durned
easy to find what you are looking for. I am a net DJ so I use the thing
quite a bit. It will also generate html based reports for viewing
histories etc. If you can find a free copy of SAM2 I would recommend it,
and it will help sort large amounts of mp3 data (I have over 12000
music/video files) and aid you in finding them quickly to be broadcast.
I would purchase SAM2 myself if I didn't already have a copy! LOL

Easy listenin peeps!

Artillo

PS:
Take a listen to my show if you like heavy metal, punk, and indie stuff,
www.fusedradio.com 

Artillo's Heavy Metal Hoedown, Sundays 10pm-Midnight EST

Can I get a W00t? I'll take requests thru YIM as well! 

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 1:58 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] a message for spike66 from thespike


Have a look at Audio blogging, such as:
http://www.blogger.com/knowledge/2004/06/on-road-with-audioblogger.pyra

I remember seeing a site recently that seemed to let you make your own
playlist from streaming audio all over the web, that might be useful.
Anyone know the site I mean?

Emlyn


On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:29:55 -0700, Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Apologies for the stolen bandwidth folks. Just tried to e Spike 
> > Jones offlist, got a `mailbox full' bounce. Is the spam choking you,

> > pal?
> >
> > Damien
> 
> Oops sorry about that Damien.  I was on a two week vacation, riding 
> all over the northwestern US on an antique motorcycle which I restored

> this past spring.  Total distance on the bike about 5 megameters on 
> the bike, ~140 km on foot.
> 
> Hiked, backpacked and camped all over Mount Rainier.
> I rigged a platform on the back of the bike to haul the backpacks and 
> camping gear, worked great.  Had a great time, no major pieces fell 
> off of the bike.  It was a
> *most* excellent adventure.
> 
> But yes, I am choking on spam, oy vey, and Im
> missing some very important personal email.
> While I was out backpacking and riding, I had
> some wonderful ideas to post.  I will start
> with this one: we should explore the notion
> of using the spoken word to spread extropian
> memes, not just in conferences but rather to
> create MP3 files which can be carried in one's
> palm pilot or equivalent.  It occurred to me
> that the spoken word conveys nuances that are
> lost in the electronic post.
> 
> I will develop this idea further after I
> clean up my bike and camping gear.
> 
> spike
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Mon Aug  9 14:45:52 2004
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 15:45:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <20040808121442.GM1400@leitl.org>
References: <000a01c47d05$d843b180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>	<20040808111257.50833.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040808121442.GM1400@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <41178E20.9090704@optusnet.com.au>

Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 04:12:57AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> 
>>Nah, the big guy to nader Bush this year is Badnarik, Michael Badnarik.
> 
> 
> To nader Bush -- to bring Bush again into office? Why would one want to do
> that?
> 

I think the term "Nader X" refers to the fact that Nader has no chance 
of winning a majority, but takes enough votes from the candidate most 
like him (X = usually the democrats) that they both lose to the other party.
Hence, to "Nader someone" is to split the vote amongst similar 
candidates causing them both to lose.

P.S. This doesn't work in Australia, where we have preferential voting, 
rather than "first past the post".

-David.


From gingell at gnat.com  Mon Aug  9 13:26:06 2004
From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 09:26:06 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] the secrets of George Bush's war service revealed
In-Reply-To: <20040808121442.GM1400@leitl.org>
References: <000a01c47d05$d843b180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<20040808111257.50833.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040808121442.GM1400@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040809132606.GA29791@gnat.com>

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 02:14:42PM +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> Has LP ever achieved over 1% in the US at any point in its history?

Yes; In 1980 Edward Clark managed 921,128 votes for 1.06% of the popular vote, but 
this wasn't enough to get him anything in the electoral college.

They actually swung one electoral vote in 1972 in Virginia - the year of McGovern's
historic 17 to 521 loss to Richard Nixon. Of course they did it with 3,674 votes when
a Nixon elector defected and cast his vote for John Hospers, so this was a bit of a
fluke.

Big years for 3rd parties were 1968 when George Wallace took the deep South for the 
American Independants, and Ross Perot taking 20% of the popular vote with nearly 20 
million ballets cast as an independent in 1992. 








From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Aug  9 20:59:51 2004
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Nanogirl)
Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:59:51 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] (no subject)
Message-ID: <rbtkrtpwibcyrvhmscf@lists.extropy.org>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040809/8f694575/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: new__price.zip
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 5932 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040809/8f694575/attachment.obj>

From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug  9 20:12:17 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 13:12:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush's Secret State of the Union Address.
Message-ID: <20040809201217.68246.qmail@web60503.mail.yahoo.com>

This one too is a joke but one that is funny and
disurbing at the same time. Enjoy

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/presaddress2.shtml



=====
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!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Aug  9 21:26:36 2004
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 14:26:36 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] That's not my post - delete it
References: <41115078.30907@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <003401c47e57$925428a0$1db71218@Nano>

Hi guys, I just noticed a message supposedly from me, posted to the list. However, I did not send a message to the list. The email has a zip file attachment, thus, I can only speculate that this is bad news and there for suggest you don't open it simply delete it. 

The real Nanogirl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040809/5c87c177/attachment.html>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug  9 22:08:30 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 15:08:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] That's not my post - delete it
In-Reply-To: <003401c47e57$925428a0$1db71218@Nano>
Message-ID: <20040809220830.69713.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Gina Miller <nanogirl at halcyon.com> wrote:
> However, I did not send a
> message to the list.

Of course you did.  This one, for example.

You didn't send *that* message, though... ;P

> The email has a zip file
> attachment, thus, I can only speculate that this is
> bad news and there for suggest you don't open it
> simply delete it. 

It's a known virus/trojan spreading mechanism: send
email pretending to be from a known user, make minimal
(usually unsuccessful) efforts towards endorsing the
attachment as something to be opened, and send code to
repeat the mechanism (and maybe do other things) as
the attachment.


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Aug  9 23:20:53 2004
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 16:20:53 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] That's not my post - delete it
References: <20040809220830.69713.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002701c47e67$87c7b540$1db71218@Nano>

Exactly, that's why the message should be deleted. Gina

  It's a known virus/trojan spreading mechanism: send
  email pretending to be from a known user, make minimal
  (usually unsuccessful) efforts towards endorsing the
  attachment as something to be opened, and send code to
  repeat the mechanism (and maybe do other things) as
  the attachment.


  > The email has a zip file
  > attachment, thus, I can only speculate that this is
  > bad news and there for suggest you don't open it
  > simply delete it. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040809/66b6acdd/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 10 02:52:22 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 19:52:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] extropian memes in spoken word
In-Reply-To: <051301c46fb3$587ef180$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <000001c47e85$11bf33f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

>Antique motorbike ehh??Hahaa excellent! :: flashes back to Zen & the
Art
>of Motorcycle Maintenance::

Loved that book.

>Are you going to have any pictures from your trip anyplace??

Ja, but there are some items higher on the priority list
currently.  Do stand by.

>Love the idea of your "portable meme transmitter"!...
>I think we would all agree that some things just can't
>be effectively communicated without the subtleness of 
>human expression.

I got the idea while riding to Mt. Rainier on the bike,
listening to the local radio.  In central Oregon there
are vast stretches where the radio choices are limited
indeed.  In one stretch of over an hour, the only thing
available was a religion-meme station, so I chose the
sermon over the drone of my engine.  I did not get religion.
But it did occur to me that a sermon format is a very
effective means of transmitting ideas.

We in extropia worry ourselves, perhaps excessively, about
being considered a religion.  While we need to avoid the
appearance of promoting a dogma, we can use the sermon
format to great advantage once we realize that the spoken
word has a rhythm and a cadence, which makes it in some
applications more effective than the written word.

For an excellent example of what I mean, consider two persons
who were particularly skilled at using the voice as a medium
of meme transfer: Martin Luther King and Ronald Reagan.  
If you listen to their voice control, the cadence, the
alliteration, these guys had it.  We can have that too.

spike   



From sjatkins at gmail.com  Tue Aug 10 07:10:59 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:10:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] 9/11 Commission Report
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV7xzmWecm9t0000968d3@hotmail.com>
References: <20040726004934.47698.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>
	<BAY9-DAV7xzmWecm9t0000968d3@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <948b11e0408100010556843a3@mail.gmail.com>

Yeah, they are fighting a different kind of war than we are.  They are
fighting off an invasion and the forced injection of a foreign
culture.   They are fighting those who have meddled in their affairs
and directed or supported their oppression for decades.  Yep, a very
different kind of war.

-s

On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:52:01 -0500, Kevin Freels <megaquark at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > their target audience is, for example, the
> > Palestinians who celebrated when the WTC collapsed.
> > Low-profile targets won't impress that audience, and
> > they know it.
> 
> 
> I hadn;t thought of it that way. How about a totally different idea?
> 
> What if we create and release a virus into the middle east that causes men
> to lose all their body hair? We can do this in concert with a holographic
> imageof Allah projected into the sky telling them that they must love and
> embrace all humans, and will be punished for their wicked ways.
> 
> They are fighting a different kind of war than we are. Let's pull out the
> military entriely and mess with their heads. :-)
> 
> Kevin Freels
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From sjatkins at gmail.com  Tue Aug 10 07:21:11 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:21:11 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] 9/11 Commission Report
In-Reply-To: <003401c47200$e2b44d10$6600a8c0@brainiac>
References: <003401c47200$e2b44d10$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <948b11e04081000215e0f8d11@mail.gmail.com>

I am very worried although not of a nuclear attack per se.  I am
worried that human freedom, prosperity and invention may be seriously
curtailed and rolled back through global agression and
counter-agressions.   I am worried that the continuously diet of fear
we in the US are being fed will preclude the majority of the people
from even remembering to care about freedom.  I am afraid the majority
will vote for whatever draconian "cure" for their fear that the
proponents of the fear wish to sell them next.  I am worried that the
anti-mind, anti-science, pro-belief folks are running the show and
that their control of the Executive is ever more dire as the Executive
gets more and more unilateral power.  I am worried that both the
NeoCons and the New Democrats share a penchant for imperialistic
control of the world in the best interest of continuous US domination
on all fronts.   I am worried that in all practical ways the parties
are nearly indistinquishable except for the facade over the top of the
same underlying  deadly designs for the country and the world.   I am
worried that we are playing bizarre idiotic games while burning
through our primary energy source and best chemical feedstocks.   I am
worried that we are playing US vs Them games at every level and their
are no voices hardly anymore that seek to find solutions that work for
all.

- samantha

On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 21:35:58 -0700, Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
>  
> As a personal aside, in the last year or so I've had the worst dreams of my life regarding "end-of-the-world scenarios" caused by explosions - nuclear bombs and such (actually I haven't had nightmares any like this, ever - and they've been coming intermittently but consistently).  
>   
> Is anyone else on this list as worried as I am?  Does anyone see any end in sight?  
>   
> Re the 9/11 Commission Report:  "The report offers vivid details on our worst fears. Instead of focusing on immediately hitting back at Osama, Bush officials indulged their idiotic id?e fixe on Saddam and ignored the memo from their counter-terrorism experts dismissing any connection between the religious fanatic bin Laden and the secular Hussein." 
>   
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/opinion/25dowd.html?hp 
>   
> Olga 
>   
> 
>


From sjatkins at gmail.com  Tue Aug 10 07:28:35 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:28:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Royal Society report on nano
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040729165245.01cbcec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040729165245.01cbcec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <948b11e040810002876647169@mail.gmail.com>

Ah yes.  We have nothing but uncertainties.  But because we have
nothing but uncertainties (FUD), we will immediately press on to
regulate what we simply don't know beans about.    Certainly research
is required in the face of uncertainty.  But should we wait with the
regulation to find out what only the research can tell us about what
and if to regulate?

- s


On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:53:45 -0500, Damien Broderick
<thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1103_2-5289179.html?tag=printthis
> 
> "Most nanotechnologies pose no new risks to health, safety or the
> environment, but we believe research and regulation is required immediately
> to address uncertainties about the effects of manufactured nanoparticles
> and nanotubes," Professor Ann Dowling, of the University of Cambridge, told
> a news conference.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From sjatkins at gmail.com  Tue Aug 10 07:37:01 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:37:01 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV4fOJsli2rae000765d9@hotmail.com>
References: <710b78fc040724015574532b34@mail.gmail.com>
	<948b11e040728001659035e4e@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY9-DAV4fOJsli2rae000765d9@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <948b11e040810003722737525@mail.gmail.com>

Now wait a sec.  The American people had to wait nearly three years to
get a [alleged] full investigation of the worse attack we have
suffered on American soil.   That by itself is enough to make any sane
person bitter toward this Administration as it did all it could to
avoid such an investigation.   The investigation we got was riddled
with unasked questions, unanswered questions and answers that We the
People will not be allowed to even learn until after an election in
which we determine whether the current administration is to to be
trusted to another term.  So, I am not surprised by bitterness.  This
administration has earned it.     Above you imply that the
administration would have been fine with an earlier investigation but
their enemies put it off until now.  This is not the way it went down
at all.   Go check  it out for yourself.

- samantha

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:09:59 -0500, Kevin Freels <megaquark at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that this commission was a political puppet, but not of  the
> administration. I sat and watched these hearings and they were just full of
> bitterness and attacks at the administration. This commission was brought
> forth in an election year by the opposing party in order to discredit Bush
> and decrease his chances of reelection. This is why the commission wasn;t
> put together until years after the event. Some of the questioning was so
> rediculous that it started to appear as a replay of the McCarthy hearings.
> They could care less about figuring out what went wrong. They just wanted to
> attack the Bush administration. If they really were after the truth, as you
> said, they would have address US foreign policy.
> 
> Kevin Freels
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Samantha Atkins" <sjatkins at gmail.com>
> To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 2:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
> 
> > This is sickening.  It was bad enough the so-called 911 Commission
> > failed to address many of the most pressing questions of what happened
> > and why on 911.  That and the very fact it was postponed until years
> > after the original event was bad enough and more than sufficient to
> > show this was not any sort of honest examination.  But to now posit an
> > ideological war as being largely the "why" of terrorism and hardly
> > bothering to mention US polcies fueling anger throughout the region
> > says that this Commission was a political puppet of the current
> > adminstration with no credibility whatsoever.
> >
> > -s
> >
> > On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:25:06 +0930, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > An interesting article on the US's troubles with Islam, from NYT.
> > > I've included the whole thing, and here's the link (but you'll need to
> > > be registered):
> > >
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/24/opinion/24brooks.html?th
> > >
> > > War of Ideology
> > > By DAVID BROOKS
> > >
> > > Published: July 24, 2004
> > >
> > > When foreign policy wonks go to bed, they dream of being X. They dream
> > > of writing the all-encompassing, epoch-defining essay, the way George
> > > F. Kennan did during the cold war under the pseudonym X.
> > >
> > > Careers have been spent racing to be X. But in our own time, the 9/11
> > > commission has come closer than anybody else. After spending 360 pages
> > > describing a widespread intelligence failure, the commissioners step
> > > back in their report and redefine the nature of our predicament.
> > >
> > > We're not in the middle of a war on terror, they note. We're not
> > > facing an axis of evil. Instead, we are in the midst of an ideological
> > > conflict.
> > >
> > > We are facing, the report notes, a loose confederation of people who
> > > believe in a perverted stream of Islam that stretches from Ibn Taimaya
> > > to Sayyid Qutb. Terrorism is just the means they use to win converts
> > > to their cause.
> > >
> > > It seems like a small distinction - emphasizing ideology instead of
> > > terror - but it makes all the difference, because if you don't define
> > > your problem correctly, you can't contemplate a strategy for victory.
> > >
> > > When you see that our enemies are primarily an intellectual movement,
> > > not a terrorist army, you see why they are in no hurry. With their
> > > extensive indoctrination infrastructure of madrassas and mosques,
> > > they're still building strength, laying the groundwork for decades of
> > > struggle. Their time horizon can be totally different from our own.
> > >
> > > As an ideological movement rather than a national or military one,
> > > they can play by different rules. There is no territory they must
> > > protect. They never have to win a battle but can instead profit in the
> > > realm of public opinion from the glorious martyrdom entailed in their
> > > defeats. We think the struggle is fought on the ground, but they know
> > > the struggle is really fought on satellite TV, and they are far more
> > > sophisticated than we are in using it.
> > >
> > > The 9/11 commission report argues that we have to fight this war on
> > > two fronts. We have to use intelligence, military, financial and
> > > diplomatic capacities to fight Al Qaeda. That's where most of the
> > > media attention is focused. But the bigger fight is with a hostile
> > > belief system that can't be reasoned with but can only be "destroyed
> > > or utterly isolated."
> > >
> > > The commissioners don't say it, but the implication is clear. We've
> > > had an investigation into our intelligence failures; we now need a
> > > commission to analyze our intellectual failures. Simply put, the
> > > unapologetic defenders of America often lack the expertise they need.
> > > And scholars who really know the Islamic world are often blind to its
> > > pathologies. They are so obsessed with the sins of the West, they are
> > > incapable of grappling with threats to the West.
> > >
> > > We also need to mount our own ideological counteroffensive. The
> > > commissioners recommend that the U.S. should be much more critical of
> > > autocratic regimes, even friendly ones, simply to demonstrate our
> > > principles. They suggest we set up a fund to build secondary schools
> > > across Muslim states, and admit many more students into our own. If
> > > you are a philanthropist, here is how you can contribute: We need to
> > > set up the sort of intellectual mobilization we had during the cold
> > > war, with modern equivalents of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, to
> > > give an international platform to modernist Muslims and to introduce
> > > them to Western intellectuals.
> > >
> > > Most of all, we need to see that the landscape of reality is altered.
> > > In the past, we've fought ideological movements that took control of
> > > states. Our foreign policy apparatus is geared toward relations with
> > > states: negotiating with states, confronting states. Now we are faced
> > > with a belief system that is inimical to the state system, and aims at
> > > theological rule and the restoration of the caliphate. We'll need a
> > > new set of institutions to grapple with this reality, and a new
> > > training method to understand people who are uninterested in national
> > > self-interest, traditionally defined.
> > >
> > > Last week I met with a leading military officer stationed in
> > > Afghanistan and Iraq, whose observations dovetailed remarkably with
> > > the 9/11 commissioners. He said the experience of the last few years
> > > is misleading; only 10 percent of our efforts from now on will be
> > > military. The rest will be ideological. He observed that we are in the
> > > fight against Islamic extremism now where we were in the fight against
> > > communism in 1880.
> > >
> > > We've got a long struggle ahead, but at least we're beginning to
> understand it.
> > >
> > > E-mail: dabrooks at nytimes.com
> > >
> > > --
> > > Emlyn
> > >
> > > http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From sjatkins at gmail.com  Tue Aug 10 07:40:16 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:40:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
In-Reply-To: <20040728165538.28632.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040728165538.28632.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <948b11e04081000403790b3fe@mail.gmail.com>

It conveniently puts the blame on "them" and their wacky ideology. It
is of the same cloth as Bush claiming they "hate us because we are so
good."   Any thinking person who bothers to research the history of
our involvement in that part of the world knows this is a LIE.   I
guess though we'll have to distinguish between Republican truth and
Arab truth and leave truth itself a casualty.

-s

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:55:38 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:
> > But to now posit an
> > ideological war as being largely the "why" of
> > terrorism and hardly
> > bothering to mention US polcies fueling anger
> > throughout the region
> > says that this Commission was a political puppet of
> > the current
> > adminstration with no credibility whatsoever.
> 
> Oh, they mention the policies.  That's part of the
> source of the ideological war.  But whatever the
> cause, the result is still the result - and merely
> removing the cause won't necessarily fix everything
> (even if it would help a lot).
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From sjatkins at gmail.com  Tue Aug 10 07:47:20 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:47:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
In-Reply-To: <6E192D79-E4B4-11D8-8438-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
References: <20040728165538.28632.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
	<6E192D79-E4B4-11D8-8438-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <948b11e04081000471ee3e475@mail.gmail.com>

Sure, if that was remotely what was going on and what is at the root
of our troubles.    We have torn hell out of the Middle East and
supported those who have oppressed the people to this day.  It would
be a mark of insanity if a tremendous number of persons in that part
of the world were not righteously pissed.    Religion is not the real
question.  Do you think you will get relatively wacky religion to
lessen in strength if the supposed voice for rationality and
secularism is sending in evangelists to convert you to its God while
plundering your country and oppressing your people?   If we really
want culture change this is diametrically opposite the way to acheive
it.   If you want endless anger and striking out any way they can
including terrorism then we are doing exactly the right thing.    If
you want to incite enough terrorism to justify bulldozing the rest of
the land then we are doing the right thing.

- samantha



On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 14:47:39 -0400, Bret Kulakovich
<bret at bonfireproductions.com> wrote:
> 
> Not to beat a dead thread, but -
> 
> I had a room mate once, who was incredibly neat and well organized.
> Yes, some people would call him a "neat-freak" or even
> "super-anal-retentive" This wasn't an Odd Couple scenario, with me
> being a slob, but I wasn't as highly structured. From time to time we
> made each other crazy.
> 
> So my question is : Who was right?
> 
> I heard of an academic expert speaking on Isalm, of course talking the
> sense of it being a religion of peace and the like. The quote that
> stuck with me, was something along the lines of the "problem" is
> radical interpretations of Islamic law, and that most of history
> involving Islam revolves around a small minority.
> 
> I tend to keep with the old "Your right to throw a punch ends at my
> face" Heinleinian angle.
> 
> But if we have a group that wants to create "the perfect Islamic
> nation-state", and are constantly looking to increase their
> square-footage, are we not having an ideological conflict? I think that
> blaming partisan politics, soviet-era US backing, coddling Israel, and
> all other catch phrases, are failing to acknowledge the fact that this
> does seem to be an ideological problem...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 28, 2004, at 12:55 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> 
> > --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> But to now posit an
> >> ideological war as being largely the "why" of
> >> terrorism and hardly
> >> bothering to mention US polcies fueling anger
> >> throughout the region
> >> says that this Commission was a political puppet of
> >> the current
> >> adminstration with no credibility whatsoever.
> >
> > Oh, they mention the policies.  That's part of the
> > source of the ideological war.  But whatever the
> > cause, the result is still the result - and merely
> > removing the cause won't necessarily fix everything
> > (even if it would help a lot).
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 10 15:06:09 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 11:06:09 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Politics: Laura Bush Defends George Bush's Stem Cell
	Views
Message-ID: <288350-2200482101569977@M2W099.mail2web.com>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5652274/

This very well could become a definitive issue for the upcoming US
election, or an argument between a current First Lady and a former First
Lady.  I'd like to see "Nancy" roll up her shirt sleeves and get in there
and fight for biotech progress.

Natasha

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




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Aug 10 15:40:21 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 08:40:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] War of Ideology
In-Reply-To: <948b11e04081000403790b3fe@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040810154021.60221.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

*cough*  I did say "part", right?  As in, "this is a
subset of the cause, neither 0% nor 100% of it"?

--- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:

> It conveniently puts the blame on "them" and their
> wacky ideology. It
> is of the same cloth as Bush claiming they "hate us
> because we are so
> good."   Any thinking person who bothers to research
> the history of
> our involvement in that part of the world knows this
> is a LIE.   I
> guess though we'll have to distinguish between
> Republican truth and
> Arab truth and leave truth itself a casualty.
> 
> -s
> 
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:55:38 -0700 (PDT), Adrian
> Tymes
> <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > But to now posit an
> > > ideological war as being largely the "why" of
> > > terrorism and hardly
> > > bothering to mention US polcies fueling anger
> > > throughout the region
> > > says that this Commission was a political puppet
> of
> > > the current
> > > adminstration with no credibility whatsoever.
> > 
> > Oh, they mention the policies.  That's part of the
> > source of the ideological war.  But whatever the
> > cause, the result is still the result - and merely
> > removing the cause won't necessarily fix
> everything
> > (even if it would help a lot).



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Tue Aug 10 16:13:34 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:13:34 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] House-warming
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040810112951.03c32ac8@unreasonable.com>

After the fun we had at my Newtonmas party (beginning at 2 PM, the last 
group left at 2 AM), I was intent on a successor in the spring. Life 
intruded, but I'm ready now. I'm in a new house -- not set-up to my 
satisfaction, but good enough for a gathering of extropians.

If you are going to be in the Boston area, you're welcome to attend. 
There's crash-space here, if you need it. You may be able to get a ride 
from NYC or other parts south; use the exi-east list to coordinate.

(If you're not around but coming to town in the future, let us know. We can 
usually lure a quorum of Bostropians.)

My house. Hudson, New Hampshire. A couple miles from the MA border and the 
Nashua malls. Roughly 20 minutes north of Rt. 128.

This Saturday, August 14. 2 PM until the last person not me leaves.

Anyone on this list is specifically invited. If you have someone else in 
mind, run it by me. It will probably be okay. Additionally, I will invite a 
few friends-of-extropy, such as sf writer, nano, LP, MIT, Alcor types.

Bring to augment existing: food, drink; musical instruments; interesting 
stuff to show people. We'll order Chinese food at some point.

RSVP to me and the exi-east list.


-- David Lubkin.

	lubkin at unreasonable.com




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 10 16:39:34 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Politics: Laura Bush Defends George Bush's Stem
	Cell Views
In-Reply-To: <288350-2200482101569977@M2W099.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20040810163934.63099.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5652274/
> 
> This very well could become a definitive issue for the upcoming US
> election, or an argument between a current First Lady and a former
> First
> Lady.  I'd like to see "Nancy" roll up her shirt sleeves and get in
> there and fight for biotech progress.

This might be a good strategy to pursue. However, Nancy always had more
in common politically with Michael Reagan than with Ron Jr., she was
always very right-to-life.

That being said, I can't say that I am all that upset over the
restrictions on government funding for stem cell research, from a
libertarian point of view. There are 78 cell lines available for public
funding research, and in the 3 years since Bush's restrictions, the
private sector has produced about 100 more with private funds outside
the scope of government controls. It looks to me like the private
sector is taking up the slack fine, especially with the hundreds of
millions of dollars in funding coming from the Hughes Medical
Foundation. Getting the public sector out of paying for medical
research is ultimately okay with me if the private sector is ageeable
to taking it on. 

Bush's limits are also motivating research into ways to produce stem
cell lines without using an embryo, which from an ethical standpoint,
everyone should be happy with. While I support human testing, the
humans being tested upon must have an informed choice in the matter.
Embryos, by definition, do not, and I'm opposed to fictional persons,
aka corporations, being able to own (or destroy) human beings that they
create.

Thus, a more ethical use of resources would focus on how private cell
lines are treated by private groups, establishing a system of guardians
ad leitem to speak for those who can't speak for themselves, and if any
research results in production of living human beings, such beings must
be provided for by trusts, set up by their creators, with both Trustee
and Protector being named individuals, natural persons, who are outside
the influence of the creating corporation.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 10 18:26:21 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 14:26:21 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Politics: Laura Bush Defends George Bush's
	StemCell Views
Message-ID: <137310-220048210182621361@M2W060.mail2web.com>


From: Mike Lorrey

--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5652274/
> 
>>This very well could become a definitive issue for the upcoming US
>>election, or an argument between a current First Lady and a former
>>First
>>Lady.  I'd like to see "Nancy" roll up her shirt sleeves and get in
>>there and fight for biotech progress.

>This might be a good strategy to pursue. However, Nancy always had more
>in common politically with Michael Reagan than with Ron Jr., she was
>always very right-to-life.
...

>Thus, a more ethical use of resources would focus on how private cell
>lines are treated by private groups, establishing a system of guardians
>ad leitem to speak for those who can't speak for themselves, and if any
>research results in production of living human beings, such beings must
>be provided for by trusts, set up by their creators, with both Trustee
>and Protector being named individuals, natural persons, who are outside
>the influence of the creating corporation.

The election, at this point in time, is between two parties.  The election
very well may be about just a few issues that are transhumanist in scope. 
This is what I am focusing in on.  In a perfect world, I would not be
writing about 20th Century politics, as my mind would be elsehwere in more
intelligent and prosperous conversation.  

Natasha

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




From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Tue Aug 10 19:31:29 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:31:29 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] House-warming
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040810202958.01f35978@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>


>Message: 15
>Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:13:34 -0400
>From: David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] House-warming
>To: exI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040810112951.03c32ac8 at unreasonable.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>
>After the fun we had at my Newtonmas party (beginning at 2 PM, the last
>group left at 2 AM), I was intent on a successor in the spring. Life
>intruded, but I'm ready now. I'm in a new house -- not set-up to my
>satisfaction, but good enough for a gathering of extropians.

One of these days (soon)...... :)



James...





From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Aug 11 14:57:23 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:57:23 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>

Forwarded from Stewart Brand from the Long Foundation:

>Birthrates are plummeting worldwide.  Already half the world has 
>"sub-replacement" birthrates. The dearth of babies coming means the makeup 
>of human populations is about to change drastically, and that will affect 
>everything.  Radical population increase defined the 20th century; radical 
>population decrease could well define our current century.  This form of 
>decrease---losing the young and keeping the old--- is something humanity 
>has never experienced before.
>
>"The Depopulation Problem," Phillip Longman, Friday, August 13, 7pm, Fort 
>Mason Conference Center, San Francisco.   Doors open for coffee and books 
>at 7pm; lecture is promptly at 8pm.  Special showing of Robert Frank's 
>1969 film "Liferaft Earth" at 7:15pm.  You may want to come early to be 
>sure of a seat.  Admission is free (donation of $10 very welcome, not 
>required).
>
>Phillip Longman, author of the excellent new book, THE EMPTY CRADLE, is a 
>senior fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington, DC.  His book 
>will be on sale at the talk.
>
>"Demography is destiny," as they say.  Every single 20-year-old of 2023 is 
>already born---as is, where is.  We were the first humans to experience a 
>global doubling of population in a single lifetime, and now we learn it 
>was the last doubling.  It turned out to be urbanization that stopped 
>exponential population growth (half the world now lives in cities).  So 
>far we have no idea what will stop exponential population decrease.
>
>This is one of a monthly series of Seminars About Long-term Thinking, 
>given every second Friday at Fort Mason, organized by The Long Now 
>Foundation.  Future speakers in the series include Danny Hillis, Paul 
>Hawken, Michael West, Ken Dychtwald, Laurie Anderson, and Jared 
>Diamond.  If you would like to be notified by email of forthcoming talks, 
>please contact Simone Davalos--- simone at longnow.org, 415-561-6582.
>
>You are welcome to forward this note to anyone you think might be interested.
>
>                                 --Stewart Brand
>
>--
>Stewart Brand
>The Long Now Foundation - http://www.longnow.org
>Seminars: http://www.longnow.org/10klibrary/Seminars.htm

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/20040811/9dff154a/attachment.html>

From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 11 13:15:44 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:45:44 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408110615214884a4@mail.gmail.com>

I would have called it "DePopulation Bomb", but that's probably why no
one asks me to speak anywhere :-)

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


----- Original Message -----
From: Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:57:23 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org, art-tac at yahoogroups.com

Forwarded from Stewart Brand from the Long Foundation:


Birthrates are plummeting worldwide.  Already half the world has
"sub-replacement" birthrates. The dearth of babies coming means the
makeup of human populations is about to change drastically, and that
will affect everything.  Radical population increase defined the 20th
century; radical population decrease could well define our current
century.  This form of decrease---losing the young and keeping the
old--- is something humanity has never experienced before.

"The Depopulation Problem," Phillip Longman, Friday, August 13, 7pm,
Fort Mason Conference Center, San Francisco.   Doors open for coffee
and books at 7pm; lecture is promptly at 8pm.  Special showing of
Robert Frank's 1969 film "Liferaft Earth" at 7:15pm.  You may want to
come early to be sure of a seat.  Admission is free (donation of $10
very welcome, not required).

Phillip Longman, author of the excellent new book, THE EMPTY CRADLE,
is a senior fellow at the New America Foundation in Washington, DC. 
His book will be on sale at the talk.

"Demography is destiny," as they say.  Every single 20-year-old of
2023 is already born---as is, where is.  We were the first humans to
experience a global doubling of population in a single lifetime, and
now we learn it was the last doubling.  It turned out to be
urbanization that stopped exponential population growth (half the
world now lives in cities).  So far we have no idea what will stop
exponential population decrease.

This is one of a monthly series of Seminars About Long-term Thinking,
given every second Friday at Fort Mason, organized by The Long Now
Foundation.  Future speakers in the series include Danny Hillis, Paul
Hawken, Michael West, Ken Dychtwald, Laurie Anderson, and Jared
Diamond.  If you would like to be notified by email of forthcoming
talks, please contact Simone Davalos--- simone at longnow.org,
415-561-6582.

You are welcome to forward this note to anyone you think might be interested.

                                --Stewart Brand

-- 
Stewart Brand
The Long Now Foundation - http://www.longnow.org
Seminars: http://www.longnow.org/10klibrary/Seminars.htm

Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc________________________________
 http://www.natasha.cc________________________________
 President, Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org Founder,
Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz Founder,
Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.transhuman.org


From dwish at indco.net  Wed Aug 11 13:30:19 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:30:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Olympics' digital security unprecedented
Message-ID: <200408111239.i7BCdRS9019645@br549.indconet.com>

Checkout the security at Athens!

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/08/10/olympics.security.ap/index.html

 

 

 

Dustin Wish

System Engineer & Programmer

INDCO Networks

Pres. OSSRI

********************************************************

"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead

 where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)

***********************************************

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040811/659ff4f6/attachment.html>

From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Wed Aug 11 13:40:57 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:40:57 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <134C6244-EB9C-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>

On 11 Aug 2004, at 16:57, Natasha Vita-More wrote:

>  Forwarded from Stewart Brand from the Long Foundation:
> Birthrates are plummeting worldwide.? Already half the world has 
> "sub-replacement" birthrates. The dearth of babies coming means the 
> makeup of human populations is about to change drastically, and that 
> will affect everything.?

Hey Natasha:

How reliable are these statistics? I thought population GLOBALLY was 
still going up, even if we in the West generally don't have children 
anymore. I thought even in the USA there was still positive population 
growth. Am I misremembering all those figures.

This seems a little like hype to sell a book. Am I wrong?

best, patrick



From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Aug 11 14:15:26 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:15:26 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <134C6244-EB9C-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<134C6244-EB9C-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <ee50357e04081107154f0ce1b6@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:40:57 +0200, Patrick Wilken wrote:
> 
> How reliable are these statistics? I thought population GLOBALLY was
> still going up, even if we in the West generally don't have children
> anymore. I thought even in the USA there was still positive population
> growth. Am I misremembering all those figures.
> 
> This seems a little like hype to sell a book. Am I wrong?
> 
> best, patrick
> 
These projections come from the U.S. Census Bureau and are pretty reliable.
And yes, the USA is projected to increase in population. They don't
really know why the US is different. Suggestions??
See my post of 4th August on this subject, where I commented -
Looks like the US just has to continue as normal and wait for
the rest of the world to dwindle away over the next 50 years.

BillK


From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Wed Aug 11 14:39:24 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:39:24 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e04081107154f0ce1b6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<134C6244-EB9C-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
	<ee50357e04081107154f0ce1b6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3D54CFCF-EBA4-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>


On 11 Aug 2004, at 16:15, BillK wrote:
> These projections come from the U.S. Census Bureau and are pretty 
> reliable.
> And yes, the USA is projected to increase in population. They don't
> really know why the US is different. Suggestions??

Where is the growth rate occurring? With immigrant families?

> See my post of 4th August on this subject, where I commented -
> Looks like the US just has to continue as normal and wait for
> the rest of the world to dwindle away over the next 50 years.

You mean the Europe, Australasia, Japan and a few other countries. Not 
the rest of the World. I think you'll find that China and India and 
Latin America are growing just fine. And so would Africa if it wasn't' 
devastated by AIDS.

And just not to be too picky. Australia's population, for instance, is 
still growing. We are just achieving it by immigration. So hopefully 
we'll avoid or at least mitigate some of the problems countries like 
Germany are going to suffer in the short-to-medium term as the result 
of their restrictive immigration stance. Its an interesting strategy 
really: save all that fuss and bother on spending on education, just 
ship them in once they are ready to work!

best, patrick 
  



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 11 15:06:28 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 08:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e04081107154f0ce1b6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040811150628.28180.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> These projections come from the U.S. Census Bureau and are pretty
> reliable.
> And yes, the USA is projected to increase in population. They don't
> really know why the US is different. Suggestions??
> See my post of 4th August on this subject, where I commented -
> Looks like the US just has to continue as normal and wait for
> the rest of the world to dwindle away over the next 50 years.

US population rises because we have more immigrants than any other
nation. Period. Native born reproductive rates are generally low,
though slightly above european norms, partly because of so much
non-euro immigration from countries with anti-family-planning
traditions (Catholic Mexicans, Cubans, and other latinos, for instance,
as well as Irish) that second third and fourth generation decendants of
immigrants from those countries still have cultural baggage for high
birth rates.

The US also tends to be more religious in general than other developed
nations, which impacts reproductive rates. Mormons, for instance, don't
believe in contraception or family planning (other than planning for
large families). And people immigrate here in many instances because of
the anti-family policies of their home governments.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 11 15:09:04 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:09:04 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: CNN get's more and more like Jerry Springer
Message-ID: <63830-2200483111594173@M2W065.mail2web.com>

This is today's headlines:


MORE TOP STORIES  

? Half-ton man drops 321 pounds, and still counting

? Peterson's lover describes a web of lies |  Video

? CBS News' Mike Wallace cited for disorderly conduct

? Two tropical storms threaten Florida

? Sudan condemned over Darfur crisis |  Video | Gallery

? Philippines' Arroyo to men: Stop kissing me

? Rick Fox, Vanessa Williams divorcing

? Police: Wedding guests eat relative


Okay, the tropical storms and Venessa Williams are not Springeresque, but
gee whiz, the rest of the headliners made me laugh!

Natasha

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




From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Aug 11 16:02:05 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:02:05 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: CNN get's more and more like Jerry Springer
In-Reply-To: <63830-2200483111594173@M2W065.mail2web.com>
References: <63830-2200483111594173@M2W065.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20040811160205.GZ1477@leitl.org>

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 11:09:04AM -0400, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote:

> Okay, the tropical storms and Venessa Williams are not Springeresque, but
> gee whiz, the rest of the headliners made me laugh!

The laughter suffers a sudden death on the lips, though, 
if one imagines that people are actually *reading* this (with a furrowed
brow), and consider it *news*... yeech.

What an awful waste of human life indeed. And they don't even know what they
let happen to themselves... nevermind that perpetrators of this are free and
wealthy humanfolk. Ditto Olympics. WTF? There are starving postdocs out there
which never make the news, while a buch of running ad-studded monkeys are
personally worth megabucks, and are covered in a dedicated newspaper section.

-- 
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/20040811/10ae2599/attachment.bin>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Aug 11 16:38:03 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:38:03 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <3D54CFCF-EBA4-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040811075612.01d6fc10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<134C6244-EB9C-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
	<ee50357e04081107154f0ce1b6@mail.gmail.com>
	<3D54CFCF-EBA4-11D8-8780-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0408110938761b29f8@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:39:24 +0200, Patrick Wilken
<patrick.wilken at nat.uni-magdeburg.de> wrote:
> 
> On 11 Aug 2004, at 16:15, BillK wrote:
> > See my post of 4th August on this subject, where I commented -
> > Looks like the US just has to continue as normal and wait for
> > the rest of the world to dwindle away over the next 50 years.
> 
> You mean the Europe, Australasia, Japan and a few other countries. Not
> the rest of the World. I think you'll find that China and India and
> Latin America are growing just fine. And so would Africa if it wasn't'
> devastated by AIDS.
> 
> And just not to be too picky. Australia's population, for instance, is
> still growing. We are just achieving it by immigration. So hopefully
> we'll avoid or at least mitigate some of the problems countries like
> Germany are going to suffer in the short-to-medium term as the result
> of their restrictive immigration stance. Its an interesting strategy
> really: save all that fuss and bother on spending on education, just
> ship them in once they are ready to work!
> 

Overall, the world population is projected to continue growing up to 
2050. My comment was intended to say that the US could watch the 
competition dwindle away by 2050.

<http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/wp02.html>
<http://www.census.gov/ipc/prod/wp02/appA.html>

China is projected to stop growing around 2020. It has the most rapidly 
aging population in the world and what new births there are, are 
massively skewed towards boy babies.

The numbers in Australia are tiny compared with US, Europe or China.

The point is that, in general, the advanced countries are projected to 
reduce and age their populations. It is the less-developed countries and 
the USA that are increasing their population.
So, not much competition for the USA there.

BillK


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 11 17:41:40 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:41:40 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: CNN get's more and more like Jerry Springer
Message-ID: <236270-220048311174140849@M2W075.mail2web.com>

From: Eugen Leitl 

>The laughter suffers a sudden death on the lips, though, 
>if one imagines that people are actually *reading* this (with a furrowed
>brow), and consider it *news*... yeech.

Yup.

N

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




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 11 17:46:58 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: CNN get's more and more like Jerry Springer
In-Reply-To: <63830-2200483111594173@M2W065.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20040811174659.30333.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:

> This is today's headlines:
> 
> MORE TOP STORIES  
> 
> ? Philippines' Arroyo to men: Stop kissing me
> 
> Okay, the tropical storms and Venessa Williams are not Springeresque,
> but gee whiz, the rest of the headliners made me laugh!

Yeah, imagine if Clinton had told the women to stop giving him blow
jobs... ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 


From live2scan at bellsouth.net  Wed Aug 11 21:04:26 2004
From: live2scan at bellsouth.net (Dennis Roberts)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:04:26 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
Message-ID: <003e01c47fe6$c9730320$6101a8c0@main>

Is anyone on this list familiar with  JP Aerospace? I'd seen some interesting but rudimentary efforts at building a private launch capability in the past on their website.
http://www.jpaerospace.com/

Went there yesterday and I was blown away by the change. If they can pull this off. "JP Spacelines" can't be too far away. I'm impressed by the use of ion propulsion, a vastly under used system.
Dennis Roberts
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040811/4e55183e/attachment.html>

From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 11 21:08:19 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:08:19 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <294220-2200483112181942@M2W081.mail2web.com>

Pretty darn reliable.  Birthrate is going down.

N

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Patrick Wilken Patrick.Wilken at nat.uni-magdeburg.de
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:40:57 +0200
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday
(for forwarding)


On 11 Aug 2004, at 16:57, Natasha Vita-More wrote:

>  Forwarded from Stewart Brand from the Long Foundation:
> Birthrates are plummeting worldwide.? Already half the world has 
> "sub-replacement" birthrates. The dearth of babies coming means the 
> makeup of human populations is about to change drastically, and that 
> will affect everything.?

Hey Natasha:

How reliable are these statistics? I thought population GLOBALLY was 
still going up, even if we in the West generally don't have children 
anymore. I thought even in the USA there was still positive population 
growth. Am I misremembering all those figures.

This seems a little like hype to sell a book. Am I wrong?

best, patrick

_______________________________________________
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 wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Aug 11 21:16:15 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <003e01c47fe6$c9730320$6101a8c0@main>
Message-ID: <20040811211615.21111.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dennis Roberts <live2scan at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Is anyone on this list familiar with  JP Aerospace?
> I'd seen some interesting but rudimentary efforts at
> building a private launch capability in the past on
> their website.
> http://www.jpaerospace.com/
> 
> Went there yesterday and I was blown away by the
> change. If they can pull this off. "JP Spacelines"
> can't be too far away. I'm impressed by the use of
> ion propulsion, a vastly under used system.

I have some friends on their team.  I'm not certain
whether they'll be able to pull off step 3 - something
light enough to float yet strong enough to withstand
hypersonic velocities (even with the tradeoff: the
lower in the atmosphere one goes, the more one can
float to resist gravity, but the stronger the craft
must be if moving fast) - but even if they can just
pull off step 2 - the Dark Sky Station - that'd be
rather impressive.  I do think they'll get at least
that far.


From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 12 02:10:14 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 19:10:14 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040811211615.21111.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002601c48011$81a9ba40$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Adrian Tymes

> > http://www.jpaerospace.com/
> > 

> 
> I have some friends on their team.  I'm not certain
> whether they'll be able to pull off step 3 - something
> light enough to float yet strong enough to withstand
> hypersonic velocities...


Ja, this is way cool, is it not?  The forces on the craft 
due to high velocity is proportional to the density of
the medium, so if they float way up there, then perhaps
this scheme could work.  Balloons can get up to where the
atmosphere is less than 1% the density down here.  Im
pleased to see a radical new approach to an old problem.

spike





From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Thu Aug 12 06:42:16 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:42:16 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <294220-2200483112181942@M2W081.mail2web.com>
References: <294220-2200483112181942@M2W081.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <C06A51BA-EC2A-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>


On 11 Aug 2004, at 23:08, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote:

> Pretty darn reliable.  Birthrate is going down.

Its not going down everywhere. Its going down in some places.

The basic result is that when women have a choice they tend to choose 
to have less babies. Wow. Something the demographers could never see 
coming when they predicted the population explosion. I wonder what 
other obvious points they are now missing in the predicted population 
implosion?

best, patrick



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Thu Aug 12 07:08:10 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:38:10 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <C06A51BA-EC2A-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
References: <294220-2200483112181942@M2W081.mail2web.com>
	<C06A51BA-EC2A-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040812000863c936c8@mail.gmail.com>

Do you think this (depopulation caused by people choosing to have less
children) is a function of the cost of having children? In the west,
and probably in most poorer countries except where children can pay
their own way, cost of raising children plus easy reproductive control
(actually a lot of people had this already using various native
methods, you can also include infanticide here) means people will have
less children. An economist might predict this. I'm assuming readers
understand the fact that all the people of the world understand how
babies are made, and make economically driven decisions about family
sizes.

The same economist might look at the looming greying population
problem, and say that it'll turn around (with lag) because the value
of money compared to human labor will change, with more money buying
less labor, because we'll have more people with money and without the
ability to labor. So, children (-> young teens -> yound adults) will
be able to earn more, and become profitable again (the way they were
for thousands of years). You would predict worldwide labor shortages
and subsequent labor and services price rises to lead to relatively
unsubtle subsidisation of breeding and child rearing, eventually.
Personally as part of Gen X I like this scenario, given that the
boomers will be wanting services (my services!) and have the money.
Maybe our parents are spending the inheritance, but we get it one way
or another :-)

The economist from the preceding paragraphs is short-sighted of
course. None of the analysis takes into account indefinite healthy
life extension, or robots, for example. And I'm not even going to
mention MNT... (oops, sorry)

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:42:16 +0200, Patrick Wilken
<patrick.wilken at nat.uni-magdeburg.de> wrote:
> 
> On 11 Aug 2004, at 23:08, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote:
> 
> > Pretty darn reliable.  Birthrate is going down.
> 
> Its not going down everywhere. Its going down in some places.
> 
> The basic result is that when women have a choice they tend to choose
> to have less babies. Wow. Something the demographers could never see
> coming when they predicted the population explosion. I wonder what
> other obvious points they are now missing in the predicted population
> implosion?
> 
> 
> 
> best, patrick
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Aug 12 07:38:37 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:38:37 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040811211615.21111.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <003e01c47fe6$c9730320$6101a8c0@main>
	<20040811211615.21111.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040812073837.GK1477@leitl.org>

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 02:16:15PM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> I have some friends on their team.  I'm not certain
> whether they'll be able to pull off step 3 - something
> light enough to float yet strong enough to withstand

This isn't the issue (though your hull erosion through plasma will make the
craft very, very short-lived), the question is where do you want to get the
thrust from? Who's going to build the microwave stations on the ground to
track the craft as it goes around the Earth? How many newtons thrust do you
get from 10 kg thruster, and how much lift capacity in 50 km height does that
need, what is the crossection of the hull, and the drag?

And does anyone have a fat airfoil for hypersonic regime which provides the
lift?

> hypersonic velocities (even with the tradeoff: the
> lower in the atmosphere one goes, the more one can
> float to resist gravity, but the stronger the craft
> must be if moving fast) - but even if they can just
> pull off step 2 - the Dark Sky Station - that'd be
> rather impressive.  I do think they'll get at least
> that far.

The Dark Sky station is as close to LEO as SpaceshipOne. I.e., not at 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/20040812/4e1392f5/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Aug 12 08:01:49 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:01:49 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <002601c48011$81a9ba40$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <20040811211615.21111.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
	<002601c48011$81a9ba40$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040812080149.GP1477@leitl.org>

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 07:10:14PM -0700, Spike wrote:

> Ja, this is way cool, is it not?  The forces on the craft 

What about plasma wear? How good are you with hypersonic fat foils which
provide lift?

> due to high velocity is proportional to the density of

Where does the high velocity come from? There is no rocket onboard.

> the medium, so if they float way up there, then perhaps
> this scheme could work.  Balloons can get up to where the
> atmosphere is less than 1% the density down here.  Im

Lift gives you zero horizontal velocity component. It shaves off maybe 10%
off energy costs due to lack of drag.

> pleased to see a radical new approach to an old problem.

-- 
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/20040812/2d8d52de/attachment.bin>

From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Thu Aug 12 07:55:00 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:55:00 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040812000863c936c8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <294220-2200483112181942@M2W081.mail2web.com>
	<C06A51BA-EC2A-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
	<710b78fc040812000863c936c8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E92E240A-EC34-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>

On 12 Aug 2004, at 09:08, Emlyn wrote:

> Do you think this (depopulation caused by people choosing to have less
> children) is a function of the cost of having children?

There surely is a cost to having children, and people are clearly 
choosing to have fewer. However, what needs to be emphasized is that 
it's women making these decisions. Its generally regarded in 
developmental agencies that one of the most potent forms of birth 
control are the micro-credit loans that allow women in developing 
countries some form of economic independence.

The shock-horror headline "World Birth Rates Plummet" could be 
re-written "Global Female Empowerment". Its interesting to speculate 
which headline is preferred and why.

best, patrick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 16:49:32 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040812000863c936c8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040812164932.33842.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you think this (depopulation caused by people choosing to have
> less children) is a function of the cost of having children? 

This is not a foregone conclusion. China has over a billion people, all
living under a one child law, allowing no choice to mothers, and that
one child rate seriously skews the worldwide average.

I would instead say that a woman's tendency to reproduce is
proportional to how expensive *governments* make child rearing, via
either statutory limitations on child bearing, or indirectly via
burdensome tax regiemes that raise the cost of living to excessively
high levels. Germany, for instance, has one of the most costly tax
regiemes, and a terrible reproductive rate. Here in the US, outside of
immigration, the population growth is better because our tax regieme
isn't as severe, though that varies from state to state. It would be
interesting to study reproductive rates in US states relative to their
state and local tax burden....

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 16:56:59 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:56:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040812080149.GP1477@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040812165659.31862.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 07:10:14PM -0700, Spike wrote:
> 
> > Ja, this is way cool, is it not?  The forces on the craft 
> 
> What about plasma wear? How good are you with hypersonic fat foils
> which provide lift?

Plasma wear occurs because hulls are not actively charged. Since the
vehicle is receiving microwave power, and using ION propulsion, it can
also actively charge its hull to help reduce plasma erosion, and
minimize shock waves at the same time.

The foils don't need hypersonic capacity. The indicated air speed at
those altitudes is entirely subsonic even at orbital velocities.

> 
> > due to high velocity is proportional to the density of
> 
> Where does the high velocity come from? There is no rocket onboard.

ION propulsion powered by beamed microwave energy.

> 
> > the medium, so if they float way up there, then perhaps
> > this scheme could work.  Balloons can get up to where the
> > atmosphere is less than 1% the density down here.  Im
> 
> Lift gives you zero horizontal velocity component. It shaves off
> maybe 10% off energy costs due to lack of drag.

The ion propulsion is for use in high atmosphere. You don't need a lot
of thrust because at such altitudes your indicated air speed is so low.
You can be going mach 24 relative to the ground but your indicated air
speed at 350,000 feet is going to be less than 100 mph. Therefore, all
you need is a lot of time to thrust..

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 16:58:44 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <003e01c47fe6$c9730320$6101a8c0@main>
Message-ID: <20040812165844.48399.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Dennis Roberts <live2scan at bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Is anyone on this list familiar with  JP Aerospace? I'd seen some
> interesting but rudimentary efforts at building a private launch
> capability in the past on their website.
> http://www.jpaerospace.com/
> 
> Went there yesterday and I was blown away by the change. If they can
> pull this off. "JP Spacelines" can't be too far away. I'm impressed
> by the use of ion propulsion, a vastly under used system.

Their concept is possibly the most imaginative I've seen. I started
having similar ideas over the past several years as I've been playing
with suborbital simulations in X-plane.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Thu Aug 12 17:02:51 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:02:51 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004
In-Reply-To: <E92E240A-EC34-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
References: <294220-2200483112181942@M2W081.mail2web.com>
	<C06A51BA-EC2A-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
	<710b78fc040812000863c936c8@mail.gmail.com>
	<E92E240A-EC34-11D8-B585-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0408121300360.-227989@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


http://www.reason.com/rb/rb081104.shtml

Regards,
MB


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 12 17:02:28 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:02:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <BAY17-F1190Ky1k6Gjs000256b8@hotmail.com>

In the US, the tax burden decreases with each additional child. So 
theoretically, the higher the local tax burden, the greater the tax 
incentive would be to have children (as the deductions would be more 
valuable).

Additionally, other tax-like expenses like healthcare do not increase with 
additional children. So where there is a large incremental cost for 1 child, 
a 2nd and 3rd child do not each cost as much as the previous child.

I suspect that the decreasing birthrate in developed nations can also be 
caused by the prolonged adolescence where it make take someone 25 years to 
complete college and postgraduate work prior to beginning a career. This 
means that a woman is not ready to have children until 28-35 or so. This 
would limit the number of children possible to further lower the birthrate.

BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com>,   ExI chat list 
><extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday 
>(for forwarding)
>Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:49:32 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Do you think this (depopulation caused by people choosing to have
> > less children) is a function of the cost of having children?
>
>This is not a foregone conclusion. China has over a billion people, all
>living under a one child law, allowing no choice to mothers, and that
>one child rate seriously skews the worldwide average.
>
>I would instead say that a woman's tendency to reproduce is
>proportional to how expensive *governments* make child rearing, via
>either statutory limitations on child bearing, or indirectly via
>burdensome tax regiemes that raise the cost of living to excessively
>high levels. Germany, for instance, has one of the most costly tax
>regiemes, and a terrible reproductive rate. Here in the US, outside of
>immigration, the population growth is better because our tax regieme
>isn't as severe, though that varies from state to state. It would be
>interesting to study reproductive rates in US states relative to their
>state and local tax burden....
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Aug 12 17:31:09 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:31:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F1190Ky1k6Gjs000256b8@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040812173109.55902.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> In the US, the tax burden decreases with each
> additional child. So 
> theoretically, the higher the local tax burden, the
> greater the tax 
> incentive would be to have children (as the
> deductions would be more 
> valuable).
> 
> Additionally, other tax-like expenses like
> healthcare do not increase with 
> additional children. So where there is a large
> incremental cost for 1 child, 
> a 2nd and 3rd child do not each cost as much as the
> previous child.

Arguably true, depending on what you call "tax-like".
Grocerices, daipers, hospital visits, education
(especially college), et al certainly do increase with
additional children.  Many who have the resources to
raise one child well could not raise five to what most
people consider acceptable quality.  (Not
simultaneously, anyway.)

> I suspect that the decreasing birthrate in developed
> nations can also be 
> caused by the prolonged adolescence where it make
> take someone 25 years to 
> complete college and postgraduate work prior to
> beginning a career. This 
> means that a woman is not ready to have children
> until 28-35 or so. This 
> would limit the number of children possible to
> further lower the birthrate.

This is not true of all females in the developed world
- although the opposite end, girls who have children
while still teenagers themselves, is seen as a social
problem to be reduced and, hopefully, eventually
eliminated.


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 12 17:35:35 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:35:35 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004
Message-ID: <120750-220048412173535291@M2W055.mail2web.com>


From: MB mbb386 at main.nc.us

http://www.reason.com/rb/rb081104.shtml

Too much cyborg and not enough transhuman.  I'm not a huge fan of cyborg
matrial, as it, as Ron says, puts people off.  I prefer the transhuman
approach to upgrading the human body.  

Bty, Stelarc was great.

N

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




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Aug 12 17:48:55 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040812073837.GK1477@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040812174855.86946.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> Who's going to build the microwave
> stations on the ground to
> track the craft as it goes around the Earth?

I generally agree with most of your objections here,
but this one can easily be solved: solar panels (or
cells on the craft's skin), or a fleet of microwave
satellites launched by traditional means.

> The Dark Sky station is as close to LEO as
> SpaceshipOne. I.e., not at all.

*shrugs*  Doesn't mean it isn't useful in its own
right.  If they can solve the engineering issues of
floating serious payload at high altitudes...floating
cities, anyone?


From reason at longevitymeme.org  Thu Aug 12 18:09:49 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:09:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0408121300360.-227989@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEMEENAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>

Kip Werking wrote a long report on TV2004 that I've excerpted here:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000205.php

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme


From kurt at metatechnica.com  Thu Aug 12 18:22:18 2004
From: kurt at metatechnica.com (Kurt Schoedel)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:22:18 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The DEpopulation Bomb
Message-ID: <E1BvKDS-0006Se-2N@svr58.ehostpros.com>

Has anyone bothered to point out to Phillip Longman that the 
Depopulation bomb is not a problem because by 2050 or so, we should 
certainly have the SENS treatments to irradicate aging?

Kurt Schoedel
MetaTechnica


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 12 18:48:15 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:48:15 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <BAY17-F36ZvC1GZtlta00030955@hotmail.com>

>From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday 
>(for forwarding)
>Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:31:09 -0700 (PDT)

>Arguably true, depending on what you call "tax-like".
>Grocerices, daipers, hospital visits, education
>(especially college), et al certainly do increase with
>additional children.  Many who have the resources to
>raise one child well could not raise five to what most
>people consider acceptable quality.  (Not
>simultaneously, anyway.)

It's true that 2 children are more expensive to raise than 1, but the cost 
of two children is not twice that of one. I only speak from theory as I'm 
still raising just one, but it seems that a lot of the initial investments 
(cribs, furniture, expanded home) and recurring costs (healthcare, 
groceries, clothes) don't increase linearly with each new child. Some of 
these incremental costs can be largely or completely offset by tax credits 
(I think 1-2k/child in the US).

>This is not true of all females in the developed world
>- although the opposite end, girls who have children
>while still teenagers themselves, is seen as a social
>problem to be reduced and, hopefully, eventually
>eliminated.

Though not true of all females, I think that the average age of first 
mothers increases as a country becomes more and more developed. The US is a 
bit of an exception because the influx of immigration allows for continued 
growth.

BAL




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Aug 12 20:03:11 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F36ZvC1GZtlta00030955@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040812200311.98789.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
> 
> >Many who have the resources
> to
> >raise one child well could not raise five to what
> most
> >people consider acceptable quality.  (Not
> >simultaneously, anyway.)
> 
> It's true that 2 children are more expensive to
> raise than 1, but the cost 
> of two children is not twice that of one.

True.  But it doesn't have to be twice, it only has to
be more.  One only has a certain amount of resources
to spend, and if one child already accounts for a
significant fraction of that...


From reason at longevitymeme.org  Thu Aug 12 20:03:14 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason .)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:03:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004
Message-ID: <200408121503.AA633995496@longevitymeme.org>

Here's another one from a chap who, I feel, totally misses the point of the exercise - wearing the arts blinders and blundering through reality...

http://www.bmezine.com/news/pubring/20040812.html

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme

---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Reason" <reason at longevitymeme.org>
Reply-To: reason at longevitymeme.org,ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Date:  Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:09:49 -0700

>Kip Werking wrote a long report on TV2004 that I've excerpted here:
>
>http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000205.php
>
>Reason
>Founder, Longevity Meme
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
 

 
______________ ______________ ______________ ______________
Sent via the KillerWebMail system at longevitymeme.org


 
                   


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 20:14:51 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F1190Ky1k6Gjs000256b8@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040812201451.34419.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:

> In the US, the tax burden decreases with each additional child. So 
> theoretically, the higher the local tax burden, the greater the tax 
> incentive would be to have children (as the deductions would be more 
> valuable).

The problem with this logic is that income does not increase with each
additional child, so for a given income, there is a maximum tolerable
number of children. The more income that gets taken in taxes, the fewer
this number is. If a four child family with zero taxes gets a tax
increase to 25% of income, that family can afford three children. At
50% they could afford two, and one at 75% tax burden.

Furthermore, it can also be said that the tax burden DOESN'T decrease
proportionately to the incremental cost of raising each child. If the
per child deduction does not meet or exceed the per child rearing cost,
there is an increasing tax burden per child.

Finally, the per child tax deduction only applies to income taxes.
Child related consumption causes sales tax payments, and each child's
bedroom in a home increases property tax payments. My theory deals with
the whole tax burden, not just income taxes.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 20:18:46 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <20040812200311.98789.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040812201846.48712.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:

> --- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
> > 
> > >Many who have the resources
> > to
> > >raise one child well could not raise five to what
> > most
> > >people consider acceptable quality.  (Not
> > >simultaneously, anyway.)
> > 
> > It's true that 2 children are more expensive to
> > raise than 1, but the cost 
> > of two children is not twice that of one.
> 
> True.  But it doesn't have to be twice, it only has to
> be more.  One only has a certain amount of resources
> to spend, and if one child already accounts for a
> significant fraction of that...

Keep in mind, also, that today you pay for day-care on a per child
basis. Used to be you typically had an unpaid partner/employee at home
to eliminate those expenses...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 12 20:27:02 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:27:02 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <BAY17-F42BSQxjyxEFu0000998a@hotmail.com>




>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday 
>(for forwarding)
>Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In the US, the tax burden decreases with each additional child. So
> > theoretically, the higher the local tax burden, the greater the tax
> > incentive would be to have children (as the deductions would be more
> > valuable).
>
>The problem with this logic is that income does not increase with each
>additional child, so for a given income, there is a maximum tolerable
>number of children. The more income that gets taken in taxes, the fewer
>this number is. If a four child family with zero taxes gets a tax
>increase to 25% of income, that family can afford three children. At
>50% they could afford two, and one at 75% tax burden.
>Furthermore, it can also be said that the tax burden DOESN'T decrease
>proportionately to the incremental cost of raising each child. If the
>per child deduction does not meet or exceed the per child rearing cost,
>there is an increasing tax burden per child.

I was trying to point out that if a child allows for a set deduction (lets 
say $3000) then the value of that deduction increases with the increasing 
tax burden. Under a 25% marginal rate it's $750 but under a 40% rate it's 
worth $1200. Of course the family would also be paying more in taxes, but 
the value of each child would increase, so you get to a certain tax 
percentage where the value of the deduction is greater than the cost of the 
child and your kids become, effectively, free under a more oppressive tax 
burden where they would cost more under a low tax burden.

>Finally, the per child tax deduction only applies to income taxes.
>Child related consumption causes sales tax payments, and each child's
>bedroom in a home increases property tax payments. My theory deals with
>the whole tax burden, not just income taxes.

I'm also referring to property taxes. My point about the marginal cost of 
each child includes property. For example. If you live in a 1 bedroom apt 
and have a child, you'll want more space. So you get a 3 bedroom house or 2 
bedroom apt or whatever. This increases property tax and forces new housing 
expenses. If you have a 2nd or 3rd child, this does not require more space 
(just get some bunk beds) so no additional property taxes.

I think it boils down to certain "fixed" child rearing costs such as:
housing,
transportation
health insurance
public education
that don't vary linearly with the number of children (you end up with stages 
where 1-3 it is fixed, then 4-6 or whatever)

and then "variable" costs (as kids increase and age, these costs go up) such 
as:
food
water

and finally mixed (can be shared amond kids)
clothing
entertainment

So you do end up with additional sales tax for food, clothing, but for the 
big ticket items like houses and cars you don't really have an incremental 
cost between 1 and 3 kids (maybe even 4-5 if you start squeezing them in).

BAL




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 12 20:48:45 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F42BSQxjyxEFu0000998a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040812204845.87364.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >
> >The problem with this logic is that income does not increase with
> each
> >additional child, so for a given income, there is a maximum
> tolerable
> >number of children. The more income that gets taken in taxes, the
> fewer
> >this number is. If a four child family with zero taxes gets a tax
> >increase to 25% of income, that family can afford three children. At
> >50% they could afford two, and one at 75% tax burden.
> >Furthermore, it can also be said that the tax burden DOESN'T
> decrease
> >proportionately to the incremental cost of raising each child. If
> the
> >per child deduction does not meet or exceed the per child rearing
> cost,
> >there is an increasing tax burden per child.
> 
> I was trying to point out that if a child allows for a set deduction
> (lets say $3000) then the value of that deduction increases with the
> increasing tax burden. 

How do you argue that? The deduction comes off the front end of income.
The more you earn, the less that deduction is worth because it is a
decreasing percentage of your income. Ergo, if you are in a higher tax
bracket, any given deduction is worth less UNLESS it happens to drop
you into a lower bracket.

> Under a 25% marginal rate it's $750 but under a 40% rate it's 
> worth $1200. Of course the family would also be paying more in taxes,
> but 
> the value of each child would increase, so you get to a certain tax 
> percentage where the value of the deduction is greater than the cost
> of the 
> child and your kids become, effectively, free under a more oppressive
> tax burden where they would cost more under a low tax burden.

Again, the problem with this is that it is only beneficial to have
additional children if the cost of rearing a child is equal to or less
than the deduction. A family may be able to afford another child more
than without the deduction IF they stay in the same tax bracket. The
deduction may be worth more in the end living in a more oppressive tax
regieme, but the problem is that the overall tax burden is still a
higher barrier to entry than under a low tax regieme. You're picking
nits but ignoring the swarm.

> 
> >Finally, the per child tax deduction only applies to income taxes.
> >Child related consumption causes sales tax payments, and each
child's
> >bedroom in a home increases property tax payments. My theory deals
> >with the whole tax burden, not just income taxes.
> 
> I'm also referring to property taxes. My point about the marginal
> cost of each child includes property. For example. If you live in
> a 1 bedroom apt and have a child, you'll want more space. So you
> get a 3 bedroom house or 2 bedroom apt or whatever. 
> This increases property tax and forces new housing expenses. If you
> have a 2nd or 3rd child, this does not require more space 
> (just get some bunk beds) so no additional property taxes.

That is a strategy, but one that few families engage in. Government
also tends to frown on maximizing bunking, because since children's
education gets paid for by property taxes, they tend to impose limits
on occupants per room in either zoning, building, DCYF or other
community ordinances.

While you can decrease your costs on each additional child, it is still
an increasing burden that does not encourage child rearing unless the
costs are less than deductions allowed per child.

> 
> I think it boils down to certain "fixed" child rearing costs such as:
> housing,
> transportation
> health insurance
> public education
> that don't vary linearly with the number of children (you end up with
> stages where 1-3 it is fixed, then 4-6 or whatever)

Public education may not have much variance (except of course that
additional children put additional burden on the school system as a
whole, which raises property taxes). However, public schools are not
the be all and end all. You have day-care expenses on a per child
basis, summer camp, and if you send them to private school, you pay
property taxes PLUS private school tuition on each child.

Finally, college education costs are distinctly on a per child basis,
as is auto insurance once the kids start driving.



=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Aug 12 21:09:43 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004
In-Reply-To: <200408121503.AA633995496@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <20040812210943.11274.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Reason ." <reason at longevitymeme.org> wrote:
> Here's another one from a chap who, I feel, totally
> misses the point of the exercise - wearing the arts
> blinders and blundering through reality...
> 
> http://www.bmezine.com/news/pubring/20040812.html

I had the opposite reaction to his article.  He's
arguing that we should be doing more doing and less
talking - to him, we're the ones wearing the blinders
and blundering.  And then there's this:

> Scientists need to embrace the reality of human
> interaction and start to include marketing as an
> important part of transhumanist dialog.  Body
> modification for example is successful not just
> because it's "right", but also because it's cool and
> accessible.

"Memetic engineering" overlaps "marketing" so much
that the two could arguably be called almost one and
the same, just different takes on the same idea.  We
do not envision, say, augmented reality getting in
the way of reality with a mass of mundane problems -
interference with the existing social uses of the eyes
chief among them - and yet this is one of the things
keeping this idea from being accepted.  It, itself, is
a problem that needs solving, and altering or limiting
the users isn't a viable solution (in fact, the
requirement for said alterations or limits is a large
part of the problem).


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 12 22:51:51 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 17:51:51 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
References: <BAY17-F42BSQxjyxEFu0000998a@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV6Hj0s8jHw5U00049552@hotmail.com>

Don;t forget that self-employed people are able to employ their children at
any age that t hey are reasonable able to do the work. They do not fall
under wage/hour regulations either. Having many children when you are
self-employed can greatly increase productivity while keeping costs down. In
this case, having many children becomes a huge benefit! :-)


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Lee" <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday
(for forwarding)


>
>
>
> >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this
Friday
> >(for forwarding)
> >Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In the US, the tax burden decreases with each additional child. So
> > > theoretically, the higher the local tax burden, the greater the tax
> > > incentive would be to have children (as the deductions would be more
> > > valuable).
> >
> >The problem with this logic is that income does not increase with each
> >additional child, so for a given income, there is a maximum tolerable
> >number of children. The more income that gets taken in taxes, the fewer
> >this number is. If a four child family with zero taxes gets a tax
> >increase to 25% of income, that family can afford three children. At
> >50% they could afford two, and one at 75% tax burden.
> >Furthermore, it can also be said that the tax burden DOESN'T decrease
> >proportionately to the incremental cost of raising each child. If the
> >per child deduction does not meet or exceed the per child rearing cost,
> >there is an increasing tax burden per child.
>
> I was trying to point out that if a child allows for a set deduction (lets
> say $3000) then the value of that deduction increases with the increasing
> tax burden. Under a 25% marginal rate it's $750 but under a 40% rate it's
> worth $1200. Of course the family would also be paying more in taxes, but
> the value of each child would increase, so you get to a certain tax
> percentage where the value of the deduction is greater than the cost of
the
> child and your kids become, effectively, free under a more oppressive tax
> burden where they would cost more under a low tax burden.
>
> >Finally, the per child tax deduction only applies to income taxes.
> >Child related consumption causes sales tax payments, and each child's
> >bedroom in a home increases property tax payments. My theory deals with
> >the whole tax burden, not just income taxes.
>
> I'm also referring to property taxes. My point about the marginal cost of
> each child includes property. For example. If you live in a 1 bedroom apt
> and have a child, you'll want more space. So you get a 3 bedroom house or
2
> bedroom apt or whatever. This increases property tax and forces new
housing
> expenses. If you have a 2nd or 3rd child, this does not require more space
> (just get some bunk beds) so no additional property taxes.
>
> I think it boils down to certain "fixed" child rearing costs such as:
> housing,
> transportation
> health insurance
> public education
> that don't vary linearly with the number of children (you end up with
stages
> where 1-3 it is fixed, then 4-6 or whatever)
>
> and then "variable" costs (as kids increase and age, these costs go up)
such
> as:
> food
> water
>
> and finally mixed (can be shared amond kids)
> clothing
> entertainment
>
> So you do end up with additional sales tax for food, clothing, but for the
> big ticket items like houses and cars you don't really have an incremental
> cost between 1 and 3 kids (maybe even 4-5 if you start squeezing them in).
>
> BAL
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Aug 13 03:02:26 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:32:26 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
Message-ID: <710b78fc040812200259035993@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I've got a friend here who is looking for objective information
regarding Fahrenheit 911, because he found it compelling but obviously
slanted. He's wanting basically to sort the good stuff from the crap,
in the face of a torrent of "it's all crap/made up" vs "its gospel"
coming from all sides.

Does anyone know of an objective examination of that movie? ie: non
party aligned, actually checking the facts, mind not made up in
advance kind of investigation?

I asked the great god Google, but google is kind of bombed by the
partisan stuff just now.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 13 04:04:22 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 21:04:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040812200259035993@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000801c480ea$9de52800$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


>...Emlyn
...
> 
> I've got a friend here who is looking for objective information
> regarding Fahrenheit 911...
> 
> Does anyone know of an objective examination of that movie? ie: non
> party aligned, actually checking the facts... Emlyn


Emlyn, F911 is the wrong medium to be looking for facts:
its a comedy.  Michael Moore is a comic.  Look at his 
previous works, the very funny and entertaining, incredibly 
bitter quasi-documentary dark comedies "Roger and Me" and 
"Pets or Meat".

Rush Limbaugh is a comedian too, as is Michael Savage
and the rest.  Foxnews is entertainment for the masses.
CNN is bitter entertainment for the masses.  We asked
for it, we got it.

spike 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Aug 13 04:53:16 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:53:16 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <000801c480ea$9de52800$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <019101c480f1$72422e30$852c2dcb@homepc>

Spike wrote:
> >...Emlyn
> ...
> > 
> > I've got a friend here who is looking for objective information
> > regarding Fahrenheit 911...
> > 
> > Does anyone know of an objective examination of that movie? ie: non
> > party aligned, actually checking the facts... Emlyn
> 
> 
> Emlyn, F911 is the wrong medium to be looking for facts:
> its a comedy. 

I saw it.  I didn't find it funny.  I expected to see propaganda and I
did.  But that doesn't mean it doesn't contain checkable facts.  

Have you seen it Spike?  

Did anyone see anything in it that was factually inaccurate? If so,
what?

Brett




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 13 05:57:12 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 22:57:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <019101c480f1$72422e30$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <001101c480fa$63138720$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Brett Paatsch
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
> 
> > > 
> > > I've got a friend here who is looking for objective information
> > > regarding Fahrenheit 911...
> > > 
> 
> Did anyone see anything in it that was factually inaccurate? If so,
> what? Brett

Brett, its all in the editing.  I don't know of anything in
these presentations that is factually inaccurate.  Rather
it is in what the editor chooses to include and what not
to include.  Our news sources on this planet are telling
stories that are factually accurate and simultaneously
extremely biased.  Our entertainment does the same.  
Eventually the two media merge into indistinguishable 
unity.  spike



From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Aug 13 06:53:58 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 07:53:58 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040812200259035993@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc040812200259035993@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e040812235332d18ae4@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:32:26 +0930, Emlyn wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know of an objective examination of that movie? ie: non
> party aligned, actually checking the facts, mind not made up in
> advance kind of investigation?
> 

Try
<http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm>

BillK


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Aug 13 09:51:58 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:51:58 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <001101c480fa$63138720$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <01f501c4811b$2cb6e3e0$852c2dcb@homepc>

> > Brett Paatsch
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > I've got a friend here who is looking for objective information
> > > > regarding Fahrenheit 911...
> > > > 
> > 
> > Did anyone see anything in it that was factually inaccurate? If so,
> > what? Brett
> 
> Brett, its all in the editing.  I don't know of anything in
> these presentations that is factually inaccurate.  Rather
> it is in what the editor chooses to include and what not
> to include.  Our news sources on this planet are telling
> stories that are factually accurate and simultaneously
> extremely biased.  Our entertainment does the same.  
> Eventually the two media merge into indistinguishable 
> unity.  spike

Politicians of all persuasions also use selective editting. The truth
but not the whole truth is part of the game. A lie or factual error
is almost too sloppy because it can get caught - or that once seems
to me to be the case  anyway - maybe voters are getting sloppier 
and more gullible (or maybe I am getting more intolerant of damn
fools). 

I'm beginning to suspect the populace is getting so cynical and
disinterested that now even blatant lying by politicians can be
gotten away with. Because anything is to be preferred by believers
than the exercise of critical faculties. 

George W Bush is the encumbent president of the US. Either
he or Kerry will have the power of that role for four years. 
Michael Moore has fired a propaganda salvo at Bush only.
Everybody has an agenda. 

I don't care about Michael Moore either way. I am interested
in the critical faculties of the US voter though because the US
voter will vote for a President that will have the power to stuff
up a lot more than just the US.  If the only choices were
Calligula and Nero and I couldn't vote I'd still want to see those
that could vote to do so for the least damaging option. US voters
will vote for their own interests - I accept that - but it would be
good if they'd vote in an enlightened way as having a moron in 
charge in Rome can make an even bigger mess for those of us
that live in the provinces. 

How can the US voter be enlightened - he or she can at least 
try to think.

On September 11 a lot of arguable innocent people got killed.
That's not new in the world. Its just new on the US homeland.

But now there is an election about to happen and anyone who 
has the opportunity to vote with their wits after engaging with the
issues and doesn't take the trouble will not in my opinion be able
to claim they are completely innocent next time. Not all the 
terrorists are in the other countries. Domestic politicians can use
terror for their purposes too.  

To some extent democracies do get the governments they
deserve.  American's seems likely to deserve either Bush or
Kerry. (And Australian's Howard or Latham).  But which? What 
could be more sensible than considering *reasons* for voting for
one over the other and articulating those reasons?

This is a rant, maybe, but I think I'll post it anyway. 

Brett

 








 




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 12:43:07 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 05:43:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <019101c480f1$72422e30$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040813124307.1712.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> I saw it.  I didn't find it funny.  I expected to see propaganda and
> I did.  But that doesn't mean it doesn't contain checkable facts.  
> 
> Have you seen it Spike?  
> 
> Did anyone see anything in it that was factually inaccurate? If so,
> what?

Propaganda like this is more a matter of what was left out rather than
what was put in. If I made a movie only of right wing racist white
skinheads shooting guns, and presented it as the face of the American
gun culture, every fact presented would be checkable, except of course
the ones I left out.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 13 14:03:28 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:03:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004
Message-ID: <105660-22004851314328491@M2W058.mail2web.com>

Not a bad article.  BUT frankly, I had no intention of talking about
cosmetic surgery as it had no relevance to posthuman entities.

This guy needs a good lesson in moving beyond transhuman 20th Century
technology to learning how to think about designing posthumans.  

I think I better give him a phone call this weekend or email to set him
straight.

Natasha

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Adrian Tymes wingcat at pacbell.net
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Reason Magazine Online on TransVision 2004


--- "Reason ." <reason at longevitymeme.org> wrote:
> Here's another one from a chap who, I feel, totally
> misses the point of the exercise - wearing the arts
> blinders and blundering through reality...
> 
> http://www.bmezine.com/news/pubring/20040812.html

I had the opposite reaction to his article.  He's
arguing that we should be doing more doing and less
talking - to him, we're the ones wearing the blinders
and blundering.  And then there's this:

> Scientists need to embrace the reality of human
> interaction and start to include marketing as an
> important part of transhumanist dialog.  Body
> modification for example is successful not just
> because it's "right", but also because it's cool and
> accessible.

"Memetic engineering" overlaps "marketing" so much
that the two could arguably be called almost one and
the same, just different takes on the same idea.  We
do not envision, say, augmented reality getting in
the way of reality with a mass of mundane problems -
interference with the existing social uses of the eyes
chief among them - and yet this is one of the things
keeping this idea from being accepted.  It, itself, is
a problem that needs solving, and altering or limiting
the users isn't a viable solution (in fact, the
requirement for said alterations or limits is a large
part of the problem).
_______________________________________________
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 brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 13 14:54:33 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 10:54:33 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <BAY17-F12dxyscXIW6J0003577d@hotmail.com>




>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday 
>(for forwarding)
>Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>
>How do you argue that? The deduction comes off the front end of income.
>The more you earn, the less that deduction is worth because it is a
>decreasing percentage of your income. Ergo, if you are in a higher tax
>bracket, any given deduction is worth less UNLESS it happens to drop
>you into a lower bracket.

No, any deductions come off your highest percentage first. Tax brackets work 
by taxing a certain percentage of your income. For example the federal 
brackets were (for a single person) in 2001 were:
Between  But Not Over  Base Tax  + Rate  Of the Amount Over
$0 $6,000 $0 10% $0
$6000 $26,250 $600 15% $6,000
$26,250 $63,550 $3,637.50 27% $26,250
$63,550 $132,600 $13,708.50 30% $63,550
$132,600 $288,350 $34,423.50 35% $132,600
$288,350 - - - - - $88,936.00 38.6% $288,350

So if someone makes 300k and gets a $3000 deduction it is worth 38.6% of 
$3000 or $1158.
But if someone makes 35000, then the $3000 deduction is worth only 27% of 
$3000 or $810.

There's really no such thing as "dropping into a lower tax bracket" as being 
advantageous in the US federal tax system but I think that many people 
misunderstand and think that their entire income is taxed at the highest 
rate. I know I've personally had to explain this to tons of friends and 
relatives.

So deductions never come out of the lowest bracket unless your lowest 
bracket is also your highest bracket.

BAL




From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 13 15:43:22 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 08:43:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <01f501c4811b$2cb6e3e0$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Brett Paatsch

> 
> George W Bush is the encumbent president of the US. Either
> he or Kerry will have the power of that role for four years...
> 
> Brett

If one doesn't like these guys, there are others on
the ballot.  If one is generally right leaning but
doesn't like Bush, the strategy is to vote for someone
who is far left, such as that Ralph guy.  Then the
left-leaning party perceives that it must move farther
left to pick up its own disaffected far left wing,
which causes it to lose votes in the highly-populated
middle.  The two front runners have become indistinguishable
(except for Kerry's comment that he would fight a "more
sensitive war" whatever the hell that is).

http://www.gop.com/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4514

I am a right-ish capitalist libertarian.  I don't like 
Bush myself but would like to see Ralph make a good 
showing.  Perhaps in the next election, that result 
would help those more likely to stay out of my portemonnaie.

Politics create such odd paradoxes, ya gotta love it.

spike



From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Fri Aug 13 15:50:35 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 17:50:35 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <842D9168-ED40-11D8-B92E-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>


On 13 Aug 2004, at 17:43, Spike wrote:
> I am a right-ish capitalist libertarian.  I don't like
> Bush myself but would like to see Ralph make a good
> showing.  Perhaps in the next election, that result
> would help those more likely to stay out of my portemonnaie.
>
> Politics create such odd paradoxes, ya gotta love it.

Spike:

Its really too bad that US doesn't have proportional voting like in 
Australia. It would help stop you have to second guess the party you 
vote for.

best, patrick



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 13 16:26:13 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:26:13 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <842D9168-ED40-11D8-B92E-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <000a01c48152$40ad5820$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Patrick Wilken
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
> 
> 
> 
> On 13 Aug 2004, at 17:43, Spike wrote:

> > Politics create such odd paradoxes, ya gotta love it.
> 
> Spike:
> 
> Its really too bad that US doesn't have proportional voting like in 
> Australia. It would help stop you have to second guess the party you 
> vote for.
> 
> best, patrick


Actually we kinda do: we vote on representatives.  The
presidency is only one office (an important one of course).
But ideally from a libertarian point of view, one likes to
see the congress and the presidency held by opposing parties.
If so, then preferrably the lefties hold the presidency and 
the righties hold both houses of congress.  That way budgets
tend to be leaner, which is good.

spike  



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 18:08:03 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F12dxyscXIW6J0003577d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040813180803.29997.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this
> Friday 
> >(for forwarding)
> >Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:48:45 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> >
> >How do you argue that? The deduction comes off the front end of
> income.
> >The more you earn, the less that deduction is worth because it is a
> >decreasing percentage of your income. Ergo, if you are in a higher
> tax
> >bracket, any given deduction is worth less UNLESS it happens to drop
> >you into a lower bracket.
> 
> No, any deductions come off your highest percentage first. Tax
> brackets work 
> by taxing a certain percentage of your income. For example the
> federal 
> brackets were (for a single person) in 2001 were:
> Between  But Not Over  Base Tax  + Rate  Of the Amount Over
> $0 $6,000 $0 10% $0
> $6000 $26,250 $600 15% $6,000
> $26,250 $63,550 $3,637.50 27% $26,250
> $63,550 $132,600 $13,708.50 30% $63,550
> $132,600 $288,350 $34,423.50 35% $132,600
> $288,350 - - - - - $88,936.00 38.6% $288,350
> 
> So if someone makes 300k and gets a $3000 deduction it is worth 38.6%
> of $3000 or $1158.
> But if someone makes 35000, then the $3000 deduction is worth only
> 27% of $3000 or $810.

Your logical problem here is that $810 is a much greater percentage of
$35k than $1158 is of $300k, and both numbers are significantly less
than the cost of raising each child. If your cost per child is $5k,
that $5k is also a much greater percentage of $35k than of $300k. Since
the $35k guy gets only $810 off his $5k cost of raising his kid, and
the $300k guy gets $1158 off that $5k cost, the richer guy can afford
not only more kids, but can afford to spend more money on each kid.


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 13 18:11:51 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <842D9168-ED40-11D8-B92E-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <20040813181151.8364.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Patrick Wilken <Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE> wrote:

> 
> On 13 Aug 2004, at 17:43, Spike wrote:
> > I am a right-ish capitalist libertarian.  I don't like
> > Bush myself but would like to see Ralph make a good
> > showing.  Perhaps in the next election, that result
> > would help those more likely to stay out of my portemonnaie.
> >
> > Politics create such odd paradoxes, ya gotta love it.
> 
> Spike:
> 
> Its really too bad that US doesn't have proportional voting like in 
> Australia. It would help stop you have to second guess the party you 
> vote for.

Some states do have instant run-off voting, others do not. Vermont, for
example, does have instant run-off, and the Progressive Party is a
major party there. Despite federal regs, voting is constitutionally a
states rights issue, except where 13/14/15th and other federal
amendments apply.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 13 18:51:56 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:51:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,
	this Friday (for forwarding)
Message-ID: <BAY17-F35ZsDhV7oJIK00038784@hotmail.com>


>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: Re: [extropy-chat] [SALT] The DEpopulation Problem,this Friday 
>(for forwarding)
>Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 11:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>Your logical problem here is that $810 is a much greater percentage of
>$35k than $1158 is of $300k, and both numbers are significantly less
>than the cost of raising each child. If your cost per child is $5k,
>that $5k is also a much greater percentage of $35k than of $300k. Since
>the $35k guy gets only $810 off his $5k cost of raising his kid, and
>the $300k guy gets $1158 off that $5k cost, the richer guy can afford
>not only more kids, but can afford to spend more money on each kid.

Now you're getting into what the cost of a child is. My point was that as 
the tax burden increases, the tax incentives for having additional children 
also increases.

I have no idea what the cost of a child is, but it's probably pretty high. I 
also made the point that the marginal cost of each child increases with 
volume (call it an economy of scale).

BAL




From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Sat Aug 14 08:45:21 2004
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 09:45:21 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <842D9168-ED40-11D8-B92E-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<842D9168-ED40-11D8-B92E-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <411DD121.8060205@optusnet.com.au>

Patrick Wilken wrote:
> 
> On 13 Aug 2004, at 17:43, Spike wrote:
> 
>> I am a right-ish capitalist libertarian.  I don't like
>> Bush myself but would like to see Ralph make a good
>> showing.  Perhaps in the next election, that result
>> would help those more likely to stay out of my portemonnaie.
>>
>> Politics create such odd paradoxes, ya gotta love it.
> 
> 
> Spike:
> 
> Its really too bad that US doesn't have proportional voting like in 
> Australia. It would help stop you have to second guess the party you 
> vote for.
> 
> best, patrick
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 

Proportional voting is good in that a candidate with widely distributed 
support can still be elected with enough votes. This means that minor 
parties and independents can still get elected, which makes for a less 
monolithic House, and IMHO a more representative elect.

We also use Preferential Voting.  There is a quick explanation of each 
here:

http://www.eca.gov.au/systems/single/by_category/preferential.htm

http://www.eca.gov.au/systems/proportional/proportion_rep.htm

One of the benefits of the preferential system is that by listing your 
preferences in the right order you can make a 'protest vote' for a small 
party candidate while still having your vote count towards the major 
candidate that you dislike least.

-David


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 01:14:04 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Traveling to Palm Beach
In-Reply-To: <411DD121.8060205@optusnet.com.au>
Message-ID: <20040814011404.66899.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

>From Sunday evening through the 27th, I'll be in the Palm Beach, FL
area, doing training for my new job. If any extropians want to get
together in that time, you can reach me there at 18007378336.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Aug 14 03:28:41 2004
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 20:28:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>

I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik.    Not because 
of any overly complicated political calculation though.  Badnarik is 
simply the only one I have heard speak sensibly (and in large agreement 
with my own views).    Of course I don't expect him to win.  But a 
respectable showing in the Libertarian camp this year would send a 
clear message.  It could also insure the Libertarian party is taken 
more seriously.   Most calculations say that votes for Badnarik will be 
largely subtracted from votes for Bush.  Bush is not limited 
government, balanced budget, limited foreign engagements, good for 
business or much of anything else dear to the heart of many of his 
supporters.

The biggest reason though is that I am a Libertarian and I believe I 
should vote my convictions.   I especially believe it as our freedoms 
are being eroded and threatened at a precipitous rate.   I cannot in 
good faith sanction either of the major candidates who plan simply more 
of the same.

- samantha

On Aug 13, 2004, at 8:43 AM, Spike wrote:

>
>> Brett Paatsch
>
>>
>> George W Bush is the encumbent president of the US. Either
>> he or Kerry will have the power of that role for four years...
>>
>> Brett
>
> If one doesn't like these guys, there are others on
> the ballot.  If one is generally right leaning but
> doesn't like Bush, the strategy is to vote for someone
> who is far left, such as that Ralph guy.  Then the
> left-leaning party perceives that it must move farther
> left to pick up its own disaffected far left wing,
> which causes it to lose votes in the highly-populated
> middle.  The two front runners have become indistinguishable
> (except for Kerry's comment that he would fight a "more
> sensitive war" whatever the hell that is).
>
> http://www.gop.com/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=4514
>
> I am a right-ish capitalist libertarian.  I don't like
> Bush myself but would like to see Ralph make a good
> showing.  Perhaps in the next election, that result
> would help those more likely to stay out of my portemonnaie.
>
> Politics create such odd paradoxes, ya gotta love it.
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Aug 14 04:48:04 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] So along comes this legal precedent...
Message-ID: <20040814044804.55552.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

Ah, the vagaries of work.  One never knows what one
will stumble across.

One of my current jobs has been to build a data mining
script, to turn a very limited search interface
provided by King County (of Washington state) into
useful data for a real estate company.  The
information is your standard "must provide to the
public" kind of thing, without limitation.

Only King County decided that data miners, or any kind
of automated, high-speed access, can not be supported,
and are trying to say the law prevents access to the
data at any rate greater than a human with a basic Web
browser.  (They're also saying it strains their
resources - but one could pose the same argument about
providing online access in the first place.  And
having written the script and timed the resources, I
can testify that - assuming their scripts were written
with the same competency I use for my own - the
increased load on their servers from my scripts is
quite minimal.  I'm thus not entirely certain my
employer was the only one mining them, but hardware is
cheap.  It's like refusing to give out copies of a
report because all of the printed copies are gone, and
ignoring the ability to print more.)  Just to be on
the safe side, I've disabled the offending scripts on
my employer's side for the moment, but...

It turns out that this is a legal gray area in most of
the United States.  My employer has a meeting set up
with Washington's Attorney General to address the
matter.  It has been represented to me that this is
likely to help establish precedent for other states as
well.

Now, granted, this is far from a core Extropian issue,
or even a core "freedom of information" issue.  (One
could well view it as a corporation trying to improve
what those with resources can accomplish, among other
valid counter-arguments.)  Even so, I think some on
this list might find it food for thought.


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 14 04:59:54 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:59:54 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>
Message-ID: <007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>

Samantha wrote:

> I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik. Not
> because of any overly complicated political calculation 
> though.  Badnarik is simply the only one I have heard 
> speak sensibly (and in large agreement with my own views).
> Of course I don't expect him to win. 

If you expect that either Kerry or Bush will win and consequently
hold the power of the office for four years why wouldn't you
vote for whichever of those you dislike the least?

The reason I ask is that I get that neither Bush or Kerry appeal
and I get that a lot of people think it won't make much difference
but I can think of two grounds on which I think it will make a 
practical difference.

1) International law   (or just plain old rule-of-law period)  

Kerry does not yet have conspicuous bad form as the head of 
state of a permanent security council member that invaded a 
foreign country. 

I think people (other heads of state) will distrust Kerry less. 
I would.  I'd give Kerry one chance. I wouldn't give Bush another
as I think he's already mishandled the UN and the US interests
in the UN beyond his capacity to repair it. (It being the US 
interests in the UN and the UN generally. I think the US needs
to get rid of Bush to start to get its word of honour back). 

2) Stem cell research. (When Bush goes so will his screwy council
on bioethics). 

Brett



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 14 05:05:25 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:35:25 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] So along comes this legal precedent...
In-Reply-To: <20040814044804.55552.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040814044804.55552.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081322053ae8e26a@mail.gmail.com>

Actually, that's pretty interesting... please keep us informed of how it goes.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:48:04 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> Ah, the vagaries of work.  One never knows what one
> will stumble across.
> 
> One of my current jobs has been to build a data mining
> script, to turn a very limited search interface
> provided by King County (of Washington state) into
> useful data for a real estate company.  The
> information is your standard "must provide to the
> public" kind of thing, without limitation.
> 
> Only King County decided that data miners, or any kind
> of automated, high-speed access, can not be supported,
> and are trying to say the law prevents access to the
> data at any rate greater than a human with a basic Web
> browser.  (They're also saying it strains their
> resources - but one could pose the same argument about
> providing online access in the first place.  And
> having written the script and timed the resources, I
> can testify that - assuming their scripts were written
> with the same competency I use for my own - the
> increased load on their servers from my scripts is
> quite minimal.  I'm thus not entirely certain my
> employer was the only one mining them, but hardware is
> cheap.  It's like refusing to give out copies of a
> report because all of the printed copies are gone, and
> ignoring the ability to print more.)  Just to be on
> the safe side, I've disabled the offending scripts on
> my employer's side for the moment, but...
> 
> It turns out that this is a legal gray area in most of
> the United States.  My employer has a meeting set up
> with Washington's Attorney General to address the
> matter.  It has been represented to me that this is
> likely to help establish precedent for other states as
> well.
> 
> Now, granted, this is far from a core Extropian issue,
> or even a core "freedom of information" issue.  (One
> could well view it as a corporation trying to improve
> what those with resources can accomplish, among other
> valid counter-arguments.)  Even so, I think some on
> this list might find it food for thought.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 14 05:38:29 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:08:29 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! with reading image-based PDFs on a Palm
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081322381c6e96de@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

A quick technical query, this strikes me as the kind of issue people
on the list may have hit...

My wife is studying her Masters by distance, and it includes lots of
readings downloadable as PDFs. She's got a nice Palm PDA, so the goal
is to shoehorn these things onto the palm.

This should be simple, except the PDFs have been built by scanning
books; it's the modern equivalent of the reading brick. So on the
palm, these come out as full page images squeezed onto the tiny
screen, ie: they are illegible.

Does anyone have a solution to this? Is there a way to ocr these pdfs?
I've looked online and come up empty handed (except for some extremely
expensive software at this terrible website:
http://www.pdfcreation.com/

Or is there a way to "zoom" the view on the acrobat pdf reader for
palm, or maybe an alternate reader that will do this? Most of the text
is in thin columns, so zooming might be tolerable.

Thanks in advance!

btw, did anyone notice that The A-Team have finally been exhonerated? 
http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4032&n=1
It's about time! Shame about Hannibal though.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 14 05:55:57 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:25:57 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408132255ecc7765@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

I've been coming up with way too many interesting ideas lately. I can
never begin to follow up even 10% of this stuff, so usually they go to
waste. Then I discovered blogging...

http://virtualemlyn.blogspot.com/

I've got a couple of cool fresh ideas on my blog right now, maybe
they'd interest someone.

One is a concept of web-based identity management for people out in
the world, to handle all the myriad email addresses, web site logins,
files, calendars & schedules, contact lists, etc, etc, etc that we all
accumulate but that get completely out of hand (because there's just
so much heterogenous crap to remember, like usernames/password, or
urls, or whatever).

Another is an explanation of how I think the google units based
calculator probably works (ie: how to build it, and it's easy), and
some bonus stuff you can do over and above that, given that you aren't
integrating with a search engine.

I'll expound shortly on a half baked software development methodology
that I've got brewing in my head, tentatively tagged "disposable
code". The axioms are "assume you start with a few spectacular coders,
genius hackers, who can kind of work together, are individually
irreplaceable, and most of whom don't like working with each other.
What can you do?". It's a reaction to the regular methodologies
(standard big system & agile) which assume that you want to work with
endless fields of stupified code grinders, and that the brilliant
cowboys in the corner are a liability...

I think it will combines with an idea I blogged in July called "Object
Bus" (dumb name), which is that you create a layer above messaging and
databases onto which you can put objects, from which you can retrieve
objects, including message sending style behaviour and database style
behaviour. The "space" of objects is above the machine level (many
machines can be involved, transparently). This way you can write lots
of little programs that just do a bit of something, interacting only
with the "object bus" and not with each other directly. From what
little I know of Java, this is a bit like Java spaces, but the
difference is that it is non language specific, meant to be dead easy
to use, and applicable to desktop apps as well as big enterprise
craziness. I wonder if a P2P approach under the covers could work
here? This goes on and on, see the July archive in my blog for more
detail.

Feel free to tell me if you find any of this in the slightest bit
useful or entertaining. Um, yeah, and also you can tell me it sucks if
you feel so inclined.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 14 05:57:40 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:27:40 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040812200259035993@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc040812200259035993@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408132257ac70fb6@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 12:32:26 +0930, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've got a friend here who is looking for objective information
> regarding Fahrenheit 911, because he found it compelling but obviously
> slanted. He's wanting basically to sort the good stuff from the crap,
> in the face of a torrent of "it's all crap/made up" vs "its gospel"
> coming from all sides.
> 
> Does anyone know of an objective examination of that movie? ie: non
> party aligned, actually checking the facts, mind not made up in
> advance kind of investigation?

So the answer to this was "no". Ok, that's cool. Thanks for the links
that were sent to me privately and publicly, btw, very interesting.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 12:43:35 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:43:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] So along comes this legal precedent...
In-Reply-To: <20040814044804.55552.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040814124335.81640.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

That area is notorious for imaginative interpretations of the law. When
I had my business there, they refused to enforce a part of the building
code that mandated safety lighting systems my company sold. We sued, as
state law mandates that local and county building code be at least as
restrictive as the state code. They claimed that since theirs was more
restrictive in some areas, and less in others, that it all evened out
in the end....

If you sue them, though, just be sure that they don't know what car you
are driving if you spend time in the area. I and my partners were
subject to police harassment and numerous capricious citations over
several years.

--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:

> Ah, the vagaries of work.  One never knows what one
> will stumble across.
> 
> One of my current jobs has been to build a data mining
> script, to turn a very limited search interface
> provided by King County (of Washington state) into
> useful data for a real estate company.  The
> information is your standard "must provide to the
> public" kind of thing, without limitation.
> 
> Only King County decided that data miners, or any kind
> of automated, high-speed access, can not be supported,
> and are trying to say the law prevents access to the
> data at any rate greater than a human with a basic Web
> browser.  (They're also saying it strains their
> resources - but one could pose the same argument about
> providing online access in the first place.  And
> having written the script and timed the resources, I
> can testify that - assuming their scripts were written
> with the same competency I use for my own - the
> increased load on their servers from my scripts is
> quite minimal.  I'm thus not entirely certain my
> employer was the only one mining them, but hardware is
> cheap.  It's like refusing to give out copies of a
> report because all of the printed copies are gone, and
> ignoring the ability to print more.)  Just to be on
> the safe side, I've disabled the offending scripts on
> my employer's side for the moment, but...
> 
> It turns out that this is a legal gray area in most of
> the United States.  My employer has a meeting set up
> with Washington's Attorney General to address the
> matter.  It has been represented to me that this is
> likely to help establish precedent for other states as
> well.
> 
> Now, granted, this is far from a core Extropian issue,
> or even a core "freedom of information" issue.  (One
> could well view it as a corporation trying to improve
> what those with resources can accomplish, among other
> valid counter-arguments.)  Even so, I think some on
> this list might find it food for thought.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 12:49:16 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040814124916.64189.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> 1) International law   (or just plain old rule-of-law period)  
> 
> Kerry does not yet have conspicuous bad form as the head of 
> state of a permanent security council member that invaded a 
> foreign country. 

Screw "international law". None of you people who hate Bush have even
read the Geneva Conventions, so what good are they?

Oh, and by the way: there is a difference between international law, as
embodied in things like the conventions, and international circuses and
kangaroo courts, embodied in socialist dominated terrorist coddling
bodies like the UN General Assembly and the World Court.

> 
> I think people (other heads of state) will distrust Kerry less. 
> I would.  I'd give Kerry one chance. I wouldn't give Bush another
> as I think he's already mishandled the UN and the US interests
> in the UN beyond his capacity to repair it. (It being the US 
> interests in the UN and the UN generally. I think the US needs
> to get rid of Bush to start to get its word of honour back). 

Only because you don't know Kerry. The people who know him best as a
commander, other Swift Boat veterans of Vietnam, almost unanimously are
disgusted with him, and say he is unfit for command.

> 
> 2) Stem cell research. (When Bush goes so will his screwy council
> on bioethics). 

THe bioethics council can only reach so far as federal dollars are
spent. As has been shown recently, it's not far enough, and I'd frankly
appreciate the federal government not spending more taxpayer dollars.
The deficit is bad enough already.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From brentn at freeshell.org  Sat Aug 14 14:06:31 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:06:31 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040814124916.64189.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-27BF8DE7EDFB11D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/14/04 5:49) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

>> 
>> I think people (other heads of state) will distrust Kerry less. 
>> I would.  I'd give Kerry one chance. I wouldn't give Bush another
>> as I think he's already mishandled the UN and the US interests
>> in the UN beyond his capacity to repair it. (It being the US 
>> interests in the UN and the UN generally. I think the US needs
>> to get rid of Bush to start to get its word of honour back). 
>
>Only because you don't know Kerry. The people who know him best as a
>commander, other Swift Boat veterans of Vietnam, almost unanimously are
>disgusted with him, and say he is unfit for command.

One particular wingnut, who has had a vendetta against Kerry since the 70's, says he's unfit for command. There are just as many swift boat vets who sing his praises. And the vets that O'Neill (the wingnut) has been holding up as witnesses against Kerry have been rapidly backpedalling, since the discovery that O'Neill's book quotes them out of context and distorts the actual record - one of them was quoted as saying that he felt that O'Neill is engaging in an unwarranted smear job because of Kerry's opposition to the Vietnam War.

And besides, even if Kerry is a dork, he's -still- better qualified than W.  At least Kerry had the honor and integrity to go, even though he disagreed with it, instead of getting Daddy to place him in a nice safe reserve unit where he could get plastered and play hide the salami with buxom civil servants.

Besides, Kerry's already shown how he reacts when the shit hits the fan. There's another swift boat vet alive today because Kerry did the right thing.  Bush, on the other hand, wanked off for 7 minutes when things dropped in the pot.  Yeah, that's decisive leadership for you. Mhmm.

>
>THe bioethics council can only reach so far as federal dollars are
>spent. As has been shown recently, it's not far enough, and I'd frankly
>appreciate the federal government not spending more taxpayer dollars.
>The deficit is bad enough already.


A deficit for which you can thank W. 

I'm particularly bitter about this ever since I woke up one morning convinced I had entered the Evil Parallel Universe(tm) because the Democrats were talking fiscal responsibility and the Republicans had mortgaged the entire fscking country.  We will -never- see a comprehensive tax reform in our lifetime, due to the asininity of the Bush tax cuts. Instead of providing real tax relief, we got more of this Clinton-era "targetted" bullshit, only this time designed to benefit folks who make 3 times what I do. The tax cuts that would have provided real macroeconomic benefits were "phased in" over such a long time span as to be effectively useless and to add insult to injury, they 'expired' after a period of time because Congress didn't have the fscking balls to make them permanent. And then, Bush encourages his lapdogs^W^W the Republican-controlled House to increase Federal spending by amounts that would have given Lyndon Johnson a raging boner.

And this doesn't even -begin- to touch on the erosions of state sovereignty and individual liberties that those neocon bastards have wrought.  I'm not going to claim that Kerry is going to be what I want to see in office, but at this point, I'm willing to take the chance to see. I -know- what will happen if Bush stays in office.  (Disclosure: I've voted for either Republican or Libertarian candidates for president since I was old enough to vote.)


I'm going to make another pot of coffee. Vitriol alone is not sufficient to get me moving in the morning.

B
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 15:03:52 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 08:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <r02010200-1035-27BF8DE7EDFB11D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <20040814150352.97813.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brent Neal <brentn at freeshell.org> wrote:

>  (8/14/04 5:49) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> >> 
> >> I think people (other heads of state) will distrust Kerry less. 
> >> I would.  I'd give Kerry one chance. I wouldn't give Bush another
> >> as I think he's already mishandled the UN and the US interests
> >> in the UN beyond his capacity to repair it. (It being the US 
> >> interests in the UN and the UN generally. I think the US needs
> >> to get rid of Bush to start to get its word of honour back). 
> >
> >Only because you don't know Kerry. The people who know him best as a
> >commander, other Swift Boat veterans of Vietnam, almost unanimously
> are
> >disgusted with him, and say he is unfit for command.
> 
> One particular wingnut, who has had a vendetta against Kerry since
> the 70's, says he's unfit for command. There are just as many swift
> boat vets who sing his praises. 

This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for command,
10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
damning poll numbers in my opinion.

Of the officers that posed in a picture with Kerry, which the Kerry
campaign has used in his campaign ads, of those still living, 13 say
he's unfit for command, four have no opinion, and one supports him.

Most importantly, he 
a) lied in his autobiography and before congress about spending
Christmas in Cambodia
b) shot a fleeing Vietcong in the back, for which he faked up one of
his medals, claiming the enemy was "poised to turn around" and that he
didn't 'shoot him in the back'. If the enemy is fleeing, and is only
'poised' to turn around, when you shoot him, you are, by definition and
the laws of physics, shooting him in the back.
c) his commanding officer told him that he wanted Kerry to volunteer
for the "three purple hearts" transfer out of theater, so as not to
risk his men any further.
d) several men who were in combat with him have made statements that he
fled in the face of the enemy and was known as one who repeatedly tried
brown nosing his superiors.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 14 15:11:29 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 08:11:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <r02010200-1035-27BF8DE7EDFB11D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <20040814151129.99254.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brent Neal <brentn at freeshell.org> wrote:

>  (8/14/04 5:49) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote: 
> >
> >THe bioethics council can only reach so far as federal dollars are
> >spent. As has been shown recently, it's not far enough, and I'd
> frankly
> >appreciate the federal government not spending more taxpayer
> dollars.
> >The deficit is bad enough already.
> 
> 
> A deficit for which you can thank W. 

or al Qaeda, for those of us who prefer an accurate version of history.
None of which has an iotas thing to do with my original point, as you
continue to reduce things to hominem and non sequitur.

> 
> I'm particularly bitter about this ever since I woke up one morning
> convinced I had entered the Evil Parallel Universe(tm) because the
> Democrats were talking fiscal responsibility and the Republicans had
> mortgaged the entire fscking country.  We will -never- see a
> comprehensive tax reform in our lifetime, due to the asininity of the
> Bush tax cuts. 

I've always found that it is easier to make progress by jumping on the
reaction to a swing in the wrong direction. Conservative strategies
Grover Norquist seems to me to be a closet anarchist. The spending
strategies of the feds these days seems oriented toward bankrupting the
government into a "Snow Crash" type scenario. Not an entirely bad way
to go IMHO.

Comprehensive tax reform will only happen when we are able to separate
the government from debt backed money. It's the interest on the debt
that is killing us. Since when did congress get the authority to
delegate the money making power to a private bank? The people need to
take that power back.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From pfallon at ptd.net  Sat Aug 14 16:17:27 2004
From: pfallon at ptd.net (Pat Fallon)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:17:27 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 - objective
	review?]
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>
	<007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>

> > I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik. Not
> > because of any overly complicated political calculation
> > though.  Badnarik is simply the only one I have heard
> > speak sensibly (and in large agreement with my own views).
> > Of course I don't expect him to win.
>
> If you expect that either Kerry or Bush will win and consequently
> hold the power of the office for four years why wouldn't you
> vote for whichever of those you dislike the least?
>


Sometimes ideas can get elected even though the candidate expressing them
doesn't.

If a libertarian candidate did well in an election, the major parties might
consider
that there is a politically significant minority with those views...

For example, if Republican candidates keep selling out on "gun rights",
some voters might consider voting for a Libertarian candidate who is
a strong advocate of the right to keep and bear arms.

This might send a message to the Republicans that they shouldn't take
those voters for granted based on the belief that they have no where to go.

Pat Fallon
pfallon at ptd.net




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 14 16:42:28 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 02:42:28 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 -
	objectivereview?]
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>
	<007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
Message-ID: <010001c4821d$afb7b050$852c2dcb@homepc>

Pat Fallon wrote:

> > > I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik. Not
> > > because of any overly complicated political calculation
> > > though.  Badnarik is simply the only one I have heard
> > > speak sensibly (and in large agreement with my own views).
> > > Of course I don't expect him to win.
> >
> > If you expect that either Kerry or Bush will win and consequently
> > hold the power of the office for four years why wouldn't you
> > vote for whichever of those you dislike the least?
> >
>
>
> Sometimes ideas can get elected even though the candidate
> expressing  them doesn't.

I don't agree Pat.  An idea won't be elected President. The presidency
is a role. It needs to be filled by a person and people come with warts
and all.

> If a libertarian candidate did well in an election, the major parties
> might consider that there is a politically significant minority with
> those views..

Lets say both the democrats and the republicans did consider that there
was a significant minority of voters who were libertarians. So what?

Libertarians (as I understand it - mostly want to be left alone - they
want as few as possible constrains on their freedom). So do I.
But in democracies majorities often LIKE to constrain the freedoms
of minorities.

On Friday, in the Australian parliament both the Liberal Party and the
Labor Party combined to pass a law against same sex marriages.  Both
the major parties have large numbers of religious constituents and those
constituents *wanted* to curtail the freedoms of  homosexuals to marry.

They religious constituents in both parties came out enmass to ensure the
legislation was actively anti-libertarian. I'm not gay, but some of the best
speaches I've heard were given by a handful of hopelessly outnumbered
minory party constituents.

> For example, if Republican candidates keep selling out on "gun rights",
> some voters might consider voting for a Libertarian candidate who is
> a strong advocate of the right to keep and bear arms.
>
> This might send a message to the Republicans that they shouldn't take
> those voters for granted based on the belief that they have no where
> to go.

Unless you've a plan not just to protest vote then the hard reality is that
there often is no where to go to get minority representation.

Just because it is not possible to elect a libertarian president on the
numbers doesn't mean that one can't still argue for libertarian causes
though.

On the matter of the US Presidency if only Bush or Kerry can win
and libertarian issues are your driver then you could make a list of
pros and cons on libertarian issues for those candidates and vote so as
to achieve some damage control.  Then go back to supporting
libertarian issues in all available ways.  It doesn't make sense though
not to do the damage control as well.

Or does it?

Brett








From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 14 16:46:24 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 02:46:24 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <20040814124916.64189.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <010801c4821e$3c88e210$852c2dcb@homepc>

> > 1) International law   (or just plain old rule-of-law period)  
> > 
> > Kerry does not yet have conspicuous bad form as the head of 
> > state of a permanent security council member that invaded a 
> > foreign country. 

Mike Lorrey:
 
> Screw "international law". None of you people who hate Bush
> have even read the Geneva Conventions, so what good are 
> they?

Come on Mike. You are capable of seeing what good international
law (like the UN Charter) and the Geneva Conventions are. They
are in the US national interest. If international law and the Geneva
Conventions didn't exist some competent US head of state would
take a lead role in trying to create them.

- Brett





 






From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 14 17:14:24 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:14:24 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 -
	objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
Message-ID: <000001c48222$2b3e2b10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Pat Fallon
> 
> For example, if Republican candidates keep selling out on 
> "gun rights", some voters might consider voting for a Libertarian
candidate who is
> a strong advocate of the right to keep and bear arms.
> 
> This might send a message to the Republicans that they shouldn't take
> those voters for granted based on the belief that they have 
> no where to go.
> 
> Pat Fallon
> pfallon at ptd.net

Ja this was my point exactly.  If one finds oneself in a 
position where one cannot tell the difference between the
major candidates in a particular election, one is perhaps
best served by voting for the far wing of the opposite party.
Right leaning non-Bush fans would be best served by voting
for Nader, because he's an unelectable nut.  If he does
well, the left party moves left to collect Nader voters,
thus abandoning any semblance of support for corporate
rights, property rights and gun rights for instance, thus 
losing votes in the highly populated middle.

Similarly a left leaning libertarian who dislikes Kerry
should vote for Pat Buchanan, causing the right party
to move right in an attempt to collect those votes, thus
abandoning abortion rights for instance, thus losing
votes in the middle.

Nations would be best served if their two leading parties
would move apart some.  This would keep elections from 
becoming beauty contests, which is what they have become.

spike



From brentn at freeshell.org  Sat Aug 14 19:23:14 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:23:14 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040814150352.97813.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-63F51491EE2711D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/14/04 8:03) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

>This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
>reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for command,
>10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
>damning poll numbers in my opinion.


Dude. One of them was on stage with him at the convention. The other whom I mentioned made a public retraction in the Boston newspaper. Put down that Kool-Aid.

B
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From brentn at freeshell.org  Sat Aug 14 19:29:56 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:29:56 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040814151129.99254.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-536426E8EE2811D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/14/04 8:11) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

>or al Qaeda, for those of us who prefer an accurate version of history.
>None of which has an iotas thing to do with my original point, as you
>continue to reduce things to hominem and non sequitur.

Those of us who prefer an accurate version of history can well note that the spending that has been going on in the name of the "War of Terror" has damned little to do with actually breaking al Qaeda. And it bally well does, since you brought up the deficit. 

My argument was no more non-sequitur than you bringing up a disaffected swift boat captain with an axe to grind and calling that irrefutable evidence.  And if my argument was ad hominem, it was so directed towards the current administration. I didn't point out the silliness of a purported libertarian stumping for arguably the most statist (and fascist) Republican administration in the past 50 years. -That- would have been ad hominem. :)

The fact that you're so defensive about this says something. What it says, I'm not sure, but it certainly says something.


Brent
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From brentn at freeshell.org  Sat Aug 14 19:35:56 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:35:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 - objective
	review?]
In-Reply-To: <002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-2A096BB6EE2911D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/14/04 12:17) Pat Fallon <pfallon at ptd.net> wrote:

>This might send a message to the Republicans that they shouldn't take
>those voters for granted based on the belief that they have no where to go.


Unfortunately, the current unholy alliance between the neocons and the fundamentalist Christian right-wing is so well-funded that barring an election rout or a libertarian lobbying blitz (isn't that an oxymoron? *G*), the Republican party will continue to take voters like me for granted. I personally intend to cast votes based on pure spite in several elections just for this reason.

Brent

-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From pfallon at ptd.net  Sat Aug 14 19:48:19 2004
From: pfallon at ptd.net (Pat Fallon)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:48:19 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com><007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc><002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
	<010001c4821d$afb7b050$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <008b01c48237$b7b32680$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>

>> If a libertarian candidate did well in an election, 
>> the major parties might consider that there is 
>> a politically significant minority with those views..
 
> Lets say both the democrats and the republicans did consider that there
> was a significant minority of voters who were libertarians. So what?

if the libertarian candidate got more votes than the 2nd place finisher
lost by, one tactic that suggests itself is for the candidate [or party] 
that lost to see if they could adopt [and water down, of course]
some issue or position associated with the libertarian candidate
in hope of picking up some of those voters...

Pat Fallon
pfallon at ptd.net






From pfallon at ptd.net  Sat Aug 14 20:16:28 2004
From: pfallon at ptd.net (Pat Fallon)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:16:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com><007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc><002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
	<010001c4821d$afb7b050$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <009801c4823b$a2d16610$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>

> > Sometimes ideas can get elected even though the candidate
> > expressing  them doesn't.


 
> I don't agree Pat.  An idea won't be elected President. The presidency
> is a role. It needs to be filled by a person and people come with warts
> and all.



A Socialist Party candidate was never elected President of the US,
but, in effect, their ideas were...

F.D.R., in particular, was attacked by the leader of the Socialist
Party, Eugene Debs, and other Socialist campaigners as an 
opportunistic thief of Socialist Party platform planks.

Pat Fallon
pfallon at ptd.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040814/1ce4140c/attachment.html>

From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sat Aug 14 20:54:04 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 16:54:04 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Traveling to Palm Beach
In-Reply-To: <200408141800.i7EI0m010851@tick.javien.com>
References: <200408141800.i7EI0m010851@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <1384A94A-EE34-11D8-A005-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Aug 14, 2004, at 2:00 PM, Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> From Sunday evening through the 27th, I'll be in the Palm Beach, FL
> area, doing training for my new job. If any extropians want to get
> together in that time, you can reach me there at 18007378336.

Drat!  That's only a 90 minute drive from my Florida home.  
Unfortunately, I am working in Washington, DC now and won't be home 
during this time.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Aug 14 22:43:59 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:43:59 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tunguska spaceship after all?
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174207.01bc9ed8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

What thu--?

http://www.physorg.com/news819.html

<During the press conference in Krasnoyarsk, Yuri Lavbin, the head of the 
<http://www.physorg.com/news766.html>last expedition, confirmed that parts 
of an extraterrestrial device had been discovered. The new expedition, 
organized by the Siberian Public State Foundation "Tunguska Space 
Phenomenon" completed its work on the scene of Tunguska meteorite fall on 
August 9. >

Presumably a wild beat-up (as Aussies say), but you never know.

Damien Broderick




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Aug 14 22:47:39 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:47:39 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>



Breakthrough Nanotechnology Will Bring 100 Terabyte 3.5-inch Digital Data 
Storage Disks

http://www.physorg.com/news785.html  




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Aug 14 23:01:46 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:01:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tunguska -- on the other hand...
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814175826.01bdfc58@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/tunguska_event_040812.html

<"I'm afraid this is a rather stupid hoax," said Benny Peiser, a researcher 
at Liverpool John Moores University in the UK. "The Russian team stupidly 
stated long before they went to Siberia that the main intention of their 
expedition was to find the remnants of an 'alien spaceship!' And bingo! A 
week later, that's what they claim to have found."

Peiser studies catastrophic events and related scientific processes and 
media reports. He runs an electronic newsletter, CCNet, which is among the 
most comprehensive running catalogues on the subject.

"It's a rather sad comment on the current state of the anything-goes 
attitudes among some 'science' correspondents that such blatant rubbish is 
being reported -- without the slightest hint of skepticism," Peiser told 
SPACE.com. >

Luckily, we know researchers in Liverpool are always right.

Damien Broderick




From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 14 23:25:51 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 08:55:51 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>

Excellent! A couple of those might be able to hold a few weeks of my
mailing list and rss feed subscriptions.

Emlyn

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:47:39 -0500, Damien Broderick
<thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Breakthrough Nanotechnology Will Bring 100 Terabyte 3.5-inch Digital Data
> Storage Disks
> 
> http://www.physorg.com/news785.html
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From bjk at imminst.org  Sun Aug 15 00:54:55 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 19:54:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update - Transvision & Ettinger
Message-ID: <411EB45F.5080207@imminst.org>

CHAT: 

Toronto TransVision 2004 - Photos & Discussion 
Chat Time - Sun, Aug 15 @ 8 PM Eastern: 
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=159&t=3377&st=30#entry35936


ARTICLE: 

Robert Ettinger - Father of Cryonics:  Interview by Bruce Klein 
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=4112


POLL: 

Would you favor the creation of a Methuselah Fly Prize? 
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=44&t=4048




From twodeel at jornada.org  Sun Aug 15 01:07:53 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:07:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush, was Re:
	[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040814150352.97813.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408141807130.28579-100000@hplx.net>

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
> reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for command,
> 10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
> damning poll numbers in my opinion.

>From what I can see, Snopes seems to disagree with you about the whole
Swift Boat vets issue.



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sun Aug 15 01:20:20 2004
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:20:20 -0700
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re:[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408141807130.28579-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <001601c48266$08480830$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>

> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
> > reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for command,
> > 10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
> > damning poll numbers in my opinion.
> 
>From what I can see, Snopes seems to disagree with you about the whole
> Swift Boat vets issue.

Yep, that seems to be the case:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp

C'mon Mike.  Give in.

http://www.johnkerryisadouchebagbutimvotingforhimanyway.com/

Olga





From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 15 01:36:51 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:36:51 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit
	911-objectivereview?]
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>
	<007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<002901c4821a$3f1ecc00$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
	<010001c4821d$afb7b050$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<008b01c48237$b7b32680$259532d1@preferrei3lj79>
Message-ID: <017b01c48268$56f14a80$852c2dcb@homepc>

> >> If a libertarian candidate did well in an election, 
> >> the major parties might consider that there is 
> >> a politically significant minority with those views..
>  
> > Lets say both the democrats and the republicans did consider that there
> > was a significant minority of voters who were libertarians. So what?
> 
> if the libertarian candidate got more votes than the 2nd place finisher
> lost by, one tactic that suggests itself is for the candidate [or party] 
> that lost to see if they could adopt [and water down, of course]
> some issue or position associated with the libertarian candidate
> in hope of picking up some of those voters...

[Aside:

I could be missing something in how US presidential elections are
run (I don't follow the mechanics as closely in the US as I do
in Australia - so that might be effecting my thinking.)

Here in Australia I couldn't personally vote for Howard or Latham
because they aren't sitting in the same electoral seat as each other
and neither of them is sitting in mine. To get either Howard or Latham
as a Prime Minister the best I could do with my vote (short of moving
my place of residence) is to vote for their party and expect that their
party if they win a majority in the House of Reps will win government
and then the party leader becomes the Prime Minister. 

Isn't it the case though that you do vote in the US for the President
directly. ie. Don't you get to vote for Bush himself or Kerry himself or
Nadar?).

I know I could check this using google but then no one would tell 
me and in so doing also tell and educate other people reading.  ]
-------

Now (if my understanding of what you are suggesting is correct
and you can each vote directly for the person who will be president
not just the party then what you are saying might be put like this)
 
Let's say the Libertarian presidential candidate gets 5%
The candidate from party A gets  48%
The candidate from party B gets  47% 

Your saying Party A and Party B would see AFTER the Party A's
candidate becomes president for 4 years (and does whatever the
hell he likes with libertarian issues for four years) that there was a 
5% wedge that might have been attracted somehow to make a 
difference and that they should consider that next time - aren't 
you?

If so my problem is that that 5% wedge of Libertarians is not a
wedge that can be relied on to be there in four years time or that
can be relied on to be broken up in such a way as to effect the
electorate in four years time. All it tells you is that the libertarians
amounted to 5% this time around. 

Libertarians and non-libertarians alike ARE going to get Bush or
Kerry for four years.  That four years is four years of *your* life.
By the time the next election comes around and the number
cruncher come to consider the protest vote of the libertarian message
senders you will all be four years older and four years closer to being
dead. 

And whichever of Bush or Kerry (Party A's or Party B's presidential
candidate that would have been least bad exercising presidential power
for this coming for years including on your libertarian issues will
not have been affected by your vote).

That true isn't it?  (Obviously if you thought party A or B's candidate
was slightly more libertarian and was going to win anyway you could
vote for you libertarian candidate as well.)

But with a line ball election could you rationally risk it?

I stand ready to be educated if I'm wrong, especially with respect
to the mechanics of US presidential elections.

Brett










From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 03:29:25 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 20:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <r02010200-1035-63F51491EE2711D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <20040815032925.78921.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brent Neal <brentn at freeshell.org> wrote:

>  (8/14/04 8:03) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> >This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
> >reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for
> command,
> >10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
> >damning poll numbers in my opinion.
> 
> 
> Dude. One of them was on stage with him at the convention. The other
> whom I mentioned made a public retraction in the Boston newspaper.
> Put down that Kool-Aid.

The one on stage at the convention was his one supporter. The Swift
Boats reunion poll was of 295 or so vets. So one retracts, thats still
damning numbers.

The kool aid is being drunk by the dems who think it is democratic to
sue a bi-partisan group of military veterans into surrendering their
first amendment rights, to bully networks and newspapers into even
refusing to allow these vets to PAY to have their voices heard, and to
condemn O'Neill, who has voted Democrat and comes from a family that
has voted Democrat for generations, as some kind of conspirator of the
'vast right wing conspiracy'. This whole episode is proof in the pu
dding that the dems will do ANYTHING to silence credible opposition.
Typical left wing smear tactics.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 15 03:29:53 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 13:29:53 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 -
	objectivereview?]
References: <r02010200-1035-2A096BB6EE2911D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <019b01c48278$2113f920$852c2dcb@homepc>

Brent Neal:

> I personally intend to cast votes based on pure spite in several
> elections just for this reason.

Sounds like game theory tit for tat. 

Imagine how you'd feel if you were an Iraqi teenager managing to
survive under Saddam and some idiot wiped out your family as part
of collateral damage in an illegal war. 

Who would you think was the terrorist leader you most wanted to
see brought to justice Saddam, Bin Laden or Bush? 

Now consider that the US voters can replace Bush without killing
him and can claim quite rightly that they never voted for a doctrine
of preemption when they elected Bush and they do not support it 
or endorse Bush's past method of indiscriminantly waging war now. 

That teenager may still grow to hate Bush personally but whether he 
generalised that hatred to American's is still in the hands of the 
American voter. 

There will still be a mess to clean up in Iraq whoever is president but
the teenager will look at American's attempts to clean up the mess 
differently if Bush is not re-elected and his illegal reckless actions
aren't endorsed.

If Bush IS endorsed that teenager has four years to grow and plan
and to consider how much he should care about the collateral
damage of his own actions in his own pursuit of justice as he sees
it.  He has a chance to factor into his thinking how much the
American voter cared about the collateral damage done to his 
family and to him. 

That Iraq kid is a fiction in many ways but he is a statistical
certainty in others. 

If Americans endorse Bush post-Iraq, then American will own 
part of the consequences of that Iraqi teenagers consideration 
of the amount of collateral damage he is willing to accept in
going after Bush. 

The universe is contingent.  Tit for tat goes very deep in human
psychology and in game theory and I'd encourage US voters not
to imagine that humans are very different in wanting to see justice
done.    

I am not an Iraqi teenager - Bush's doctrine of preemption has not
killed my family yet - but I am a pissed off Australian. I am going to
have to live in a world of idiot created and propagated terror now.

There is no totally honorable side for me to choose to be on and that
is the fault of the leaders of my country. 

I have seen Bush, Blair and Howard hijack the future through 
incompetence and make it about terror when it could have been 
a lot more about hope.  I will not forget that when I vote. 

- Brett



From brentn at freeshell.org  Sun Aug 15 03:41:36 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:41:36 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040815032925.78921.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-030BE17BEE6D11D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/14/04 20:29) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

>Typical left wing smear tactics.


Actually, it smacks more of typical right-wing smear tactics. The kind used against McCain in the Republican primaries in 2000. And your numbers are still bullshit, as others have pointed out.

Brent
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From dgc at cox.net  Sun Aug 15 03:55:15 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:55:15 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <411EDEA3.6090302@cox.net>

We joke about this, but the reality is different.

At some point during the last ten years, most of us crossed a threshold. 
Prior to the threshold, We did not have enough disk space or processing 
power. We spent as much money on a computer as our comfort level 
allowed, and it was not enough. Now, for most of us we have enough. When 
is the last time you checked the percentage of usage of your disk? when 
is the last time you thought "gee this operation is taking too long." 
(not counting problems with viruses and malware.) Think back ten years. 
One of the big deals then was figuring out which disk compression 
software to use.

Most broadband providers have a cap at 2GB/month. A 1TB disk will hold 
more than 2 years of downloads, at a current cost of about $1000. ($500 
for the disks and $500 for the computer to hold the disks.) A 100TB disk 
would hold 200 years of downloads at today's rates.

Assuming no monthly cap, look at it another way. An individual can 
probably assimilate <1Mbps for < 8hours/day (average.) that's 
(1Mb/8)*3600*8, or 3.6GB/day. That's 1TB/mo, or 100TB in 8 years.

Emlyn wrote:

>Excellent! A couple of those might be able to hold a few weeks of my
>mailing list and rss feed subscriptions.
>
>Emlyn
>
>On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:47:39 -0500, Damien Broderick
><thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Breakthrough Nanotechnology Will Bring 100 Terabyte 3.5-inch Digital Data
>>Storage Disks
>>
>>http://www.physorg.com/news785.html
>>
>>    
>>



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 04:00:00 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408141807130.28579-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20040815040000.67675.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
> > reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for
> command,
> > 10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
> > damning poll numbers in my opinion.
> 
> >From what I can see, Snopes seems to disagree with you about the
> whole
> Swift Boat vets issue.

On the contrary, Snopes quotes 18 swift boat vets against him, three
statements in his favor, and two which are marginal. These numbers
reflect the stats I posted above: Most vets who served with him think 
he's unfit.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 04:03:24 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:03:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re:[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <001601c48266$08480830$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:

> From: "Don Dartfield" <twodeel at jornada.org>
> 
> > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > 
> > > This is patently FALSE. A poll at the most recent Swift Boat Vets
> > > reunion showed that 85% thought Kerry was completely unfit for
> command,
> > > 10% had no opinion, and 5% thought he was fit for command. Rather
> > > damning poll numbers in my opinion.
> > 
> >From what I can see, Snopes seems to disagree with you about the
> whole
> > Swift Boat vets issue.
> 
> Yep, that seems to be the case:
> 
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/kerry/swift.asp
> 
> C'mon Mike.  Give in.

Nope, that page shows 18 vets against him, three for him, and two
indeterminate, which reflects my own stats pretty accurately.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From brentn at freeshell.org  Sun Aug 15 04:06:36 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 00:06:36 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 -
	objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <019b01c48278$2113f920$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-80B312C8EE7011D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/15/04 13:29) Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

>Brent Neal:
>
>> I personally intend to cast votes based on pure spite in several
>> elections just for this reason.
>
>Sounds like game theory tit for tat. 
>

Hadn't thought of it that way, but I think that you may be right. 


>The universe is contingent.  Tit for tat goes very deep in human
>psychology and in game theory and I'd encourage US voters not
>to imagine that humans are very different in wanting to see justice
>done.    

I recall reading somewhere that the "tit-for-two-tats" strategy is usually more optimal than tit for tat. Of course, in BushCo's case, there are so many 'tats' that one loses track. :)

>
>There is no totally honorable side for me to choose to be on and that
>is the fault of the leaders of my country. 

I hear you.

>
>I have seen Bush, Blair and Howard hijack the future through 
>incompetence and make it about terror when it could have been 
>a lot more about hope.  I will not forget that when I vote. 


I call it voting on the principle of least incompetence. I made the mistake in 2000 of voting for Harry Browne, the Libertarian candidate, because the thought of voting for an abject moron like Bush was morally repugnant (and because anyone that dumb must have smart handlers that'd be running the show, and I figured correctly that those handlers would be the same people that were in power during his father's presidency.) and voting Democrat was something I wasn't prepared to do. 

So this time around, I'm voting "against someone" instead of "for a set of principles."  And honestly, I don't see any other way at this point to prevent the US from turning into a complete hell-hole. Kerry may be just as spineless as any other career politician, but there is a possibility that he may be 'educatable.'  So sayeth John Perry Barlow, at least. (c.f. <http://www.reason.com/0408/fe.bd.john.shtml>)  Actually, I think that interview pretty much sums up why libertarians of any stripe should not be voting for BushCo.  ("I don?t see anything particularly free about a plutocracy.")

Brent
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 04:20:21 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit
	911-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <017b01c48268$56f14a80$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040815042021.67910.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> -------
> 
> Now (if my understanding of what you are suggesting is correct
> and you can each vote directly for the person who will be president
> not just the party then what you are saying might be put like this)
>  
> Let's say the Libertarian presidential candidate gets 5%
> The candidate from party A gets  48%
> The candidate from party B gets  47% 
> 
> Your saying Party A and Party B would see AFTER the Party A's
> candidate becomes president for 4 years (and does whatever the
> hell he likes with libertarian issues for four years) that there was
> a 5% wedge that might have been attracted somehow to make a 
> difference and that they should consider that next time - aren't 
> you?

If neither major party gets a majority of the popular vote (as happened
in the 1992 election, when Clinton won with, I think, 39% or so), it
tells the major parties that they are ignoring large parts of the
electorate that they need to kiss up to, and it also tells them that
the winner did not receive a mandate for his agenda.

However, the popular vote doesn't elect the president, the electoral
vote does, sort of like the parliament elects the PM, except the
electors are generally obligated to vote the way the people in their
district voted. Some states don't make this mandatory. However, this
does mean that, as in 2000, it is possible for a candidate to lose the
popular vote nationwide but win enough electoral districts to win the
electoral college.

If, say, the Libertarian Party wins enough votes in some districts to
win a few electoral votes, and the two other parties are neck and neck
in winning the rest of the electoral votes, then we could have a
situation where nobody wins a majority of the electoral college. When
that happens, then the dickering happens, and the two major parties
will woo the smallest party with deals on agenda items, maybe some
cabinet or judgeship appointments, in order to get those electoral
votes for their candidate.

Now, Spike's logic is wrong. If  you were going to vote democrat but
can't stand Kerry, it is a bad idea to vote for Buchanan or Banarik,
because it only builds the strength of those parties demands for change
from the Republicans. It won't change anything about the democrats.
Just look at the 2000 election. By Spike's logic, the DNC should be
even more Green than it was, but it isn't. Kerry instead is Bush-lite
with a little liberal on top: Kerry advocating "compassionate war" in
Iraq (WHAT is THAT?). Dems blame the Greens and have backed away from
luddism.

Instead, if you want the GOP to back away from luddite policies, you
should back a radical luddite like Buchanan to nader Bush. If you want
to nader Bush with the war, play up Bush's connections to Grover
Norquist and via him the radical Islamic set, and promote a rabid
anti-muslim candidate.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 04:37:15 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 21:37:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911 -
	objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <r02010200-1035-80B312C8EE7011D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <20040815043715.69210.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brent Neal <brentn at freeshell.org> wrote:

>  (8/15/04 13:29) Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> >Brent Neal:
> >
> >> I personally intend to cast votes based on pure spite in several
> >> elections just for this reason.
> >
> >Sounds like game theory tit for tat. 
> >
> 
> Hadn't thought of it that way, but I think that you may be right. 

Which still doesn't demonstrate any evidence of voting rationally. Tit
for tat is decidedly an irrational, instinctual, strategy.
> 
> 
> I call it voting on the principle of least incompetence. I made the
> mistake in 2000 of voting for Harry Browne, the Libertarian
> candidate, because the thought of voting for an abject moron like
> Bush was morally repugnant (and because anyone that dumb must have
> smart handlers that'd be running the show, and I figured correctly
> that those handlers would be the same people that were in power
> during his father's presidency.) and voting Democrat was something I
> wasn't prepared to do. 
> 
> So this time around, I'm voting "against someone" instead of "for a
> set of principles."  And honestly, I don't see any other way at this
> point to prevent the US from turning into a complete hell-hole. Kerry
> may be just as spineless as any other career politician, but there is
> a possibility that he may be 'educatable.'  So sayeth John Perry
> Barlow, at least. (c.f.
> <http://www.reason.com/0408/fe.bd.john.shtml>)  Actually, I think
> that interview pretty much sums up why libertarians of any stripe
> should not be voting for BushCo.  ("I don???t see anything
> particularly free about a plutocracy.")

The anti-any-war attitude of many US Libertarians is not shared around
the world. The French Libertarian movement, Liberte J'ecrit Ton Nom, is
decidedly pro-Bush, pro-Iraqwar, which, along with the US LP stance,
only seems to indicate that too many libertarians of any stripe are
generally contrarian in nature, not that their foreign policy is based
on a rational principle, despite what many might like to claim.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Aug 15 04:37:31 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:37:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush, 
In-Reply-To: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <001601c48266$08480830$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814232939.01c1bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 09:03 PM 8/14/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>Nope, that page shows 18 vets against him, three for him, and two
>indeterminate, which reflects my own stats pretty accurately.

They're mostly not `against him' in the relevant sense (for this thread) of 
asserting witness of his alleged cowardice and incompetence in the face of 
the enemy. They are against his subsequent claims that the Vietnam war 
involved unjustified terror and atrocities, claims in which they feel 
painfully implicated. That dirty rat! Everyone knows that the Vietnam war 
was conducted in a polite and gentlemanly way by the Americans and their 
allies, much as the Iraq war is being conducted nowadays.

Damien Broderick 




From brentn at freeshell.org  Sun Aug 15 04:58:03 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 00:58:03 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814232939.01c1bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-B10D6EFBEE7711D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/14/04 23:37) Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

>They're mostly not `against him' in the relevant sense (for this thread) of 
>asserting witness of his alleged cowardice and incompetence in the face of 
>the enemy. They are against his subsequent claims that the Vietnam war 
>involved unjustified terror and atrocities, claims in which they feel 
>painfully implicated. That dirty rat! Everyone knows that the Vietnam war 
>was conducted in a polite and gentlemanly way by the Americans and their 
>allies, much as the Iraq war is being conducted nowadays.


Exactly. This is why Mike's claims of a vast swell of swift boat veterans decrying Kerry falls flat.  To paraphrase someone else: "John Kerry is a douchebag but he's still a better leader than the Shrub."  Just because a veteran disagrees with Kerry's anti-war stance does not mean that he agrees with O'Neill's wingnuttery.  To assume otherwise is so incredibly, blindly partisan as to defy common sense.

Brent

-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From twodeel at jornada.org  Sun Aug 15 05:30:39 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 22:30:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush, was Re:
	[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040815040000.67675.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408142226490.28579-100000@hplx.net>

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> On the contrary, Snopes quotes 18 swift boat vets against him, three
> statements in his favor, and two which are marginal. These numbers
> reflect the stats I posted above: Most vets who served with him think
> he's unfit.

It also says that only one of the 18 quoted men actually served under him,
and that "The other men who served under Kerry's command continue to speak
positively of him" and "How well all of these men knew John Kerry is
questionable, and discrepancies between how some of them described Kerry
thirty-five years ago and how they describe him today suggest that their
opinions are largely based upon political differences rather than
objective assessments of Kerry's military record."



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Aug 15 06:36:41 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:36:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was
	Re:Fahrenheit911-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <20040815042021.67910.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c48292$3d723ef0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Mike Lorrey
> 
> Instead, if you want the GOP to back away from luddite policies, you
> should back a radical luddite like Buchanan to nader Bush. If you want
> to nader Bush with the war, play up Bush's connections to Grover
> Norquist and via him the radical Islamic set, and promote a rabid
> anti-muslim candidate.
> =====
> Mike Lorrey

I admit I am at a loss in this election.  I see no real
differences in how the two front runners will handle
the war.  Kerry says he will fight a more sensitive war.  But
all war is hell, there is no reforming it.  Kerry witnessed 
a number of war crimes in Vietnam that evidently no one else 
saw.  Either he committed the war crimes himself or he lied,
which would be treason.  I have seen no other witnesses 
backing up his testimony.

Bush is messing up in an area that really matters: stem cell 
research.  Nader didn't make the ballot in most states, and 
I never even heard of the libertarian candidate before two 
weeks ago.  I suspect we will end up with screwed leadership.  

But if the past is any indication, we will do just fine anyway.  spike



From charlie at antipope.org  Sun Aug 15 10:38:14 2004
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 11:38:14 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040812174855.86946.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040812174855.86946.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <3613385A-EEA7-11D8-AD2B-000D9328A216@antipope.org>


On 12 Aug 2004, at 18:48, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>> Who's going to build the microwave
>> stations on the ground to
>> track the craft as it goes around the Earth?
>
> I generally agree with most of your objections here,
> but this one can easily be solved: solar panels (or
> cells on the craft's skin), or a fleet of microwave
> satellites launched by traditional means.
>
>> The Dark Sky station is as close to LEO as
>> SpaceshipOne. I.e., not at all.
>
> *shrugs*  Doesn't mean it isn't useful in its own
> right.  If they can solve the engineering issues of
> floating serious payload at high altitudes...floating
> cities, anyone?

Sure. Until ...

1. The neighbours on the ground get a bit annoyed about the city 
blocking all their sunlight

2. The neighbours on the ground who you've just drifted over point out 
that under existing international law they have sovereignty over their 
head space, and would you mind implementing their shari'a legal code 
immediately?

(For the sake of point (2) above, assume the neighbours have SAMs or an 
ABM system)

3. The higher you float your city, the lower the density of the 
surrounding air. Therefore the volume of lift gas you need to displace 
your own mass in air also increases. When you're so high that 
atmospheric pressure is around 1% of sea level, your aerostat needs to 
hold 100 times the volume it encloses at sea level. The kind of 
altitude these folks are talking about implies kilometre-plus diameter 
gas cells, just to hold up something as massive as a 747. If you want a 
floating city, you either have to have gas cells the size of continents 
or float it down in the troposphere where the pressure's higher but 
there's nasty weather to contend with.

(See http://www.mypage.bluewin.ch/airshipsimon/design.html for a basic 
overview of how an aerostat works.)


-- Charlie



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 15 15:18:54 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 01:18:54 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Electoral vote tracking site (was electing ideas
	etc)
References: <20040815042021.67910.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <027b01c482db$2dbb6100$852c2dcb@homepc>

Mike wrote:
 
> ... the popular vote doesn't elect the president, the electoral
> vote does, sort of like the parliament elects the PM, except 
> the electors are generally obligated to vote the way the people
> in their district voted. Some states don't make this mandatory.
> However, this does mean that, as in 2000, it is possible for a
> candidate to lose the popular vote nationwide but win enough
> electoral districts to win the electoral college.

I found this site reasonably informative. http://www.electoral-vote.com
Its tracking the electoral vote dispersal based on polls that come
in from time to time onto a graphical mapping. 

This link
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/politics101/politics101_ecmap.html
invites you to "be Karl Rove or Mary Beth Cahill" and to plot a winning 
strategy using graphical historical data.

I clicked on View Election Trends and found New Hampshire on
the list of yellow colored swing states. 

It says, among other things, that "New Hampshire is one of 2 States
in which George W Bush's margin of victory was less than the number
of votes for Ralph Nadar - the other was Florida" 

I noticed the state governor is republican and think I recall you saying
he is supportive of (or at least not opposed to the free state project).
Do you know what he as a republican thinks of Bush? Do state 
governors criticise presidents of the same flavour? 

When you vote in New Hampshire what names will you see on the 
ballat paper there? Will it be Bush, Kerry and Nadar's names that you'll
see or will it rather be the names of electors that you vote for that in 
turn have promised to vote for particular candidates? Will you get
offered a libertarian option? 

Brett






From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 15 16:12:20 2004
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:12:20 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re:[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00ae01c482e2$b0952280$60fe4d0c@hal2001>

I'm (reluctantly) voting for Bush but I think all that swift boat criticism
of Kerry is unfair. Take a look at

http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=231

It's interesting that none of the vets who damn him served on his boat,
while all the men who did serve on it, and presumably know him best, defend
him. If Bush is wise he would drop this issue because whatever the truth one
thing is clear, Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.

I'm voting for Bush despite the Weapons of Mass Destruction fiasco because
Kerry, who was on the Senate intelligence committee, was reading the same
reports the president was and also believed they were in Iraq; and if our
intelligence stinks Kerry is as much to blame as anyone, for 20 years he has
been trying to reduce the budget and place more restrictions on the CIA. But
my main reason for disliking Kerry is economic, I disagree with his idea
that the way to become prosperous is to increase taxes, increase regulation,
increase trade barriers ,  and embrace the hyper expensive and ineffective
Kyoto protocols.

   John K Clark     jonkc at att.net




From brentn at freeshell.org  Sun Aug 15 16:42:50 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 12:42:50 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re:[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <00ae01c482e2$b0952280$60fe4d0c@hal2001>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-264AD1B0EEDA11D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/15/04 12:12) John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:

>my main reason for disliking Kerry is economic, I disagree with his idea
>that the way to become prosperous is to increase taxes, increase regulation,
>increase trade barriers ,  and embrace the hyper expensive and ineffective
>Kyoto protocols.


Unlike Bush, whose recipe for success has been to increase protectionist tariffs, increase government spending, and engage in expensive, ultimately fruitless, unilateral 'police actions'?

Sure makes sense to me.

Brent
-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From dwish at indco.net  Sun Aug 15 18:37:43 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 13:37:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <20040815043715.69210.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <!~!AAAAANZdqIhpSZdLswZV2YI7VP0Eyi0A@indco.net>



This forum seems in general to support the Kerry camp. This is understanding
because most in the group seek "radical" changes in the way we live our
lives in the future. I also seek to change the world in which we live, but
at the same time keep a strong rear view on the past. I don't care for the
"Fear" agenda that Bush spreads, but I can't with a clear mind vote for
Kerry either. I am a realist in that I know the next President of this great
country will be one of these men. Also want scares me more is that the next
Democratic rep. to run after this election will be Hillary and Obama which
is sooooooo much scarier than Bush or Kerry. So that means my vote will be
best counted by voting for someone who will support most of my views even if
I disagree with some. That brings me to the point that the Kerry is just a
"Feel Good" guy that if anything goes wring then they just need a hug. That
scares me. We are facing a group of Muslim men ages 18-25 that have been
taught to hate America since they were born. The issue truly rests in that
if we tuck tail and run out of Iraq that we lose far more than the men we
have lost already. Our country will be a target for anyone that needs their
agenda passed to just bomb a church or building and we will give them what
they want to not make anyone mad. That is the Kerry camp. Appeasement never
works. If as transhumanist, futurist, and mad scientists we should not
fighting for truth and understanding through education, legislation, and
global information and not be wondering who maybe offended or pissed off. To
live in fear is to not live at all. This tone seems to sound in the Bush
camp. I can seem to find if Kerry has an opinion at all or if it is just
"what do you want to hear and I'll tell you that". I want a man of passion
about his principals. That is not the flip flop Kerry camp. 

Dustin Wish
System Engineer & Programmer
INDCO Networks
Pres. OSSRI
********************************************************
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead
 where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
***********************************************

-----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, August 14, 2004 11:37 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
-objectivereview?]


--- Brent Neal <brentn at freeshell.org> wrote:

>  (8/15/04 13:29) Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> >Brent Neal:
> >
> >> I personally intend to cast votes based on pure spite in several
> >> elections just for this reason.
> >
> >Sounds like game theory tit for tat. 
> >
> 
> Hadn't thought of it that way, but I think that you may be right. 

Which still doesn't demonstrate any evidence of voting rationally. Tit
for tat is decidedly an irrational, instinctual, strategy.
> 
> 
> I call it voting on the principle of least incompetence. I made the
> mistake in 2000 of voting for Harry Browne, the Libertarian
> candidate, because the thought of voting for an abject moron like
> Bush was morally repugnant (and because anyone that dumb must have
> smart handlers that'd be running the show, and I figured correctly
> that those handlers would be the same people that were in power
> during his father's presidency.) and voting Democrat was something I
> wasn't prepared to do. 
> 
> So this time around, I'm voting "against someone" instead of "for a
> set of principles."  And honestly, I don't see any other way at this
> point to prevent the US from turning into a complete hell-hole. Kerry
> may be just as spineless as any other career politician, but there is
> a possibility that he may be 'educatable.'  So sayeth John Perry
> Barlow, at least. (c.f.
> <http://www.reason.com/0408/fe.bd.john.shtml>)  Actually, I think
> that interview pretty much sums up why libertarians of any stripe
> should not be voting for BushCo.  ("I donb
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3886 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040815/2fc3a683/attachment.bin>

From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 15 20:13:37 2004
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:13:37 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re:[extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <r02010200-1035-264AD1B0EEDA11D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <002601c48304$66057cc0$d8ff4d0c@hal2001>

"Brent Neal" <brentn at freeshell.org> Wrote:

> Unlike Bush, whose recipe for success has been to
> increase protectionist tariffs,

Bush's steel tariff and farm subsidies made no economic sense, but those are
one of the very few things you will not hear Kerry or any democrat criticize
Bush about. They just want more of it.

> increase government spending,

Spending has gone up with Bush, it has gone up in every administration since
Washington I would guess.  I have a hunch it would have gone up even more if
200 voters in Florida had switched sides 4 years ago. As for Kerry, he has
about a million and one ideas for new programs, and they will all need
money.

> and engage in expensive, ultimately fruitless, unilateral 'police
> actions'?

You mean the police action Kerry voted for, the one to get rid of Weapons of
Mass Destruction in Iraq that the CIA said were there, the same CIA Kerry
wanted to slash the budget of, the CIA Kerry wanted placed under tighter
restrictions so they always act in a gentlemanly way even if it reduced
their effectiveness?

> Sure makes sense to me.

I thought so.

John K Clark     jonkc at att.net




From pfallon at ptd.net  Sun Aug 15 21:10:01 2004
From: pfallon at ptd.net (Pat Fallon)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:10:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit
	911-objectivereview?]
References: <!~!AAAAANZdqIhpSZdLswZV2YI7VP0Eyi0A@indco.net>
Message-ID: <002801c4830c$4d26ef60$1e47bacc@preferrei3lj79>

> We are facing a group of Muslim men ages 18-25 that have been
> taught to hate America since they were born.


IMHO, our interventionist foreign policy hasn't helped any...

Take Iran, for instance...
The CIA played a large role in overthrowing the Prime Minister of Iran
and replaced him with the Shah whose dictatorship and secret police
lasted almost 20 years until he was driven from office...

when the revolution came, they didn't storm the Zwiss Embasy,
they stormed the American Embassy because they hated us...
the American CIA had replaced their Prime Minister with a dictator...

we create, prop up, discard, and play tyrants off of one another...
eventually that shit will catch up to you as it did in Iran...

our interventionist foreign policy breeds hatred,
it destroys our freedoms here in the US...
it will bleed us dry...

>The issue truly rests in that if we tuck tail and run out of Iraq
>that we lose far more than the men we have lost already.

sounds a little deja-viet-namish....
the sooner we admit a mistake and withdraw, the better...

> Our country will be a target for anyone that needs their
> agenda passed to just bomb a church or building and we
> will give them what they want to not make anyone mad.

our troops will certainly continue to be a target if we keep them in Iraq...

> Appeasement never works.

Refraining from disasterous foreign interventionism is not "appeasement."

Self defense, YES...
installing dictators, proping up kings and princes to secure oil franchises,
NO.
taxing us to give trillions to foreign countries...no
[privatize foreign aid, stop forcing Americans to contribute]

Pat Fallon
pfallon at ptd.net




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 15 21:56:37 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:56:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <3613385A-EEA7-11D8-AD2B-000D9328A216@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <20040815215637.1652.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> On 12 Aug 2004, at 18:48, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > floating
> > cities, anyone?
> 
> Sure. Until ...
> 
> 1. The neighbours on the ground get a bit annoyed
> about the city 
> blocking all their sunlight

If the city's not too big and floats high enough,
the sunlight goes around them.  Much like a cloud.

> 2. The neighbours on the ground who you've just
> drifted over point out 
> that under existing international law they have
> sovereignty over their 
> head space, and would you mind implementing their
> shari'a legal code 
> immediately?

There's a maximum altitude that applies to.
Specifically, nations don't get to apply their law to
any satellite (or thing at comparable altitude) that
happens to go overhead.  Still, the station would
presumably do much better simply to avoid those areas
- military issues aside, they wouldn't make for good
customers.  (This being a private venture, they would
presumably seek to make money off of it.)

> 3. The higher you float your city, the lower the
> density of the 
> surrounding air. Therefore the volume of lift gas
> you need to displace 
> your own mass in air also increases. When you're so
> high that 
> atmospheric pressure is around 1% of sea level, your
> aerostat needs to 
> hold 100 times the volume it encloses at sea level.
> The kind of 
> altitude these folks are talking about implies
> kilometre-plus diameter 
> gas cells, just to hold up something as massive as a
> 747. If you want a 
> floating city, you either have to have gas cells the
> size of continents 
> or float it down in the troposphere where the
> pressure's higher but 
> there's nasty weather to contend with.

Depends on how large the city is.  This is what I
meant by the "engineering issues" they'd have to
solve.  (And I'm not necessarily saying they are
solvable.  Not saying they aren't, either.)


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 21:58:41 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 14:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408142226490.28579-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20040815215841.5436.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > On the contrary, Snopes quotes 18 swift boat vets against him,
> three
> > statements in his favor, and two which are marginal. These numbers
> > reflect the stats I posted above: Most vets who served with him
> think
> > he's unfit.
> 
> It also says that only one of the 18 quoted men actually served under
> him,
> and that "The other men who served under Kerry's command continue to
> speak
> positively of him" 

If they speak positively of him, how about some quotes? Or is this just
a statement from the pro-Kerry shill?

> and "How well all of these men knew John Kerry is
> questionable, and discrepancies between how some of them described
> Kerry
> thirty-five years ago and how they describe him today suggest that
> their
> opinions are largely based upon political differences rather than
> objective assessments of Kerry's military record."

As previously stated, O'Neill's family has been Democrat for
generations. Are you saying that other Democrats are trying to sabotage him?

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Aug 16 00:44:44 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:44:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Comments to Mr. Larratt of BMEZINE.COM
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040815173506.04f6c6a0@mail.earthlink.net>

Greetings -

This is my reply to a journalist who wants to pierce our brains and make us 
look like "real" body modifiers. :-)


>Mr. Larratt,
>
>It is unfortunate that I am not able to post this response to your article 
>on the website it was printed.  Nonetheless, I will send this to you and 
>hope that you print it on your site where it accepts comments.   Thank you.
>
>It seems that you skipped over any level of finesse in understanding that 
>my presentation was intentionally shorted to fit the evening's scheduling 
>(after tech problems during my formerly scheduled time),and in deference 
>to Stelarc, who graciously invited me to share the stage with him.
>
>However, even if I had the full 1/2 hour to give my talk, I would not have 
>taken the audience through the metal wires of posthumanity, but reveled in 
>the level of collaborative thinking and cross-technological 
>boundaries.  Unlike you, I am not overtly impressed by dribbling three 
>syllable words from the lips, but find much more "brilliance" in sharing 
>ideas with those whom I value.  This type of "Enigma" intellectual 
>output?aproaching ideas from varied angles and backgrounds?fom designers 
>is far more honest.  Exploring emotions of designs, however simplex, is 
>often more refreshing than listening to designers pontificating about 
>their tools.
>
>Just as there is a big difference between human and transhuman, there is a 
>big difference between a transhuman and a posthuman.  In the case of the 
>posthuman, no one knows how it will be actualized.  To assume otherwise 
>would be erroneous.  Thus, the best we can do now is to envision and 
>conceptualize the possible futures and to allow our minds to wander, 
>outside the restrictive controls of technology, as practiced today.  But 
>we must keep in mind that convictions for body modifications are more than 
>piercing, tattoos, skin carvings, cosmetic surgery, which do not make one 
>futuristic.  Nor does a cyborg make a transhuman.
>
>It is puzzling that men or women looking at a woman provokes such 
>resentment in you.  Further, the fact that my biological chromosomal 
>heritage, whether I carry the gene or not, includes large breasts should 
>not warrant such crude commentary.  Further, I have no idea what "extreme" 
>cosmetic surgery you are referring to, since I believe the best way to 
>have cosmetic surgery is moderately and over time.  Perhaps you have me 
>confused with the artist Orlan who uses extreme measures to alter her 
>body, something that I have little interest in at this point in time.  Or 
>perhaps you came to the conference looking for a gothic freakishness, 
>which is sorely missing from the transhumanist culture, much to my delight.
>
>In 1986, Honda's engineers set out to master the "principles of walking." 
>Such early robotic mechanics is primitive compared to current 
>technological leaps in mobility and sensory adaptations.  Just as the 
>early biplane glider designed by the Wright Brothers (1899) is primitive 
>compared to a Boeing 747 jetliner, which will in turn be primitive to 
>X-planes (RLVs).  The early Asimo is certainly a primitive but important 
>"step" toward the future of robotics not because it is weak, but because 
>it is a primal and original step.  It leads the way for later generations 
>of assembled body parts and much greater advances that will come into 
>play. And such understanding is not so foolish when one considers the fact 
>that robotics has made extraordinary advances in skin manipulation, facial 
>expression, vocalization and mobility in recent years.
>
>Perhaps you were not listening when I announced, more than once, that the 
>engineering (the science and technology) of Primo would be featured and 
>elaborated on in that evening's Video Fest.  Both "Primo's Technology" on 
>Canadian Cultural TV and the film "Precipice" which details reasons for 
>the science and technology of Primo prototypes.
>
>What disturbs me about your type of commentary is that it lacks insight or 
>shared interest with transhumanism.  This is not a bad thing, but the 
>angst that you expressed to all other than Stelarc and Mann is curious and 
>one would think that perhaps you identify with what Mann represents, 
>although I would not put Stelarc in the same genre as Mann.  Stelarc is a 
>highly sophisticated artist.
>
>Lastly, and this is a side observation: I have often heard comments that 
>transhumanists should have more fun at conferences rather than portraying 
>an imbalance of science/technology over culture.  Alternatively, if we 
>have "fun" we are questioned about not being serious enough. Such protests 
>are far too loud and could be better addressed in conversation than 
>pointed at unwilling targets.
>
>Toward progress!
>
>Natasha Vita-More
>
>
>
>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

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/20040815/fdb6f31d/attachment.html>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 15 23:13:34 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408132255ecc7765@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040815231334.14906.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> One is a concept of web-based identity management
> for people out in
> the world, to handle all the myriad email addresses,
> web site logins,
> files, calendars & schedules, contact lists, etc,
> etc, etc that we all
> accumulate but that get completely out of hand
> (because there's just
> so much heterogenous crap to remember, like
> usernames/password, or
> urls, or whatever).

Been done.  Google doesn't just have search results
for this, it has a bunch of ads from providers.  The
main flaw: unless you own the servers, someone else
owns the machines your identity resides on.  How much
can you trust them?  (Granted, there's some of that
even now.  This is a lot more.)

> I'll expound shortly on a half baked software
> development methodology
> that I've got brewing in my head, tentatively tagged
> "disposable
> code". The axioms are "assume you start with a few
> spectacular coders,
> genius hackers, who can kind of work together, are
> individually
> irreplaceable, and most of whom don't like working
> with each other.
> What can you do?". It's a reaction to the regular
> methodologies
> (standard big system & agile) which assume that you
> want to work with
> endless fields of stupified code grinders, and that
> the brilliant
> cowboys in the corner are a liability...

The brilliant cowboys, like anyone, could get sick or
quit - especially if you (the business manager who
can't see anything but $) try to reduce their high
pay so you can pocket more profits.  Cheap code
grinders are widely available, and you still have the
code even if its makers quit.

In reality, high-quality businesses require truly
trusted employees.  But try telling the paranoid
execs who have fought off all manner of cold-blooded
challengers to their business.

As to this question itself, the answer is pretty
standard, if not often applied within a single
business unit: divide the application into each
person's responsibilities, and make a solid API.  If
someone needs a new API, they can negotiate for adding
it; the executive managing the project is responsible
for maintaining the API document itself, as part of
the project management documents (like the task
breakdown and schedule).  Otherwise, each programmer
is responsible for making sure their bit meets the API
perfectly (along with other, part-specific
responsibilities: databases don't lose data, UIs are
usable, and so forth).


From brentn at freeshell.org  Sun Aug 15 23:17:25 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:17:25 -0400
Subject: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush,
	was Re: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040815215841.5436.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <r02010200-1035-45FFD7FCEF1111D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (8/15/04 14:58) Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

>As previously stated, O'Neill's family has been Democrat for
>generations. Are you saying that other Democrats are trying to sabotage him?


This sort of partisan thinking is ultimately a red herring. O'Neill has a personal axe to grind against Kerry. I don't care if he's National Socialist or Trotskyite, he's still not an accurate reflection of the opinions of Kerry's comrades-in-arms.  He's one wingnut with an agenda.  

It is my opinion that partisan generalization is a disease of lazy minds. -No one- is a 'good party man;' everyone has a personal agenda, and characterizing people's political views with such a broad brush is the type of thing I'd come to expect from rabid knee-jerk Democrats. It is, I suppose, unsurprising that the mentality exists on the right wing as well.

Brent

-- 
Brent Neal
Geek of all Trades
http://brentn.freeshell.org

"Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 15 23:19:31 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Help! with reading image-based PDFs on a Palm
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081322381c6e96de@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040815231931.23725.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> So on the
> palm, these come out as full page images squeezed
> onto the tiny
> screen, ie: they are illegible.

Tap the image and hold the stylus down.  This should
cause the image to zoom out to normal size, with
scrollbars to slide around the image.  (There is a
menu option to disable this; if this doesn't work, you
may have to go into the Viewing/Preferences menu and
re-enable it.)

It might have been better for this to happen on tap
only, not tap-and-hold.  But this is how it is, at
least on the Adobe reader on my Palm.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 15 23:31:45 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040815215637.1652.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040815233145.99458.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:

> --- Charlie Stross <charlie at antipope.org> wrote:
> > On 12 Aug 2004, at 18:48, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > > floating
> > > cities, anyone?
> > 
> > Sure. Until ...
> > 
> > 1. The neighbours on the ground get a bit annoyed
> > about the city 
> > blocking all their sunlight
> 
> If the city's not too big and floats high enough,
> the sunlight goes around them.  Much like a cloud.
> 
> > 2. The neighbours on the ground who you've just
> > drifted over point out 
> > that under existing international law they have
> > sovereignty over their 
> > head space, and would you mind implementing their
> > shari'a legal code 
> > immediately?
> 
> There's a maximum altitude that applies to.
> Specifically, nations don't get to apply their law to
> any satellite (or thing at comparable altitude) that
> happens to go overhead.  Still, the station would
> presumably do much better simply to avoid those areas
> - military issues aside, they wouldn't make for good
> customers.  (This being a private venture, they would
> presumably seek to make money off of it.)
> 
> > 3. The higher you float your city, the lower the
> > density of the 
> > surrounding air. Therefore the volume of lift gas
> > you need to displace 
> > your own mass in air also increases. When you're so
> > high that 
> > atmospheric pressure is around 1% of sea level, your
> > aerostat needs to 
> > hold 100 times the volume it encloses at sea level.
> > The kind of 
> > altitude these folks are talking about implies
> > kilometre-plus diameter 
> > gas cells, just to hold up something as massive as a
> > 747. If you want a 
> > floating city, you either have to have gas cells the
> > size of continents 
> > or float it down in the troposphere where the
> > pressure's higher but 
> > there's nasty weather to contend with.
> 
> Depends on how large the city is.  This is what I
> meant by the "engineering issues" they'd have to
> solve.  (And I'm not necessarily saying they are
> solvable.  Not saying they aren't, either.)

Yeah:
a) envelope size generally get calculated on helium density. These
would be Hydrogen filled cells.
b) they could also be HOT hydrogen filled cells, getting lift both from
atomic mass differences and thermal volume differences. With buckyfiber
envelopes, you could easily engineer an envelope with R factors
approaching a thermos bottle.
c) the envelope also gets lift from its velocity through the air and
its airfoil shape, propelled by microwave powered ion/plasma thrusters.

A 747 sized homestead could have an envelope the size of an aircraft
carrier. An aircraft carrier could have an envelope a few kilometers large.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 15 23:43:04 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
In-Reply-To: <20040815233145.99458.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040815234304.36368.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> a) envelope size generally get calculated on helium
> density. These
> would be Hydrogen filled cells.

I'd be worried about helium/hydrogen leaking out the
walls.  They do this already, slowly; it's not that
big a concern since the balloons are expected to
return to the ground eventually anyway.  But this
would be a permanent deployment.

> b) they could also be HOT hydrogen filled cells,
> getting lift both from
> atomic mass differences and thermal volume
> differences. With buckyfiber
> envelopes, you could easily engineer an envelope
> with R factors
> approaching a thermos bottle.

I'd also be worried about atomic oxygen leaking in
and reacting.  Heat + fuel (hydrogen) + oxygen = boom,
no?

> c) the envelope also gets lift from its velocity
> through the air and
> its airfoil shape, propelled by microwave powered
> ion/plasma thrusters.

Not as much in the thin atmosphere, though.

> A 747 sized homestead could have an envelope the
> size of an aircraft
> carrier. An aircraft carrier could have an envelope
> a few kilometers large.

Aircraft carriers are already called miniature cities.
They're not nearly as spread out as the real thing,
but they are livable (by certain types of people, at
least) for several months at a time.  And if one
substituted hydroponics (powered by solar cells on the
gasbags) in place of some of the military systems,
resupply wouldn't be as much of an issue.  (It'd still
be needed from time to time...but then, what proper
city doesn't have mail service?)


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 16 00:56:53 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:26:53 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <20040815231334.14906.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040815231334.14906.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040815175646b79df8@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:13:34 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > One is a concept of web-based identity management
> > for people out in
> > the world, to handle all the myriad email addresses,
> > web site logins,
> > files, calendars & schedules, contact lists, etc,
> > etc, etc that we all
> > accumulate but that get completely out of hand
> > (because there's just
> > so much heterogenous crap to remember, like
> > usernames/password, or
> > urls, or whatever).
> 
> Been done.  Google doesn't just have search results
> for this, it has a bunch of ads from providers.  The
> main flaw: unless you own the servers, someone else
> owns the machines your identity resides on.  How much
> can you trust them?  (Granted, there's some of that
> even now.  This is a lot more.)

I had a private email to me pointing me to one of these. I must check
them out, see how closely they match what I'm imagining. If they're
good, I might try using one, and I'll let people know how it turns
out.

> 
> > I'll expound shortly on a half baked software
> > development methodology
> > that I've got brewing in my head, tentatively tagged
> > "disposable
> > code". The axioms are "assume you start with a few
> > spectacular coders,
> > genius hackers, who can kind of work together, are
> > individually
> > irreplaceable, and most of whom don't like working
> > with each other.
> > What can you do?". It's a reaction to the regular
> > methodologies
> > (standard big system & agile) which assume that you
> > want to work with
> > endless fields of stupified code grinders, and that
> > the brilliant
> > cowboys in the corner are a liability...
> 
> The brilliant cowboys, like anyone, could get sick or
> quit - especially if you (the business manager who
> can't see anything but $) try to reduce their high
> pay so you can pocket more profits.  Cheap code
> grinders are widely available, and you still have the
> code even if its makers quit.

I'm well aware of the problems with using excellent people with unique
skills/talents (rather than cookie-cutout grinders), but I think those
problems can be ameliorated using the right approach. Mostly it's all
variations on the theme of modularity.

People have been slagging off the loner coders for a long time now,
you know, those mad geeks who can't communicate but can churn out
magic code that no one else can, and no one can understand. I think,
given that most of our systems are built on a lot of this crazy magic
code built by these guys (imo), it might be better to not throw out
the baby with the bath water, and instead find a way to work with
them.

btw, I don't think the grind method is necessarily wrong, I just think
there are valid alternatives.

> 
> In reality, high-quality businesses require truly
> trusted employees.  But try telling the paranoid
> execs who have fought off all manner of cold-blooded
> challengers to their business.
> 

Yup. 

> As to this question itself, the answer is pretty
> standard, if not often applied within a single
> business unit: divide the application into each
> person's responsibilities, and make a solid API.  If
> someone needs a new API, they can negotiate for adding
> it; the executive managing the project is responsible
> for maintaining the API document itself, as part of
> the project management documents (like the task
> breakdown and schedule).  Otherwise, each programmer
> is responsible for making sure their bit meets the API
> perfectly (along with other, part-specific
> responsibilities: databases don't lose data, UIs are
> usable, and so forth).

That's the kind of thing I'm thinking of, but I've got a mad idea
about self documenting APIs (think web services, but promoted to the
level of abstraction of a java space), and distributed systems
composed almost solely of loosely coupled small pieces, so that the
overall central control of the api is less necessary, and so
individual pieces can be replaced almost at whim. There's more to it
than this... I must sit down and blog this thing.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 16 01:28:39 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:28:39 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<411EDEA3.6090302@cox.net>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV4CWLjLHvtxZ0001143c@hotmail.com>

I agree with your point...Yet your point is disturbing. The drive for ever
faster processing speeds and exponential increases in storage capacity was
created by our willingness to pay top dollar for the improvements. What you
are saying is that now, since we no longer have that need, the market for
these improvements in processing speeds and storage is no longer there. (I
have had 40GB for going on 3 years and still only use 9 of it.)

If this is the case, then it is just a matter of time before companies
realize it and stop investing as much into improvements in these areas.
Moore's Law would become a thing of the past and singularity would move even
farther beyond the horizon.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Clemmensen" <dgc at cox.net>
To: "Emlyn" <emlynoregan at gmail.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...


> We joke about this, but the reality is different.
>
> At some point during the last ten years, most of us crossed a threshold.
> Prior to the threshold, We did not have enough disk space or processing
> power. We spent as much money on a computer as our comfort level
> allowed, and it was not enough. Now, for most of us we have enough. When
> is the last time you checked the percentage of usage of your disk? when
> is the last time you thought "gee this operation is taking too long."
> (not counting problems with viruses and malware.) Think back ten years.
> One of the big deals then was figuring out which disk compression
> software to use.
>
> Most broadband providers have a cap at 2GB/month. A 1TB disk will hold
> more than 2 years of downloads, at a current cost of about $1000. ($500
> for the disks and $500 for the computer to hold the disks.) A 100TB disk
> would hold 200 years of downloads at today's rates.
>
> Assuming no monthly cap, look at it another way. An individual can
> probably assimilate <1Mbps for < 8hours/day (average.) that's
> (1Mb/8)*3600*8, or 3.6GB/day. That's 1TB/mo, or 100TB in 8 years.
>
> Emlyn wrote:
>
> >Excellent! A couple of those might be able to hold a few weeks of my
> >mailing list and rss feed subscriptions.
> >
> >Emlyn
> >
> >On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:47:39 -0500, Damien Broderick
> ><thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Breakthrough Nanotechnology Will Bring 100 Terabyte 3.5-inch Digital
Data
> >>Storage Disks
> >>
> >>http://www.physorg.com/news785.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 16 01:36:19 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:36:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was
	Re:Fahrenheit911-objectivereview?]
References: <!~!AAAAANZdqIhpSZdLswZV2YI7VP0Eyi0A@indco.net>
	<002801c4830c$4d26ef60$1e47bacc@preferrei3lj79>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV29c0D543Tuy0005c2cd@hotmail.com>

Let's not forget our FAILURE to intervene in Liberia last year when both
parties were looking forward to our presence. The entire issue was created
by the way we just packed up and left Liberia after the Soviet Union
crumbled. Now they are looking to stabilize and are looking for $14million
to get their electric back on in Monrovia and no one seems to care...
Liberia just isn;t big enough news to justify messing with, so we ignore it.

I'm willing to go out on a limb here though. I think the terrible foreign
policy is directly caused by the general public's lack of knowledge about
the world. The government only reacts to things they think will get them
re-elected and the voters only care about the things that  the news media
tell them to care about.  If the people had a clue and gave a shit, I think
our entire foreign policy would change and we wouldn;t have so many people
that hate us.







----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pat Fallon" <pfallon at ptd.net>
To: <dwish at indco.net>; "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was
Re:Fahrenheit911-objectivereview?]


> > We are facing a group of Muslim men ages 18-25 that have been
> > taught to hate America since they were born.
>
>
> IMHO, our interventionist foreign policy hasn't helped any...
>
> Take Iran, for instance...
> The CIA played a large role in overthrowing the Prime Minister of Iran
> and replaced him with the Shah whose dictatorship and secret police
> lasted almost 20 years until he was driven from office...
>
> when the revolution came, they didn't storm the Zwiss Embasy,
> they stormed the American Embassy because they hated us...
> the American CIA had replaced their Prime Minister with a dictator...
>
> we create, prop up, discard, and play tyrants off of one another...
> eventually that shit will catch up to you as it did in Iran...
>
> our interventionist foreign policy breeds hatred,
> it destroys our freedoms here in the US...
> it will bleed us dry...
>
> >The issue truly rests in that if we tuck tail and run out of Iraq
> >that we lose far more than the men we have lost already.
>
> sounds a little deja-viet-namish....
> the sooner we admit a mistake and withdraw, the better...
>
> > Our country will be a target for anyone that needs their
> > agenda passed to just bomb a church or building and we
> > will give them what they want to not make anyone mad.
>
> our troops will certainly continue to be a target if we keep them in
Iraq...
>
> > Appeasement never works.
>
> Refraining from disasterous foreign interventionism is not "appeasement."
>
> Self defense, YES...
> installing dictators, proping up kings and princes to secure oil
franchises,
> NO.
> taxing us to give trillions to foreign countries...no
> [privatize foreign aid, stop forcing Americans to contribute]
>
> Pat Fallon
> pfallon at ptd.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Aug 16 01:47:01 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:47:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV4CWLjLHvtxZ0001143c@hotmail.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>	<411EDEA3.6090302@cox.net>
	<BAY9-DAV4CWLjLHvtxZ0001143c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <41201215.2030500@cox.net>

Don't worry, there are a lot of drivers for investment in performance 
increases
in semiconductors and storage, and the phenomenon you worry about is already
pervasive.

You can apply more computational power to a problem in either or two ways:
you can get faster processors, or more processors. We are getting 
increasingly better
at distributed computing. Yes it's hard,a nd yes, it works better for 
some problems
than for others. But our canonical worked example for intelligence, the 
biological brain,
appears to be a massively distributed implementation.

For disk drives, we see exactly the "problem" you mention. Drives have 
quit doubling
in capacity, and instead are now dropping in price, specifically because 
a nominal 1-drive
system has "enough" capacity.  You should look at
   http://www.pricewatch.com
occasionally to get a feel for this trend. Disk capacity improvement 
have consistently
outpaced processors performance improvements for at least the last five 
years. The current
"sweet spot" for cost/GB is at about 250GB for $.50/GB, at retail.  Add 
$500 for a cheap
computer to house four drives: you get 1TB for $1000.

The only way I know to use this much disk at home is to store DVDs. 
Storing audio
CDs hardly counts: my entire CD collection fits on <<300GB with lossless 
compression.
You can store about 5 audio CDs with lossless compression (flac) in one 
GB, for a storage
cost of $.20/CD. Storage cost for a DVD would be about $4.00, which is a 
small fraction
the purchase price of a DVD. In my case I have a legal, physical CD for 
each of the CD images
on disk, but you can see why the RIAA and MPAA are panicking.

If the semiconductor manufacturers move off the performance curve, they 
will simply move
to the price curve instead. We will see retail computers at $100. With 
the semiconductor content
dropping in price each year. due to intense competition on margins. But 
this means that
the cost of building a cluster will drop dramatically, so the 
singularity continues to advance
at its inexorable pace.

Kevin Freels wrote:

>I agree with your point...Yet your point is disturbing. The drive for ever
>faster processing speeds and exponential increases in storage capacity was
>created by our willingness to pay top dollar for the improvements. What you
>are saying is that now, since we no longer have that need, the market for
>these improvements in processing speeds and storage is no longer there. (I
>have had 40GB for going on 3 years and still only use 9 of it.)
>
>If this is the case, then it is just a matter of time before companies
>realize it and stop investing as much into improvements in these areas.
>Moore's Law would become a thing of the past and singularity would move even
>farther beyond the horizon.
>
>From: "Dan Clemmensen" <dgc at cox.net>
>  
>
>>We joke about this, but the reality is different.
>>
>>At some point during the last ten years, most of us crossed a threshold.
>>Prior to the threshold, We did not have enough disk space or processing
>>power. We spent as much money on a computer as our comfort level
>>allowed, and it was not enough. Now, for most of us we have enough. When
>>is the last time you checked the percentage of usage of your disk? when
>>is the last time you thought "gee this operation is taking too long."
>>(not counting problems with viruses and malware.) Think back ten years.
>>One of the big deals then was figuring out which disk compression
>>software to use.
>>
>>Most broadband providers have a cap at 2GB/month. A 1TB disk will hold
>>more than 2 years of downloads, at a current cost of about $1000. ($500
>>for the disks and $500 for the computer to hold the disks.) A 100TB disk
>>would hold 200 years of downloads at today's rates.
>>
>>Assuming no monthly cap, look at it another way. An individual can
>>probably assimilate <1Mbps for < 8hours/day (average.) that's
>>(1Mb/8)*3600*8, or 3.6GB/day. That's 1TB/mo, or 100TB in 8 years.
>>
>>    
>>



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 02:23:33 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:23:33 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it in the
	interests of US citizens?
Message-ID: <02e901c48338$075dc6d0$852c2dcb@homepc>

Good to see you posting again John.

Do you think that international law exists? I do although I think it is farcical at present because not enough people in the US (the world's most powerful nation state) see that it is in their personal selfish interest.  If I recall you used to argue that the only laws were scientific ones. Which made me wonder about you views on contract law. 

If you do, do you think the development of perhaps some minimal level of international law is in your personal interest?  

Brett 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040816/ea8dcf04/attachment.html>

From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 16 02:29:38 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:59:38 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <41201215.2030500@cox.net>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>	<411EDEA3.6090302@cox.net>
	<BAY9-DAV4CWLjLHvtxZ0001143c@hotmail.com> <41201215.2030500@cox.net>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081519291d4023ed@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:47:01 -0400, Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> Don't worry, there are a lot of drivers for investment in performance
> increases
> in semiconductors and storage, and the phenomenon you worry about is already
> pervasive.
> 
> You can apply more computational power to a problem in either or two ways:
> you can get faster processors, or more processors. We are getting
> increasingly better
> at distributed computing. Yes it's hard,a nd yes, it works better for
> some problems
> than for others. But our canonical worked example for intelligence, the
> biological brain,
> appears to be a massively distributed implementation.

We need to be looking at new solutions to the software problem too
(ie: the problem that software technology is not increasing in-line
with hardware, because it's still hand-coded). As we get gruntier
hardware, hopefully we'll begin to see stupidly wasteful software
generators, based on things like genetic algorithms. So we can start
moving further down the track of all spec, no manual implementation
software, which will change things dramatically.

> 
> For disk drives, we see exactly the "problem" you mention. Drives have
> quit doubling
> in capacity, and instead are now dropping in price, specifically because
> a nominal 1-drive
> system has "enough" capacity.  You should look at
>   http://www.pricewatch.com
> occasionally to get a feel for this trend. Disk capacity improvement
> have consistently
> outpaced processors performance improvements for at least the last five
> years. The current
> "sweet spot" for cost/GB is at about 250GB for $.50/GB, at retail.  Add
> $500 for a cheap
> computer to house four drives: you get 1TB for $1000.

I figured out you could do a TB for $1000 a couple of weeks ago... it
blows my mind.

By the way, I still use up all my drive space (eg: 120gb drives),
mostly due to VMWare. I use virtual machines with abandon for
developing and testing distributed systems. Powerful stuff!

> 
> The only way I know to use this much disk at home is to store DVDs.
> Storing audio
> CDs hardly counts: my entire CD collection fits on <<300GB with lossless
> compression.
> You can store about 5 audio CDs with lossless compression (flac) in one
> GB, for a storage
> cost of $.20/CD. Storage cost for a DVD would be about $4.00, which is a
> small fraction
> the purchase price of a DVD. In my case I have a legal, physical CD for
> each of the CD images
> on disk, but you can see why the RIAA and MPAA are panicking.

They are panicking because they're struggling to wring the last drops
out of last decade's business model, but they don't have a good
alternative for this decade. I can tell them what it is, for free...
run sites like the russian mp3 download sites, selling songs for 10c
each, or albums for $1, and make it fast and easy to download. Problem
is they've taken too long to set it up, and now the pirates have
beaten them to the punch. Poor old recording industry, boo hoo.

Or, hey I know, why don't they just piss off and leave artists and
audience to interact directly online?

> 
> If the semiconductor manufacturers move off the performance curve, they
> will simply move
> to the price curve instead. We will see retail computers at $100. 

Yeah! Bring it on!

> With
> the semiconductor content
> dropping in price each year. due to intense competition on margins. But
> this means that
> the cost of building a cluster will drop dramatically, so the
> singularity continues to advance
> at its inexorable pace.
> 

Don't worry Kevin. We'll keep finding ways to use all that mighty
hardware, I promise.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 16 02:39:23 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:09:23 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <411EDEA3.6090302@cox.net>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040814174710.01c68ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<710b78fc040814162553b4b4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<411EDEA3.6090302@cox.net>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040815193950a851ef@mail.gmail.com>

"I think there is a world market for maybe 5 computers"
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home"
Ken Olson, chairman & founder of Digital equipment, 1977

"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered
as a means of communication. The device is ingerently of no value to
us."
Western Union internal memo, 1876

"640 K ought to be enough for anybody."
Bill Gates, 1981

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
popular mechanics, 1949

(nicked from http://web.inter.nl.net/users/pwilkins/ITquotes.html)

Come on, let's not let our imaginations fail us now.

Pop quiz: What will the consumer computer environment look like when
we have $100 machines with 100GB of memory on board, 100TB of drive
space, and lets say 10mbit/s internet connections as average speed?

Actually, that's not as interesting as asking what it will mean when
everyone has wearables (PDAs+++) with the same capacity as our current
desktops, and, say, 300kbps wireless internet connections that work
everywhere?

(btw, I already have a consumer level device here, on my desk at work,
in Adelaide Australia, which has 300kbps wireless net connection, with
browser etc, that works every, connected to a 3G network. Yeah!)

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:55:15 -0400, Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> We joke about this, but the reality is different.
> 
> At some point during the last ten years, most of us crossed a threshold.
> Prior to the threshold, We did not have enough disk space or processing
> power. We spent as much money on a computer as our comfort level
> allowed, and it was not enough. Now, for most of us we have enough. When
> is the last time you checked the percentage of usage of your disk? when
> is the last time you thought "gee this operation is taking too long."
> (not counting problems with viruses and malware.) Think back ten years.
> One of the big deals then was figuring out which disk compression
> software to use.
> 
> Most broadband providers have a cap at 2GB/month. A 1TB disk will hold
> more than 2 years of downloads, at a current cost of about $1000. ($500
> for the disks and $500 for the computer to hold the disks.) A 100TB disk
> would hold 200 years of downloads at today's rates.
> 
> Assuming no monthly cap, look at it another way. An individual can
> probably assimilate <1Mbps for < 8hours/day (average.) that's
> (1Mb/8)*3600*8, or 3.6GB/day. That's 1TB/mo, or 100TB in 8 years.
> 
> 
> 
> Emlyn wrote:
> 
> >Excellent! A couple of those might be able to hold a few weeks of my
> >mailing list and rss feed subscriptions.
> >
> >Emlyn
> >
> >On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:47:39 -0500, Damien Broderick
> ><thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Breakthrough Nanotechnology Will Bring 100 Terabyte 3.5-inch Digital Data
> >>Storage Disks
> >>
> >>http://www.physorg.com/news785.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
>


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Mon Aug 16 03:24:55 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 23:24:55 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush
In-Reply-To: <00ae01c482e2$b0952280$60fe4d0c@hal2001>
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>

John K Clark wrote:

>It's interesting that none of the vets who damn him served on his boat, 
>while all the men who did serve on it, and presumably know him best, 
>defend him.

Those who praise him were his subordinates. Those who damn him were his 
peers and superiors (up to Admiral Zumwalt). To some extent, the peers were 
present at the same events as the subordinates, literally a few feet away. 
Overall, they would provide data and judgments on different aspects of his 
performance than subordinates would.

Recognizing this, the performance appraisal mechanism at Hewlett-Packard 
combined input from everyone in the division who had worked with the 
employee. I assessed the subordinate members of my team, members of other 
teams, my peer project leaders, my manager, and his peers. It was 
time-consuming, but I thought it worked effectively.

>If Bush is wise he would drop this issue because whatever the truth one
>thing is clear, Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.

You presume that Bush is behind this. He may be, but there is not clear 
evidence either way.

I've heard lengthy interviews with some of the vets in opposition. They 
provide a credible story that Kerry was dangerous and dishonest, and lied 
to get most or all of his medals. (This is something servicemen take very 
seriously -- you may recall a few years ago there was a fuss about the 
Chief of Naval Operations wearing a medal he was not entitled to. He wound 
up committing suicide rather than face the disgrace.)

For me, I'm not surprised by the revelations. In particular, the lengthy 
profile that the Boston Globe did of him made it clear that he was a putz 
as far back as prep school, and continues this behavior to this day. (Many 
Boston locals have stories about unpleasant chance encounters with Kerry.)

The profile is available on the Globe's web site, and has a link to the 
~1971 Doonesbury cartoons lampooning his self-aggrandizing.

>Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.

I think that qualifies as the logical fallacy tu quoque. Someone else's 
character and accomplishments are not pertinent to assessing Kerry's.

Personally, I am much more interested in what Kerry did in the Senate than 
what he did in Vietnam, but Kerry has chosen to focus on his four-month 
record in-country, so it certainly seems legitimate to consider the merits 
of what he presents as his greatest accomplishments.


-- David Lubkin.




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 03:26:20 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it in the
	interests of US citizens?
Message-ID: <20040816032620.41422.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

how can intl law bein yr self intrst if you never read them?
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
wrote:
> Good to see you posting again John.
> 
> Do you think that international law exists? I do although I think it
is 
> farcical at present because not enough people in the US (the world's 
> most powerful nation state) see that it is in their personal selfish 
> interest.  If I recall you used to argue that the only laws were 
> scientific ones. Which made me wonder about you views on contract
law. 
> 
> If you do, do you think the development of perhaps some minimal level
of 
> international law is in your personal interest?  
> 
> Brett 
> 
> ------------
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 16 03:32:43 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040815175646b79df8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040816033243.26292.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> People have been slagging off the loner coders for a
> long time now,
> you know, those mad geeks who can't communicate but
> can churn out
> magic code that no one else can, and no one can
> understand.

*cough*  And the more I see the reality of that
stereotype, the more I see it to be false.  Maybe I am
one of those mad geeks, but so long as I have the
source code, I've been able to reverse engineer any
system I've tried to.  That has, in fact, been a
necessity on some of my jobs, due to sheer lack of any
other documentation.

Then again, people like me tend to charge a lot for
our services.  Businesspeople sometimes call something
"impossible" when it's actually just "impossible to do
really cheaply".

> btw, I don't think the grind method is necessarily
> wrong, I just think
> there are valid alternatives.

Ditto.  There are times when non-trivial costs are
justified - mainly when the potential profits are even
greater.  (One would think businesspeople would
understand the concept of "investment"...)

> That's the kind of thing I'm thinking of, but I've
> got a mad idea
> about self documenting APIs (think web services, but
> promoted to the
> level of abstraction of a java space),

Been there.  Done that.  Self-documentation is a nice
start, but unless you have some way of conveying the
meaning of each thing (at a minimum, well-chosen names
instead of stuff like "double doShmoo(short a, short
b, float x)"), it falls flat on its face.

> and
> distributed systems
> composed almost solely of loosely coupled small
> pieces, so that the
> overall central control of the api is less
> necessary,

You don't directly need central control of the API.
You do need a central document source, and
certification for each change that all affected
parties acknowledge and will comply with it.  For
large groups, this can be done semi-autonomously - if
(and only if) the involved parties can agree to it.
But as you said, this is for a project where the
independent coders don't talk to each other very well,
thus the need for central control: to facilitate
communication and make sure some agreement is reached.
Otherwise, you'll have coder A working to his version
of the API and coder B working to her version, and
find bugs where the two versions conflict.  (Say, if
coder A figured out that doShmoo() only returns
positive integers, and thus changed its type to int,
but coder B was doing bit-shifting tricks with the
result that only work for a double.)


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 03:34:51 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:34:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
Message-ID: <20040816033451.82685.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

(I have had 40GB for going on 3 years and still only use 9 of it.) 

your problm is not enuf pron in ur life..... :)
 

--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <megaquark at hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I agree with your point...Yet your point is disturbing. The drive for
ever
> faster processing speeds and exponential increases in storage
capacity was
> created by our willingness to pay top dollar for the improvements.
What you
> are saying is that now, since we no longer have that need, the market
for
> these improvements in processing speeds and storage is no longer
there. (I
> have had 40GB for going on 3 years and still only use 9 of it.)
> 
> If this is the case, then it is just a matter of time before
companies
> realize it and stop investing as much into improvements in these
areas.
> Moore's Law would become a thing of the past and singularity would
move even
> farther beyond the horizon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan Clemmensen" <dgc at cox.net>
> To: "Emlyn" <emlynoregan at gmail.com>; "ExI chat list"
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 10:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
> 
> 
> > We joke about this, but the reality is different.
> >
> > At some point during the last ten years, most of us crossed a
threshold.
> > Prior to the threshold, We did not have enough disk space or
processing
> > power. We spent as much money on a computer as our comfort level
> > allowed, and it was not enough. Now, for most of us we have enough.
When
> > is the last time you checked the percentage of usage of your disk?
when
> > is the last time you thought "gee this operation is taking too
long."
> > (not counting problems with viruses and malware.) Think back ten
years.
> > One of the big deals then was figuring out which disk compression
> > software to use.
> >
> > Most broadband providers have a cap at 2GB/month. A 1TB disk will
hold
> > more than 2 years of downloads, at a current cost of about $1000.
($500
> > for the disks and $500 for the computer to hold the disks.) A 100TB
disk
> > would hold 200 years of downloads at today's rates.
> >
> > Assuming no monthly cap, look at it another way. An individual can
> > probably assimilate <1Mbps for < 8hours/day (average.) that's
> > (1Mb/8)*3600*8, or 3.6GB/day. That's 1TB/mo, or 100TB in 8 years.
> >
> > Emlyn wrote:
> >
> > >Excellent! A couple of those might be able to hold a few weeks of
my
> > >mailing list and rss feed subscriptions.
> > >
> > >Emlyn
> > >
> > >On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 17:47:39 -0500, Damien Broderick
> > ><thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>Breakthrough Nanotechnology Will Bring 100 Terabyte 3.5-inch
Digital
> Data
> > >>Storage Disks
> > >>
> > >>http://www.physorg.com/news785.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 03:48:32 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:48:32 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it in
	theinterests of US citizens?
References: <20040816032620.41422.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <031c01c48343$e6c193f0$852c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey:

> how can intl law bein yr self intrst if you never read them?

Mike are you saying I don't read them, or you don't read them
or the folks that disagree with you don't read them? I don't
know what you are saying? 

Brett









 









From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 16 04:31:47 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:01:47 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <20040816033243.26292.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040816033243.26292.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040815213172c33801@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:32:43 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > People have been slagging off the loner coders for a
> > long time now,
> > you know, those mad geeks who can't communicate but
> > can churn out
> > magic code that no one else can, and no one can
> > understand.
> 
> *cough*  And the more I see the reality of that
> stereotype, the more I see it to be false.  Maybe I am
> one of those mad geeks, but so long as I have the
> source code, I've been able to reverse engineer any
> system I've tried to.  That has, in fact, been a
> necessity on some of my jobs, due to sheer lack of any
> other documentation.

Sure, that's most of coding in my opinion (ie: normal). My experience
is that you either get no doco, or out of date doco, with extremely
few exceptions. These days, I prefer that coders take a simple
approach to begin with, don't bother with too much doco (save for
architectural documentation and maybe a paragraph on each component
(often I mean binary here) of a system, do document funky stuff in the
source code (ie: explain what & why), and basically don't worry too
much about the rest. But writing the code clearly to begin with really
takes the pain away in most cases.

I'm going to be inconsistent now and say that I think communication is
strongly necessary in a development team. But it doesn't have to be
done entirely by the coders themselves, especially if they aren't
people people. Better to get rid of the idea of team leader and go for
a communcation facilitator, someone who runs around (b&m or
virtually), talks to everyone, keeps an idea of how things are going,
and helps those people who need to talk to actually talk. For the most
part, when two bits of system written by two seperate people need to
talk, they don't really need rigorous API definitions imposed from
above, they just need to communicate, with help if necessary. Two
smart coders can work that stuff out between them.


> 
> Then again, people like me tend to charge a lot for
> our services.  Businesspeople sometimes call something
> "impossible" when it's actually just "impossible to do
> really cheaply".

I wonder if the thinking goes something like this... 
You can get Shakespeare by giving typewriters to an infinite number of monkeys.
Infinite and lots are pretty much the same.
Thus if I hire (and presumably shave and dress) many monkeys, and give
them keyboards, I can get the software equivalent of Shakespeare
(after all, it's just typing with the words spelled wrong). I can
replace monkeys easier than real coders.

Hey, that's a business plan!

Theoretical problems include (1) lots is not infinite (lots and lots
and lots is still not infinite), and even if you get Shakespeare code,
how will you find it in all that muck?

Practical problems include (see own career for reference).

> 
> > btw, I don't think the grind method is necessarily
> > wrong, I just think
> > there are valid alternatives.
> 
> Ditto.  There are times when non-trivial costs are
> justified - mainly when the potential profits are even
> greater.  (One would think businesspeople would
> understand the concept of "investment"...)

I used to think so :-(

> 
> > That's the kind of thing I'm thinking of, but I've
> > got a mad idea
> > about self documenting APIs (think web services, but
> > promoted to the
> > level of abstraction of a java space),
> 
> Been there.  Done that.  Self-documentation is a nice
> start, but unless you have some way of conveying the
> meaning of each thing (at a minimum, well-chosen names
> instead of stuff like "double doShmoo(short a, short
> b, float x)"), it falls flat on its face.

You can do that. You might have to enforce people maintaining this
stuff, but in the windows world I know that COM objects will do this
just fine (carry big descriptions along with methods and objects).
.Net probably does (haven't dug deeply enough yet, but it certainly
does reflection well), and Web Services do too (although they don't
seem to be object oriented).

> 
> > and
> > distributed systems
> > composed almost solely of loosely coupled small
> > pieces, so that the
> > overall central control of the api is less
> > necessary,
> 
> You don't directly need central control of the API.
> You do need a central document source, 

Yes, I agree with this. Top level stuff is most important; which bits
talk to which other bits and why (how is also good, but less
important).

> and
> certification for each change that all affected
> parties acknowledge and will comply with it.

This can be lightweight but should be event driven - an email list or
the kind of emailed notification that lots of source control systems
provide will do the job; how tough do you think certification of
acknowledgement & compliance needs to be? Read receipts on the emails
might do if you are worried.

>  For
> large groups, this can be done semi-autonomously - if
> (and only if) the involved parties can agree to it.

I guess I've addressed this above, I agree. It depends on the task
too; an interface between two components is easier to negotiate ad-hoc
than an interface used by half of the teams in an organisation.

> But as you said, this is for a project where the
> independent coders don't talk to each other very well,
> thus the need for central control: to facilitate
> communication and make sure some agreement is reached.

I never like this, because people are too likely to let the api be set
in stone and kludge around it rather than changing it when necessary.
A good principle to keep in mind is the ability to extend your api
without breaking old stuff, covers a lot of the ground of adapting
your api.

My alternative to central control is yet again to have someone who
primarily facilitates (subtly forces :-)) communication. You can call
this person team lead, or head chat monkey, it matters not. But the
role is kind of coach/mentor/facilitator, and requires a really good
communicator (who is also technically competent if not excellent).

> Otherwise, you'll have coder A working to his version
> of the API and coder B working to her version, and
> find bugs where the two versions conflict.  (Say, if
> coder A figured out that doShmoo() only returns
> positive integers, and thus changed its type to int,
> but coder B was doing bit-shifting tricks with the
> result that only work for a double.)

Sure, yes. But that's often easier to fix than people think, as long
as someone is around to calm everyone down. Just don't be scared to
change code.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 16 04:46:51 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081519291d4023ed@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040816044651.77158.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> I figured out you could do a TB for $1000 a couple
> of weeks ago... it
> blows my mind.

Amusing point: just last week, I completed some
contract programming for a startup (so we're not
talking billions of dollars), and one of the test
conditions for this program was making sure it could
work with multi-yottabyte disk allocations.

The details of what it was doing with that much space
are confidential, unfortunately.  But my software did
pass the test.  (Lesson learned: if you're tracking
bytes in Perl, watch out when you pass around 909 TB.
At around 910 TB - 16 decimal digits - Perl starts
insisting on displaying integers as scientific
notation, with some loss of accuracy.  There are
libraries to help get around this, if one remembers to
use them.)

> Don't worry Kevin. We'll keep finding ways to use
> all that mighty
> hardware, I promise.

For much of my career, I've been practicing techniques
to not use excess memory, writing small and fast
programs.  Make sure they could operate in parallel
cleanly, so if my client needed a lot more of them
(say, customer interface software for e-commerce sites
which start getting a lot more customers per unit
time), they could simply buy more hardware and load
the same software.

But I do have to wonder.  In many industries, large
enough quantity has often taken on a quality all its
own.  How many nodes are in, say, a rat's brain?  What
was the memory capacity, again?  If we could write a
perfect emulation of that, it seems likely that merely
scaling up (with tweaking to represent any
specified-by-genetics initial weights and external
connections) could imitate a dog's brain, or a chimp's
brain, or a human's, especially if wired up to a robot
with the same approximate sensor/motor bandwidth.
(How many rods and cones in each eye, again?
Megapixel, or more?  Certainly more than a low-end toy
camera's, the ones used by many research project
androids today.)


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 16 05:14:08 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 22:14:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040815213172c33801@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040816051408.54326.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Better to get rid of the idea of team
> leader and go for
> a communcation facilitator, someone who runs around
> (b&m or
> virtually), talks to everyone, keeps an idea of how
> things are going,
> and helps those people who need to talk to actually
> talk.

It's been my experience that that is a good team
leader for engineering projects, when you have
competent engineers.  (The leader also has to make
sure the engineers are competent and not slacking off,
but that's part of what you said.)

> For the most
> part, when two bits of system written by two
> seperate people need to
> talk, they don't really need rigorous API
> definitions imposed from
> above, they just need to communicate, with help if
> necessary. Two
> smart coders can work that stuff out between them.

Is that what you understood?  Sorry for the confusion.
I didn't mean to imply that the boss would define the
API (except in rare circumstances where the
programmers couldn't agree), but rather keep the API
and make sure all the coders know of any changes to it
relevant to their parts.  The API itself would be
built up from agreements between the coders; the
initial draft might be little more than the
theoretical component communications plan that someone
(maybe the boss) thought up when laying out who would
do what.

> I wonder if the thinking goes something like this...
> 
> You can get Shakespeare by giving typewriters to an
> infinite number of monkeys.
> Infinite and lots are pretty much the same.
> Thus if I hire (and presumably shave and dress) many
> monkeys, and give
> them keyboards, I can get the software equivalent of
> Shakespeare
> (after all, it's just typing with the words spelled
> wrong). I can
> replace monkeys easier than real coders.
> 
> Hey, that's a business plan!

I think it's closer to:

This smart guy could build this software.  But he
costs a lot.

Well, what do I need him for?  He's a programmer.  I
can get programmers cheaply this other way.

Such a bargain!  And I can pocket the difference
myself, because everyone knows executives have high
salaries and all sorts of perks.

Money, money, money...hey, what do you mean, you've
run into technical problems?  Don't tell me I need to
spend a lot of money to fix it.  I've already earned
my money.  The business can't afford expensive talent.
You can't fix it?  You're fired!  How hard can it be
to fix this myself?  Well, okay, maybe I need another
grunt to take care of this thing.

...gee, I tell everyone my problem and only the really
expensive guys look at all like they can fix it.  How
dare they charge me so much!  I'll hire them because I
have no choice, but they're rotten people for parting
me from MY money!

And worse, they actually think I'm making mistakes!
They've never run a business; they don't even have
MBAs!  How could they possibly know anything other
than programming?  Even if that one customer who got
around my flunkies the other day and talked to me said
exactly the same thing.  Nah, they've got to be lying.
If they were telling the truth, surely my junior
executives who depend on my good will for their
continued employment would tell me I'm wrong.

(No, I'm not exaggerating.  I speak from sad
experience with too many greedy executives.  I wish it
were otherwise.)

> > Been there.  Done that.  Self-documentation is a
> nice
> > start, but unless you have some way of conveying
> the
> > meaning of each thing (at a minimum, well-chosen
> names
> > instead of stuff like "double doShmoo(short a,
> short
> > b, float x)"), it falls flat on its face.
> 
> You can do that. You might have to enforce people
> maintaining this
> stuff,

That's my point: you do have to enforce (at least, if
you've got coders who don't do this automatically, and
not all good programmers know the value of it).
Self-documentation isn't the "drop it in unaided and
watch your problems go away" solution many managers
think is the only thing that would be sold as a
"solution".

> > and
> > certification for each change that all affected
> > parties acknowledge and will comply with it.
> 
> This can be lightweight but should be event driven -
> an email list or
> the kind of emailed notification that lots of source
> control systems
> provide will do the job; how tough do you think
> certification of
> acknowledgement & compliance needs to be? Read
> receipts on the emails
> might do if you are worried.

Better to have a link to click to acknowledge,
especially if you have a distributed project where
you can't rely on read receipts getting through (or
being generated).  You're trying to make sure the
information got into the recipient's brain, not just
the recipient's inbox.

> > But as you said, this is for a project where the
> > independent coders don't talk to each other very
> well,
> > thus the need for central control: to facilitate
> > communication and make sure some agreement is
> reached.
> 
> My alternative to central control is yet again to
> have someone who
> primarily facilitates (subtly forces :-))
> communication.

I think we said the same thing here.


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 16 05:31:13 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:01:13 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <20040816051408.54326.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040816051408.54326.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408152231609a4b84@mail.gmail.com>

> > My alternative to central control is yet again to
> > have someone who
> > primarily facilitates (subtly forces :-))
> > communication.
> 
> I think we said the same thing here.
> 

Pretty much. Maybe I need to not be quite such an anarchist :-)

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 16 05:34:29 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:04:29 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <20040816044651.77158.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040816044651.77158.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081522343ca38a4e@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:46:51 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> Amusing point: just last week, I completed some
> contract programming for a startup (so we're not
> talking billions of dollars), and one of the test
> conditions for this program was making sure it could
> work with multi-yottabyte disk allocations.
> 
> The details of what it was doing with that much space
> are confidential, unfortunately.  

My guess... you were putting together some trivial app for Defense.
You submitted it on a floppy, but the yottas were for the required
documentation...

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 08:18:46 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:18:46 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
References: <r02010200-1035-80B312C8EE7011D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <000b01c48369$a6b8cc30$852c2dcb@homepc>

Brent Neal wrote:

> ..  voting on the principle of least incompetence.

If only it would catch on.

> http://www.reason.com/0408/fe.bd.john.shtm

Good article.  Maybe some will read excerpts that won't read
16 pages.

" ..by virtue of our abdication, a very authoritarian, assertive
form of government has taken over. And oddly enough, it is
doing so in the guise of libertarianism to a certain extent. Most
of the people in the think tanks behind the Bush administration?s
current policies are libertarians, or certainly free marketeers.
We?ve got two distinct strains of libertarianism, and the
hippie-mystic strain is not engaging in politics, and the Ayn
Rand strain is basically dismantling government in a way that
is giving complete open field running to multinational
corporatism."

" From a multinational?s standpoint, the best thing that can
happen is the best thing that can happen right now. They have
to deliver maximum shareholder value today, next quarter,
which means that they don?t worry about whether there are
going to be resources for them to exploit in 10 years."

The following seems to resonates with Spike's comments:

"TV in America created the most coherent reality distortion
field that I?ve ever seen. Therein is the problem: People who
vote watch TV, and they are hallucinating like a sonofabitch.
Basically, what we have in this country is government by
hallucinating mob."
---

Brett















From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Mon Aug 16 09:49:52 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:49:52 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <20040816044651.77158.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040816044651.77158.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0408161142530.19632@zeus>

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, Adrian Tymes wrote:

>--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I figured out you could do a TB for $1000 a couple
>> of weeks ago... it
>> blows my mind.
>
>Amusing point: just last week, I completed some
>contract programming for a startup (so we're not
>talking billions of dollars), and one of the test
>conditions for this program was making sure it could
>work with multi-yottabyte disk allocations.

Yottabytes? I was told that the dot-com era was over :-) Seriously, a
yottabyte is 10^15 GB (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_prefix for
these funny prefixes). I'm pretty sure it's more than the total harddisk
capacity of the entire planet. Sure this company is *not* just interested
in the next quarterly financial statement, but it's in for the long run.

Alfio


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 12:43:04 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 05:43:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it in
	theinterests of US citizens?
Message-ID: <20040816124304.97230.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

brett said:
Mike are you saying I dont read th(
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
wrote:
> Mike Lorrey:
> 
> > how can intl law bein yr self intrst if you never read them?
> 
> Mike are you saying I don't read them, or you don't read them
> or the folks that disagree with you don't read them? I don't
> know what you are saying? 
> 
> Brett
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Mon Aug 16 12:58:26 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:58:26 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <411DD121.8060205@optusnet.com.au>
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<842D9168-ED40-11D8-B92E-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
	<411DD121.8060205@optusnet.com.au>
Message-ID: <F662F49E-EF83-11D8-B47B-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>


On 14 Aug 2004, at 10:45, David wrote:
> We also use Preferential Voting.  There is a quick explanation of each 
> here:
>
> http://www.eca.gov.au/systems/single/by_category/preferential.htm
>
> http://www.eca.gov.au/systems/proportional/proportion_rep.htm
>
> One of the benefits of the preferential system is that by listing your 
> preferences in the right order you can make a 'protest vote' for a 
> small party candidate while still having your vote count towards the 
> major candidate that you dislike least.

It also stops the possibility of a candidate being a spoiler. The 
concept is simply illogical under a proportional voting scheme. If the 
US had proportional voting Bush presumably not have been elected due to 
proportionally more Nader voters choosing Gore as their 2nd preference.

However, under a proportional voting scheme the overall landscape of 
candidates would change. So Gore/Bush might not even be serious 
candidates. I suspect both major parties would have to undergo major 
overhauls.

best, patrick



From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Mon Aug 16 13:45:13 2004
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:45:13 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>

>
>> Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.
>>

The argument at altitude - How does one emerge from such a violent 
conflict with three purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star, ten 
fingers,  ten toes, both eyes, etc? While possible, certainly, it just 
doesn't seem statistically sound.

And the policy at the time was 3 purple heart = trip home, wasn't it?



I am Bret Kulakovich and I approved this message.



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 14:06:15 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:06:15 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
	<7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc>

Bret Kulakovich wrote:

> >> Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.
> >>
> 
> The argument at altitude - How does one emerge from such a violent 
> conflict with three purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star, ten 
> fingers,  ten toes, both eyes, etc? While possible, certainly, it just 
> doesn't seem statistically sound.
> 
> And the policy at the time was 3 purple heart = trip home, wasn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> I am Bret Kulakovich and I approved this message.

You haven't put an argument, you've put a question. 

I don't know anything about Kerry's war record but you
said "one", so here's an answer.

1) Purple heart (first injury).
2) Bronze star
3) Purple heart (second injury)
4) Silver star
5) Purple heart (third injury and trip home).

That seems to answer your hypothetical question in the terms you
put it.  Perhaps you wanted to imply or state something else?

Brett Paatsch



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 16 14:50:51 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:50:51 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
Message-ID: <BAY17-F12yLkblXzikS00044c45@hotmail.com>

I've found that management prefers the code grinders rather than mad genius 
because they lack vision. Not the "Vision" that biz books speak of, but just 
that management doesn't really know what a company or product is supposed to 
do, so they focus on what they can control: personnel, hours, code output, 
level of documentation, etc.

I reflect back on projects I've worked on: successful and unsuccessful and 
it seems like vision is the most important piece. I've been on 6 month 
projects with 4 people and no management. We had no documentation, no 
project plan, and we generated a full product that made millions its first 
year. Then I saw that same project add 40 people, multiple levels of 
management, project managers, product managers, qa, qt, etc etc and it took 
forever to get a new module out. The key difference was that in the 
beginning the four of us had a vision of what we were creating and worked 
toward the common goal.

Later, no one really knew what they had to do and were just sort of "going 
through the motions".

My preferred method of development is a very small, talented team with no 
management at first. There should be at least 1-2 "businessy" progs who can 
speak with investors and other business units to convey the message, but 
still able to generate clean code. Then the other 1-3 should just be hard 
core developers who can all understand (in theory) what the other developers 
are working on so they know what to code next.

The downside is that the project/team/company is a high risk for anyone to 
leave or die, but the upside is that there is no useless dead weight that 
drags against the finished software.

Of course, it's virtually impossible to find a small team of mad genius 
coders with a unified vision so I'm still waiting :/

BAL

>From: Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
>Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:26:53 +0930
>
>On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:13:34 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
><wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > One is a concept of web-based identity management
> > > for people out in
> > > the world, to handle all the myriad email addresses,
> > > web site logins,
> > > files, calendars & schedules, contact lists, etc,
> > > etc, etc that we all
> > > accumulate but that get completely out of hand
> > > (because there's just
> > > so much heterogenous crap to remember, like
> > > usernames/password, or
> > > urls, or whatever).
> >
> > Been done.  Google doesn't just have search results
> > for this, it has a bunch of ads from providers.  The
> > main flaw: unless you own the servers, someone else
> > owns the machines your identity resides on.  How much
> > can you trust them?  (Granted, there's some of that
> > even now.  This is a lot more.)
>
>I had a private email to me pointing me to one of these. I must check
>them out, see how closely they match what I'm imagining. If they're
>good, I might try using one, and I'll let people know how it turns
>out.
>
> >
> > > I'll expound shortly on a half baked software
> > > development methodology
> > > that I've got brewing in my head, tentatively tagged
> > > "disposable
> > > code". The axioms are "assume you start with a few
> > > spectacular coders,
> > > genius hackers, who can kind of work together, are
> > > individually
> > > irreplaceable, and most of whom don't like working
> > > with each other.
> > > What can you do?". It's a reaction to the regular
> > > methodologies
> > > (standard big system & agile) which assume that you
> > > want to work with
> > > endless fields of stupified code grinders, and that
> > > the brilliant
> > > cowboys in the corner are a liability...
> >
> > The brilliant cowboys, like anyone, could get sick or
> > quit - especially if you (the business manager who
> > can't see anything but $) try to reduce their high
> > pay so you can pocket more profits.  Cheap code
> > grinders are widely available, and you still have the
> > code even if its makers quit.
>
>I'm well aware of the problems with using excellent people with unique
>skills/talents (rather than cookie-cutout grinders), but I think those
>problems can be ameliorated using the right approach. Mostly it's all
>variations on the theme of modularity.
>
>People have been slagging off the loner coders for a long time now,
>you know, those mad geeks who can't communicate but can churn out
>magic code that no one else can, and no one can understand. I think,
>given that most of our systems are built on a lot of this crazy magic
>code built by these guys (imo), it might be better to not throw out
>the baby with the bath water, and instead find a way to work with
>them.
>
>btw, I don't think the grind method is necessarily wrong, I just think
>there are valid alternatives.
>
> >
> > In reality, high-quality businesses require truly
> > trusted employees.  But try telling the paranoid
> > execs who have fought off all manner of cold-blooded
> > challengers to their business.
> >
>
>Yup.
>
> > As to this question itself, the answer is pretty
> > standard, if not often applied within a single
> > business unit: divide the application into each
> > person's responsibilities, and make a solid API.  If
> > someone needs a new API, they can negotiate for adding
> > it; the executive managing the project is responsible
> > for maintaining the API document itself, as part of
> > the project management documents (like the task
> > breakdown and schedule).  Otherwise, each programmer
> > is responsible for making sure their bit meets the API
> > perfectly (along with other, part-specific
> > responsibilities: databases don't lose data, UIs are
> > usable, and so forth).
>
>That's the kind of thing I'm thinking of, but I've got a mad idea
>about self documenting APIs (think web services, but promoted to the
>level of abstraction of a java space), and distributed systems
>composed almost solely of loosely coupled small pieces, so that the
>overall central control of the api is less necessary, and so
>individual pieces can be replaced almost at whim. There's more to it
>than this... I must sit down and blog this thing.
>
>--
>Emlyn
>
>http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
>_______________________________________________
>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  Mon Aug 16 14:58:37 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:58:37 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas
	[wasRe:Fahrenheit911-objectivereview?]
Message-ID: <BAY17-F35FR3wNgP1f300045fc7@hotmail.com>

I don't know why it's shocking to realize that the US isn't some massive 
force for good in the world.

The US has a main concern: maintaining and increasing its power (re: 
hegemony). The US bailed out of Liberia when the USSR fell apart because 
Liberia ceased to be important.

That's the same reason why dictators with billions are more likely to get 
liberated than penniless dictators.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. There's no mandate that USians are 
compassionate folks who want to help the world. In fact, I've seen some 
polls that basically given the choice between helping the world or helping 
local USians, local charity wins out.

Spider Man's Uncle Ben said "With great power comes great responsibility." 
Until America accepts this and begins to act on it, then there will be 
terrible things happening in the world that will not be changed by the US.

BAL

>From: "Kevin Freels" <megaquark at hotmail.com>
>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] electing ideas 
>[wasRe:Fahrenheit911-objectivereview?]
>Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:36:19 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Originating-IP: [67.38.179.115]
>X-Originating-Email: [megaquark at hotmail.com]
>X-Sender: megaquark at hotmail.com
>Received: from mc2-f13.hotmail.com ([65.54.190.20]) by mc2-s1.hotmail.com 
>with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:27:49 -0700
>Received: from tick.javien.com ([209.115.169.3]) by mc2-f13.hotmail.com 
>with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:27:48 -0700
>Received: from tick.javien.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by 
>tick.javien.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id i7G1II016526;Sun, 15 Aug 2004 
>19:18:18 -0600
>Received: from hotmail.com (bay9-dav29.bay9.hotmail.com [64.4.46.86])by 
>tick.javien.com (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id i7G1IF016517for 
><extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>; Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:18:15 -0600
>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft 
>SMTPSVC;Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:18:14 -0700
>Received: from 67.38.179.115 by bay9-dav29.bay9.hotmail.com with DAV;Mon, 
>16 Aug 2004 01:18:14 +0000
>X-Message-Info: U2wzkPk8/jZ27yo+I0QrGhYRMefS/hizIsHsJLIJLYo=
>References: 
><!~!AAAAANZdqIhpSZdLswZV2YI7VP0Eyi0A at indco.net><002801c4830c$4d26ef60$1e47bacc at preferrei3lj79>
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
>X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
>Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV29c0D543Tuy0005c2cd at hotmail.com>
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Aug 2004 01:18:14.0195 
>(UTC)FILETIME=[E7165030:01C4832E]
>X-BeenThere: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: ExI chat list <extropy-chat.lists.extropy.org>
>List-Unsubscribe: 
><http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat>,<mailto:extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://www.lucifer.com/pipermail/extropy-chat>
>List-Post: <mailto:extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>List-Help: <mailto:extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org?subject=help>
>List-Subscribe: 
><http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat>,<mailto:extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org?subject=subscribe>
>Errors-To: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
>Return-Path: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
>
>Let's not forget our FAILURE to intervene in Liberia last year when both
>parties were looking forward to our presence. The entire issue was created
>by the way we just packed up and left Liberia after the Soviet Union
>crumbled. Now they are looking to stabilize and are looking for $14million
>to get their electric back on in Monrovia and no one seems to care...
>Liberia just isn;t big enough news to justify messing with, so we ignore 
>it.
>
>I'm willing to go out on a limb here though. I think the terrible foreign
>policy is directly caused by the general public's lack of knowledge about
>the world. The government only reacts to things they think will get them
>re-elected and the voters only care about the things that  the news media
>tell them to care about.  If the people had a clue and gave a shit, I think
>our entire foreign policy would change and we wouldn;t have so many people
>that hate us.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Pat Fallon" <pfallon at ptd.net>
>To: <dwish at indco.net>; "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 4:10 PM
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was
>Re:Fahrenheit911-objectivereview?]
>
>
> > > We are facing a group of Muslim men ages 18-25 that have been
> > > taught to hate America since they were born.
> >
> >
> > IMHO, our interventionist foreign policy hasn't helped any...
> >
> > Take Iran, for instance...
> > The CIA played a large role in overthrowing the Prime Minister of Iran
> > and replaced him with the Shah whose dictatorship and secret police
> > lasted almost 20 years until he was driven from office...
> >
> > when the revolution came, they didn't storm the Zwiss Embasy,
> > they stormed the American Embassy because they hated us...
> > the American CIA had replaced their Prime Minister with a dictator...
> >
> > we create, prop up, discard, and play tyrants off of one another...
> > eventually that shit will catch up to you as it did in Iran...
> >
> > our interventionist foreign policy breeds hatred,
> > it destroys our freedoms here in the US...
> > it will bleed us dry...
> >
> > >The issue truly rests in that if we tuck tail and run out of Iraq
> > >that we lose far more than the men we have lost already.
> >
> > sounds a little deja-viet-namish....
> > the sooner we admit a mistake and withdraw, the better...
> >
> > > Our country will be a target for anyone that needs their
> > > agenda passed to just bomb a church or building and we
> > > will give them what they want to not make anyone mad.
> >
> > our troops will certainly continue to be a target if we keep them in
>Iraq...
> >
> > > Appeasement never works.
> >
> > Refraining from disasterous foreign interventionism is not 
>"appeasement."
> >
> > Self defense, YES...
> > installing dictators, proping up kings and princes to secure oil
>franchises,
> > NO.
> > taxing us to give trillions to foreign countries...no
> > [privatize foreign aid, stop forcing Americans to contribute]
> >
> > Pat Fallon
> > pfallon at ptd.net
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 16 15:02:08 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:02:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it in
	theinterests of US citizens?
Message-ID: <BAY17-F25eSVEWqzBcw00046055@hotmail.com>

Most laws are established by an authority. The problem with international 
law is that there is no one willing to threaten enforcement.

International law reminds me of some of the "futuristic anarchy" discussions 
I've seen because it involves willing participation by without the threat of 
an authority forcing adherence to the law.

I don't see the US signing up for any international law program because it 
doesn't benefit. If you take a look at stuff like WTO and NAFTA then that's 
more likely the only international law that will hold any power.

BAL

>From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it in 
>theinterests of US citizens?
>Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 12:23:33 +1000
>
>Good to see you posting again John.
>
>Do you think that international law exists? I do although I think it is 
>farcical at present because not enough people in the US (the world's most 
>powerful nation state) see that it is in their personal selfish interest.  
>If I recall you used to argue that the only laws were scientific ones. 
>Which made me wonder about you views on contract law.
>
>If you do, do you think the development of perhaps some minimal level of 
>international law is in your personal interest?
>
>Brett
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 16 15:25:34 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F12yLkblXzikS00044c45@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040816152534.61297.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Of course, it's virtually impossible to find a small
> team of mad genius 
> coders with a unified vision so I'm still waiting :/

Depends on the vision.  Out of curiosity, what's
yours?


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 16 15:27:39 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:27:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081522343ca38a4e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040816152739.91407.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:46:51 -0700 (PDT), Adrian
> Tymes
> <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > Amusing point: just last week, I completed some
> > contract programming for a startup (so we're not
> > talking billions of dollars), and one of the test
> > conditions for this program was making sure it
> could
> > work with multi-yottabyte disk allocations.
> > 
> > The details of what it was doing with that much
> space
> > are confidential, unfortunately.  
> 
> My guess... you were putting together some trivial
> app for Defense.
> You submitted it on a floppy, but the yottas were
> for the required
> documentation...

Nope.  Private firm (confidentiality enforced by
contract, not by Classified/Secret/Top Secret law),
and the yottas really were for the app itself - sans
documentation - to manage.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 16 15:43:02 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:43:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0408161142530.19632@zeus>
Message-ID: <20040816154302.27661.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> >Amusing point: just last week, I completed some
> >contract programming for a startup (so we're not
> >talking billions of dollars), and one of the test
> >conditions for this program was making sure it
> could
> >work with multi-yottabyte disk allocations.
> 
> Yottabytes? I was told that the dot-com era was over
> :-) Seriously, a
> yottabyte is 10^15 GB (see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_prefix for
> these funny prefixes). I'm pretty sure it's more
> than the total harddisk
> capacity of the entire planet. Sure this company is
> *not* just interested
> in the next quarterly financial statement, but it's
> in for the long run.

Let's just say this system was built to last.  8)

(And, yes, I did have to use simulations for some of
the testing, since we didn't actually have a multi-YB
disk to work with.  My client and I are confident in
the simulations' accuracy.)


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 16 15:51:57 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush
In-Reply-To: <7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <20040816155157.7307.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Bret Kulakovich <bret at bonfireproductions.com> wrote:

> >
> >> Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.
> >>
> 
> The argument at altitude - How does one emerge from such a violent 
> conflict with three purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star,
> ten 
> fingers,  ten toes, both eyes, etc? While possible, certainly, it
> just 
> doesn't seem statistically sound.
> 
> And the policy at the time was 3 purple heart = trip home, wasn't it?

Well, there's always plastic surgery, but not any record of him doing
so. The story so far as vets like myself are concerned is that his CO
told him to volunteer for the trip home so as to cease putting his men
at excessive risk. Now, you could say Kerry was seeking combat and
glory intentionally for his political future, which is actually looked
down upon in military circles.

> 
> I am Bret Kulakovich and I approved this message.

I don't approve of anything Mike Lorrey does or says... - alter

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 16:35:57 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:35:57 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is it
	intheinterests of US citizens?
References: <BAY17-F25eSVEWqzBcw00046055@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <02d401c483af$1ba01d10$852c2dcb@homepc>

Brian Lee wrote:

> .. The problem with international law is that there is no one willing
> to threaten enforcement.

I can't agree with you on that Brian. (I'm talking from memory rather
than giving you specifics so reserve the right to tidy my language if
this argument gets interesting), in the case of the first gulf war on
George H W Bush's watch, the UN Security Council authorised
the use of force to eject Saddam from Kuwait.  International law 
in this case the UN Charter which is sort of a like the constitution
for internation law, not only threatened enforcement, it delivered 
enforcement. 

Speaking loosely again I'm a humanist rationalist atheist - I don't
normally talk in terms like righteous and just war but that one was.
And George H. W Bush got criticised for not exceeding the authority
of the existing UN resolution but in my opinion that restraint was to
his credit as a statesman.  

I think the real problem with international law is that in a world with
only one remaining military super power the temptation to bulldust and
spin gets very high and the citizens of most of the developed western
nations which have an understanding of their own laws and constitutions
(sometimes) don't really have much of an understanding of how the
UN security council works. This is understandable but I think it is
a big part of the problem. If the US citizens had had a better
understanding of the UN Charter I think that George W Bush would
have more domestic pressure and more good advice and he may have
found a better solution to the new post september 11 problem of rouge 
countries having weapons of mass destruction.  He may have IF he
was operating in good faith which I am less confident of now than
I was at the time of Resolution 1441.

> I don't see the US signing up for any international law program 
> because it doesn't benefit. If you take a look at stuff like WTO
> and NAFTA then that's more likely the only international law 
> that will hold any power.

The US was a founder of the UN. It not only signed the UN charter
but it holds (from memory) all the original signatures. The UN Charter
is the document into which (I think from memory) almost all other
international laws bolt in. 

The power behind the UN Security Council is the power of the 5
victorious countries in WW11 that make up the permanent members.
The US, the UK, Russia, China, France. There are 10 other
non permanent security council members that are elected from
time to time. 

Because the UN Charter is mostly aimed at maintaining international
peace and security the security councils powers are limited. Any
one of the permanent 5 can veto and action that the others might
want to take thereby making a resolution unreachable and no lawful
action taken. If you consider the cold war and that China and Russia
were often on different sides of political issues to the US, the UK
and France then it is not so surprising that these 5 often could not
come to agree that certain actions should be resolved to be taken
- often it was one of these five that was causing the problem in the
first place. 

To understand the UN charter its necessary to understand that
none of the permanent 5 could have a UN Resolution passed to
enforce international law upon them because they'd veto it. 

Most lay-folk don't get that.  The whole subject area seems to
esoteric or boring to them. Its not where they live.  Thats unfortunate
because international law, its development and existence is the
best hope for the future of just about all of them.  Without it I
think the free market may produce an Orwellian future.  

I don't think transhumanist causes have a hope without international
law. (I should be honest here and say I don't think a lot of transhumanist
causes have much prospect anyway). Conflicts will distract too much 
of the attention.  Terror (that which is real and that which is contrived
by domestic politicians for their political advantage) will not give hope
a chance. 

Regards,
Brett Paatsch



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 16 17:03:37 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:03:37 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
Message-ID: <BAY17-F4dNno76joHck000472bf@hotmail.com>

Of course, the vision must be of something sound. Right now, I just have the 
procedural/management/organization vision, I'm lacking the idea for the 
successful software and/or business. That's the tough part :/

Right now, it's tread water doing traditional software architecture in a 
large corp (think layers of RUP and "gates" and documentation, etc) until I 
have something that I can start on my own (or with another core group).

BAL

>From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
>Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Of course, it's virtually impossible to find a small
> > team of mad genius
> > coders with a unified vision so I'm still waiting :/
>
>Depends on the vision.  Out of curiosity, what's
>yours?
>_______________________________________________
>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  Mon Aug 16 17:11:13 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:11:13 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is
	itintheinterests of US citizens?
Message-ID: <BAY17-F4jNgh5hILpdQ000473e7@hotmail.com>

While at the time of founding, the 5 permanent members of the UN security 
council represented the major military powers of the war, now only the US is 
a major military superpower. As such, it's really the only country that 
really matters when it comes to international law (in that the US will 
invade someone if they think they are "evil" enough).

The UN Security council has no power in and of itself because if it passed a 
resolution banning something, there is no one to enforce the resolution. 
This doesn't even take into account what happens when the council disagrees 
(like what happened in Iraq).

So there is really no "international law", just some suggestions.

In order for international law to exist, countries must defer to some 
authority (and I don't see the US doing this any time soon).

As far as power, the UN is really just a forum for discussion, etc. It's 
most effective at fund raising and humanitarian efforts.

I think that transhumans will be better off gathering in specific 
sympathetic countries, or forming their own (a la Greg Egan's "Distress") 
rather than hoping that major powers will give up their hopes for hegemony 
(don't see the US or China or Brazil bowing to the UN any time soon).

Plus, a lot of transhumanist issues can be resolved "off the radar" or 
within current rulesets and can be moved from country to country should laws 
become unfavorable.

BAL

>From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is 
>itintheinterests of US citizens?
>Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 02:35:57 +1000
>
>Brian Lee wrote:
>
> > .. The problem with international law is that there is no one willing
> > to threaten enforcement.
>
>I can't agree with you on that Brian. (I'm talking from memory rather
>than giving you specifics so reserve the right to tidy my language if
>this argument gets interesting), in the case of the first gulf war on
>George H W Bush's watch, the UN Security Council authorised
>the use of force to eject Saddam from Kuwait.  International law
>in this case the UN Charter which is sort of a like the constitution
>for internation law, not only threatened enforcement, it delivered
>enforcement.
>
>Speaking loosely again I'm a humanist rationalist atheist - I don't
>normally talk in terms like righteous and just war but that one was.
>And George H. W Bush got criticised for not exceeding the authority
>of the existing UN resolution but in my opinion that restraint was to
>his credit as a statesman.
>
>I think the real problem with international law is that in a world with
>only one remaining military super power the temptation to bulldust and
>spin gets very high and the citizens of most of the developed western
>nations which have an understanding of their own laws and constitutions
>(sometimes) don't really have much of an understanding of how the
>UN security council works. This is understandable but I think it is
>a big part of the problem. If the US citizens had had a better
>understanding of the UN Charter I think that George W Bush would
>have more domestic pressure and more good advice and he may have
>found a better solution to the new post september 11 problem of rouge
>countries having weapons of mass destruction.  He may have IF he
>was operating in good faith which I am less confident of now than
>I was at the time of Resolution 1441.
>
> > I don't see the US signing up for any international law program
> > because it doesn't benefit. If you take a look at stuff like WTO
> > and NAFTA then that's more likely the only international law
> > that will hold any power.
>
>The US was a founder of the UN. It not only signed the UN charter
>but it holds (from memory) all the original signatures. The UN Charter
>is the document into which (I think from memory) almost all other
>international laws bolt in.
>
>The power behind the UN Security Council is the power of the 5
>victorious countries in WW11 that make up the permanent members.
>The US, the UK, Russia, China, France. There are 10 other
>non permanent security council members that are elected from
>time to time.
>
>Because the UN Charter is mostly aimed at maintaining international
>peace and security the security councils powers are limited. Any
>one of the permanent 5 can veto and action that the others might
>want to take thereby making a resolution unreachable and no lawful
>action taken. If you consider the cold war and that China and Russia
>were often on different sides of political issues to the US, the UK
>and France then it is not so surprising that these 5 often could not
>come to agree that certain actions should be resolved to be taken
>- often it was one of these five that was causing the problem in the
>first place.
>
>To understand the UN charter its necessary to understand that
>none of the permanent 5 could have a UN Resolution passed to
>enforce international law upon them because they'd veto it.
>
>Most lay-folk don't get that.  The whole subject area seems to
>esoteric or boring to them. Its not where they live.  Thats unfortunate
>because international law, its development and existence is the
>best hope for the future of just about all of them.  Without it I
>think the free market may produce an Orwellian future.
>
>I don't think transhumanist causes have a hope without international
>law. (I should be honest here and say I don't think a lot of transhumanist
>causes have much prospect anyway). Conflicts will distract too much
>of the attention.  Terror (that which is real and that which is contrived
>by domestic politicians for their political advantage) will not give hope
>a chance.
>
>Regards,
>Brett Paatsch
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Mon Aug 16 18:14:08 2004
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 14:14:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
In-Reply-To: <007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc>
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
	<7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
	<007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>



Since yesterday there has been back-and-forth on Slashdot.org about the  
Singularity.

Some nice points are made, but from a Sociological standpoint it an  
interesting slice of humanity to observe the reaction of.
Just thought ppl might want to catch it. Slow news day, as they say.

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/15/ 
1642243&tid=214&tid=192&tid=14&tid=6

]3



From dwish at indco.net  Mon Aug 16 18:18:31 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:18:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than Bush
In-Reply-To: <20040816155157.7307.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200408161728.i7GHSbS9012624@br549.indconet.com>

Here is what Bill O'Reilly said about the matter which is a pretty good
point I guess:

Wrong to attack Kerry war record 
By Bill O'Reilly 

The partisans are running wild over this Swift boat business, talk radio is
crazy with it, and the smell of blood is in the air. John Kerry has made a
major deal of his Vietnam War record, and now his opponents have opened fire
on the senator's experiences. 
It's all tawdry and distasteful, of course, but let's examine things
unemotionally.

First off, I believe Jim Rassmann when he says that Kerry saved his life by
pulling him out of a Vietnam river while under fire. Rassmann is a former
Green Beret, a former police officer and a longtime registered Republican
until earlier this year. If he says John Kerry is a hero, nobody should
doubt it. Rassmann has earned the right to be trusted, and insulting his
testimony is way out of line.

But I also believe Steve Gardner, a former Navy gunner who was also present
on one of Kerry's Swift boats. He says the senator wrote up a false report,
neglecting to inform the Navy that Gardner had accidentally shot a
Vietnamese child during a firefight. This is a tough one. Gardner is
implicating himself and has no reason to do so. But perhaps Kerry was
looking out for him by not reporting the incident. Only Kerry knows.

It is very possible to perform heroically on some occasions and do less than
admirable things on others. All human beings are flawed, and we are capable
of both valor and deceit. That's what I think happened here. John Kerry was
brave but he was also calculating. His heroism impressed most of his Swift
boat mates, but his civilian anti-war activities and perceived grandstanding
also alienated many other Vietnam vets. And so the battle lines are drawn.

What should we on the sidelines make of all this? Well, it's a judgment
call. It is absolutely wrong for Americans to condemn Kerry's war record
because he demonstrated provable valor. However, those who distrust him do
deserve to be heard, although facts, not emotion, should be demanded.

I think the Swift boat political advertisement calling Kerry a charlatan is
in poor taste, and if this kind of thing continues, it might well backfire
on the Kerry haters. Most Americans are fair-minded, and bitter personal
attacks do not go down well with folks who are not driven by partisanship. 

Remember, Gen. Wesley Clark was knocked out of the presidential sweepstakes
when he would not disown Michael Moore's insane remark that President Bush
was a "deserter." Bush received an honorable discharge from the National
Guard. 

Adm. Elmo Zumwalt pinned a medal on John Kerry's chest. The record is the
record unless rock-solid proof refutes it.

The lesson here is that blind partisanship is not an attribute. No person or
candidate is all good or all bad. In America today, with both sides peddling
lies and defamation and spin, it is alarmingly difficult just to get simple
facts on which to base a responsible vote.

Somewhere Jack Webb is weeping. 

Originally published on August 16, 2004 
 
 


Dustin Wish
System Engineer & Programmer
INDCO Networks
Pres. OSSRI
Pres. WTA Arkansas
********************************************************
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead
 where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
***********************************************

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 10:52 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Why Kerry is -still- a better choice than
Bush


--- Bret Kulakovich <bret at bonfireproductions.com> wrote:

> >
> >> Kerry's war record is certainly more heroic than Bush's.
> >>
> 
> The argument at altitude - How does one emerge from such a violent 
> conflict with three purple hearts, a bronze star and a silver star,
> ten 
> fingers,  ten toes, both eyes, etc? While possible, certainly, it
> just 
> doesn't seem statistically sound.
> 
> And the policy at the time was 3 purple heart = trip home, wasn't it?

Well, there's always plastic surgery, but not any record of him doing
so. The story so far as vets like myself are concerned is that his CO
told him to volunteer for the trip home so as to cease putting his men
at excessive risk. Now, you could say Kerry was seeking combat and
glory intentionally for his political future, which is actually looked
down upon in military circles.

> 
> I am Bret Kulakovich and I approved this message.

I don't approve of anything Mike Lorrey does or says... - alter

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 18:28:53 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:28:53 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and
	isitintheinterests of US citizens?
References: <BAY17-F4jNgh5hILpdQ000473e7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <02f201c483be$e25a4c50$852c2dcb@homepc>

> While at the time of founding, the 5 permanent members of
> the UN security council represented the major military powers
> of the war, now only the US is a major military superpower.

Yes, for now.

> As such, it's really the only country that really matters when it
> comes to international law (in that the US will  invade someone
> if they think they are "evil" enough).

Even in the US, the decision to invade vests in one person. The
commander in chief. The president. George W Bush is the person
responsible for the US invasion of Iraq.  It was his personal call.

There are a lot of international-law respecting folk within the US.

International law has a professional competent following because
it matters for trade as well as for peace and security.

I think that it is largely because there are many decent law-abiding
folk who do understand international law, even in its limited form,
such as it is within the US that there has been such a backlash
against Bush's decision to invade Iraq illegally.

When the President and an administration puts aside international
law which it has ratified that is every bit as real as if it put aside
domestic law in terms of the unease it creates in the minds of
citizens who get what has happened. An administration that sees
international law as a mere detail to be dispensed with can, especially
if the outrage is not great enough, also start to mess with laws at
home. The US has had one civil war in its history - another is not out
of the question.  If the rule of law is pushed aside too much you will
likely see domestic terrorism ala the Oklahoma bomber. US citizens
are nothing if not armed and technologically capable given appropriate
incentive.  Hitler provides crude but obvious object lessons in how
surprisingly easy it can be turn relatively modern societies inside out
with the use of propaganda and fear.

> The UN Security council has no power in and of itself because
> if it passed a resolution banning something, there is no one to
> enforce the resolution.

Here I think we do need to drill down a bit to stay accurate. The UN
General Assembly might vote to ban something like say human cloning
but that would not be legal binding it would only be politically
persuasive on member nations. China for instance could (if it wanted to
politically and that would depend on economics) say that therapeutic
or even reproductive cloning is a domestic matter and that the UN
Charter has no authority in domestic laws (unless China signs onto a
treaty and placed that treaties determination under the jurisdiction of
the International Court of Justice and so they'd say validly (lawfully)
that the UN General Assemblies suggestion was noted but declined.

If the 5 permanent security council members could agree on a
resolution then that means that the US, the UK, France, China and
Russia's heads of state have agreed. In that situation the heads of
states of any of those players could provide armed forces under
a UN flag. There is also a mechanism for them (if they agree) to
require other countries to provide armed forces. (That this doesn't
happen is because any one of the big 5 who didn't want it to
could stop it by vetoing the resolution needed to make something
happen that they didn't want to have to act on domestically because
they couldn't sell it domestically.

But make no mistake if the security council decided to word a
resolution say "banning" Saddam Hussein from continuing to occupy
Iraq (that's labouring the language but not excessively I don't think)
then they could do - and did they just didn't use the word ban.

> This doesn't even take into account what happens when the
> council disagrees  (like what happened in Iraq).

Resolution 1441 was agreed by all 15. But (keeping this simple)
it needed another resolution to authorise force that the US and
the UK couldn't get from France, China and Russia.

It was because the matter was in the hands of the security council
(it was because the US placed it there) that the US had legally
removed from itself the option of acting unilaterally against Iraq.

That was when international law got broken. Never before (to
my knowledge) had a security council resolution been broken
after the security council became seized of the matter. That was
the point at which Bush took the world into the shit and made
the UN a farce.  That was why the French and Russians and
Chinese objected so much afterwards. The US (Bush) essentially
thumbed their nose at the security council in a way that had
never been done before after placing the matter in the hands of
the security council.  They wanted another resolution authorising
force but were not able to get it on terms Bush would accept.

> So there is really no "international law", just some suggestions.

Its actually worse than that - there is international law - Bush would
never deny that - international  trade depends on it, its just that to
use an analogy their is a corrupt judge (or two if you include Blair)
on the five person panel that is the Supreme Court and there is
not way for the other judges to remove them. So the other judges
know that international law is conspicuous farce now and they
don't trust Bush because they see him as corrupt and diplomatically
reckless and unpredicable. They know Bush is a lawbreaker of
the worst possible kind because he can't be held to account
except by the US people who alone can remove him.

So long as Bush is President of the US the heads of state of
the other member countries know that international law is corrupt.
They choose to wait out Bush (who can't go more than 4 more
years anyway because the alternative dissolving the UN (which
logically they should do) would leave them without the illusion of
power they currently have. If this UN was wrapped up there would
have to be another at some stage and France knows it would not
likely get to be one of the big 5 again. Germany or Japan might
displace it. Similarly China and Russia don't want to lose the ability
to use the now corrupt UN as a tool of public relations
propaganda.

The UN is broke yes. The US broke it. It continues on only as
a farce whilst Bush is president. Whilst Bush is president other
countries may evy American military power but the model of the
super power they are looking at is just the old might is right one.

Their is nothing morally superior in the US over China whilst Bush
is president. Structurally the US can heal itself more easily though
because Bush can only stay president for another four years unless
the US constitution changes. That won't happen - Bush is too
dumb to be Hitler.

> In order for international law to exist, countries must defer to some
> authority (and I don't see the US doing this any time soon).
>
> As far as power, the UN is really just a forum for discussion, etc. It's
> most effective at fund raising and humanitarian efforts.

Everything the UN did was secondary to its chapter 1 Purposes and
Principles which were to maintain international peace and security.

The other stuff was merely icing on the cake so long as the security
council's integrity of structure held. Its integrity of structure is gone.
The rest is now logical bullshit quite frankly. Its like a house of
cards waiting to fall over. If Bush is replaced perhaps the key "card"
can be inserted into the logical house of cards before the whole house
of topples of its logical inconsistencies, but there is no guarantee of
that.

> I think that transhumans will be better off gathering in specific
> sympathetic countries, or forming their own (a la Greg Egan's
> "Distress") rather than hoping that major powers will give up their
> hopes for hegemony (don't see the US or China or Brazil bowing
> to the UN any time soon).

Major powers don't have a consciousness of course. They have heads
of state, they have citizens but there is not such thing as a unitary single
desire in such a thing as a nation state.  Nation states (major powers)
no more have desires than say evolution has a desires.

I don't know about Egan's Distress but I suspect its science fiction.

I'd be interested in hearing good ideas about finding creative space
for new civilizations. I once posted on the principles of founding
a virtual country myself. So far as I know no more practical model
have ever been proposed - but I am biased.

> Plus, a lot of transhumanist issues can be resolved "off the radar"
> or within current rulesets and can be moved from country to country
> should laws become unfavorable.

We could be talking past each other here. I'm not sure what
transhumanist issues you have in mind.

----
Brett Paatsch




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 16 18:37:50 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:37:50 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist and is
	itintheinterests of US citizens?
References: <BAY17-F4jNgh5hILpdQ000473e7@hotmail.com>
	<02f201c483be$e25a4c50$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <02fe01c483c0$224a2320$852c2dcb@homepc>

Correction instead of   Iraq   below I should have said Kuwait.
 
> But make no mistake if the security council decided to word a
> resolution say "banning" Saddam Hussein from continuing to occupy
> Iraq (that's labouring the language but not excessively I don't think)
> then they could do - and did they just didn't use the word ban.

Brett Paatsch


From charlie at antipope.org  Mon Aug 16 18:40:17 2004
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 19:40:17 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
In-Reply-To: <10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
	<7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
	<007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <B82EF3C7-EFB3-11D8-9ACD-000D9328A216@antipope.org>


On 16 Aug 2004, at 19:14, Bret Kulakovich wrote:
>
> Since yesterday there has been back-and-forth on Slashdot.org about 
> the Singularity.
>
> Some nice points are made, but from a Sociological standpoint it an 
> interesting slice of humanity to observe the reaction of.

As long as you bear in mind that slashdot's readership are Not Typical 
of the rest of humanity -- they're a self-selected bunch of geeks, and 
the ones who post are *vocal* geeks.


-- Charlie



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 16 19:01:31 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:01:31 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist andisitintheinterests
	of US citizens?
Message-ID: <BAY17-F8mIwoFhAPxQP0004834d@hotmail.com>

>From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
>To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Does international law exist 
>andisitintheinterests of US citizens?
>Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:28:53 +1000
>
>Even in the US, the decision to invade vests in one person. The
>commander in chief. The president. George W Bush is the person
>responsible for the US invasion of Iraq.  It was his personal call.

I think US law allows the president 60-90 days to deploy troops without 
congressional approval, but it wasn't used in this case. I think both the 
Senate and House authorized troops in Iraq, so saying that it was a 
"personal" call by Bush is simplistic at the least. He wasn't acting as a 
rouge president and abusing his powers.

The UN charter does not make resolutions binding, so all 15 members could 
vote and pass a resolution to invade or whatever and unless members then 
execute it, it is meaningless. Thus the problem with the UN.

If you want real, international law (aside from trade agreements which are 
the only functioning international laws) then form a new authoratative 
power. Personally, I'm just waiting for the EU to expand all over the world.

I don't think any former president was willing to accede US sovereignty to 
the UN nor will any near-term future president. Kerry is against the ICC as 
far as I know.

For international law to grow, it needs to expand from WTO-like orgs where 
members must pass local legislation to enforce the princples of the 
treaties. As scary as it is, the recent DMCAish legislation in Australia is 
an example of functioning international law. So now the US and Australia 
have similar copyright laws that can be enforced and prosecuted in both 
countries.

BAL




From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Mon Aug 16 20:57:06 2004
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:57:06 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
In-Reply-To: <B82EF3C7-EFB3-11D8-9ACD-000D9328A216@antipope.org>
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
	<7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
	<007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
	<B82EF3C7-EFB3-11D8-9ACD-000D9328A216@antipope.org>
Message-ID: <D4EFEDA0-EFC6-11D8-B318-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>


Yes of course: this is like having a (-this list -pop consensus 
+technically adept +sci fi reading) filter, versus a - + + - for say 
cnn.com, or a - + - - from say, Fox News.

Something we may not hear from on the topic(s) often, but know they are 
savvy.


On Aug 16, 2004, at 2:40 PM, Charlie Stross wrote:

>
> On 16 Aug 2004, at 19:14, Bret Kulakovich wrote:
>>
>> Since yesterday there has been back-and-forth on Slashdot.org about 
>> the Singularity.
>>
>> Some nice points are made, but from a Sociological standpoint it an 
>> interesting slice of humanity to observe the reaction of.
>
> As long as you bear in mind that slashdot's readership are Not Typical 
> of the rest of humanity -- they're a self-selected bunch of geeks, and 
> the ones who post are *vocal* geeks.
>
>
> -- Charlie
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Aug 16 23:39:46 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:39:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] a review url'd
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040816183700.01d7f6a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Not quite on topic, but hey. :)

http://www.thealienonline.net/ao_030.asp?tid=2&scid=21&iid=2503

is a review by Dr. Adam Roberts, a newish and excellent British sf writer 
and critic, of my latest book, *x, y, z, t*, along with a thumbnail of the 
now-familiar beautiful cover art by extrope Anders Sandberg (who seems to 
have vanished, alas, from our midst).

Damien Broderick




From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug 17 00:02:15 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 09:32:15 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F4dNno76joHck000472bf@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY17-F4dNno76joHck000472bf@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081617026dbcde46@mail.gmail.com>

I think there are a million things you could build right now and that
people would find useful, and some relatively large subset of these
would be commercialisable. The 'net, for instance, is still a fabulous
rambling mess of stuff where everything that is hard to do or hard to
understand or hard to use for people can be seen as an opportunity.

You can see my recent ideas in my blog, poorly expressed as they are
(mostly I have to squeeze them out of my head into the blog so they
quit bugging me and I can think about something else).

btw, it is also my contention that most ideas for doing things can be
safely blurted out in public fora / blogs. Any ideas worth pursuing
take enough work that people wont normally steal them, in fact they
think the idea is crap (I can't see that...) until it is made
concrete. Ideas aren't something people want to grab, you usually have
to ram them down people's throats.

Emlyn

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:03:37 -0400, Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Of course, the vision must be of something sound. Right now, I just have the
> procedural/management/organization vision, I'm lacking the idea for the
> successful software and/or business. That's the tough part :/
> 
> Right now, it's tread water doing traditional software architecture in a
> large corp (think layers of RUP and "gates" and documentation, etc) until I
> have something that I can start on my own (or with another core group).
> 
> BAL
> 
> >From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
> >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
> >Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
> 
> 
> >
> >--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Of course, it's virtually impossible to find a small
> > > team of mad genius
> > > coders with a unified vision so I'm still waiting :/
> >
> >Depends on the vision.  Out of curiosity, what's
> >yours?
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 17 03:05:05 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:05:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
References: <BAY17-F4dNno76joHck000472bf@hotmail.com>
	<710b78fc04081617026dbcde46@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV22lsp3jm9D6000211c7@hotmail.com>

Whatever you do, if you have a good idea, follow up on it, or you will be
kicking yourself in the arse the rest of your life. I designed a device in
1996 where a computer touch screen could be mounted to a headstone and a
person could leave messages for loved ones (or hated ones). It was all on
papaer,. but I never built it. I lacked the funds, and many of t he
technologies needed such as MPEG video just were in their infancy. SO I just
sat on it. Just last month, someone patented one. My family won;t let it go
since I used to talk about it all the time. Now every time I show up at a
family function, they give me a hard time about it.

If you think you have something worth doing, and someone else isn;t doing
it, you probably have something. Don't sit on it.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Emlyn" <emlynoregan at gmail.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped


> I think there are a million things you could build right now and that
> people would find useful, and some relatively large subset of these
> would be commercialisable. The 'net, for instance, is still a fabulous
> rambling mess of stuff where everything that is hard to do or hard to
> understand or hard to use for people can be seen as an opportunity.
>
> You can see my recent ideas in my blog, poorly expressed as they are
> (mostly I have to squeeze them out of my head into the blog so they
> quit bugging me and I can think about something else).
>
> btw, it is also my contention that most ideas for doing things can be
> safely blurted out in public fora / blogs. Any ideas worth pursuing
> take enough work that people wont normally steal them, in fact they
> think the idea is crap (I can't see that...) until it is made
> concrete. Ideas aren't something people want to grab, you usually have
> to ram them down people's throats.
>
> Emlyn
>
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:03:37 -0400, Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com>
wrote:
> > Of course, the vision must be of something sound. Right now, I just have
the
> > procedural/management/organization vision, I'm lacking the idea for the
> > successful software and/or business. That's the tough part :/
> >
> > Right now, it's tread water doing traditional software architecture in a
> > large corp (think layers of RUP and "gates" and documentation, etc)
until I
> > have something that I can start on my own (or with another core group).
> >
> > BAL
> >
> > >From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
> > >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
> > >Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 08:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >
> > >
> > >--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Of course, it's virtually impossible to find a small
> > > > team of mad genius
> > > > coders with a unified vision so I'm still waiting :/
> > >
> > >Depends on the vision.  Out of curiosity, what's
> > >yours?
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
>
>
> -- 
> Emlyn
>
> http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Aug 17 03:48:16 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081617026dbcde46@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040817034816.17716.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there are a million things you could build
> right now and that
> people would find useful, and some relatively large
> subset of these
> would be commercialisable. The 'net, for instance,
> is still a fabulous
> rambling mess of stuff where everything that is hard
> to do or hard to
> understand or hard to use for people can be seen as
> an opportunity.

More of an advantage, at least from my view, is the
fact that if you can conceive of it and it's simple
enough, someone else has probably done it - but now
you can find that other person, or at least stories
about why they failed if it's actually non-viable.
(There are rare occasions when what you're doing truly
is unique.  And in those cases, you're less likely to
face competition, at least until you can commercialize
and recover investment - if you move fast enough.)

> btw, it is also my contention that most ideas for
> doing things can be
> safely blurted out in public fora / blogs. Any ideas
> worth pursuing
> take enough work that people wont normally steal
> them, in fact they
> think the idea is crap (I can't see that...) until
> it is made
> concrete. Ideas aren't something people want to
> grab, you usually have
> to ram them down people's throats.

And besides, for most ideas really worth doing, our
own lives are enriched even if someone else rips them
off and successfully implements them.  For instance,
say I suddenly realized a simple, safe, cheap, and
reliable way to upload people that could be done with
today's technology, and I bounced it off people, one
of whom went ahead and did it without telling me while
I was still bouncing it around.  Net result: it
becomes possible for people like me to upload.  Yes, I
don't collect the corresponding fortune...but I and
those I care about could have immortality (or, at
least, rid ourselves of most of the age-related causes
of death) if we choose.  I'd still win, right along
with most of the human race.

That said, you do have to look out for yourself.  But
making the world better can, sometimes, bring us far
more material rewards than going after the material
rewards themselves.  Sometimes.


From steve at multisell.com  Tue Aug 17 03:51:33 2004
From: steve at multisell.com (Steve Nichols)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:51:33 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Truth-speaking MVT machines & Primal hYpnosis
Message-ID: <001c01c4840d$8ed93f60$eac12ad9@stevo>

A few thoughts on implementation of MVT-based conscious machines. 
By their nature, sentient machines must have self-volition, and would
not be amenable to 
programming from external sources. But there needs to be some sort of
purpose/ structure 
in the design for them to do anything useful at all, let alone to excel
and out-perform humans & 
conventional nets and von Neumann AI machines. 
I think we need to use reconfigurable circuits, probably hybrid systems
with connectionist glue, with 
a directive for "truth-telling." The MVT process would make the machines
self-referential, copying 
the evolutionary process that occurred in organisms that lost the primal
eye in order to be able 
to reset their clocks internally in a soft manner rather than hard/
environmentally governed (see my various papers on this). 
We (on posthuman at yahoogroups.com list) have strong background in neural
computing as well as chip semantics, but welcome input from any in the
trans/ post-human firmament who would like to assist with this ongoing
project. 
I am pleased also to report some progress with the new Primal Hypnosis
induction techniques ... 
The geo-political world seems full of uncertainty at present because of
the influence of primitive 
supernaturalism and conflict between (those perpetuating) various
delusional and inadequate legacy systems. 
I think we need Truth-speaking machines sooner rather than later. We
have been in transitional limbo since the 
start of the Industrial Revolution .. far too long already .. let's help
bring about the switch to posthuman TODAY and not interminably tomorrow
. 
Steve (& Maita . just married!) 
http://www.multi.co.uk/identity.htm
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040817/643126e5/attachment.html>

From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug 17 04:57:22 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:27:22 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <20040817034816.17716.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040817034816.17716.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040816215754b7d2a1@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 20:48:16 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think there are a million things you could build
> > right now and that
> > people would find useful, and some relatively large
> > subset of these
> > would be commercialisable. The 'net, for instance,
> > is still a fabulous
> > rambling mess of stuff where everything that is hard
> > to do or hard to
> > understand or hard to use for people can be seen as
> > an opportunity.
> 
> More of an advantage, at least from my view, is the
> fact that if you can conceive of it and it's simple
> enough, someone else has probably done it - but now
> you can find that other person, or at least stories
> about why they failed if it's actually non-viable.
> (There are rare occasions when what you're doing truly
> is unique.  And in those cases, you're less likely to
> face competition, at least until you can commercialize
> and recover investment - if you move fast enough.)

Yes yes yes! I totally agree with this. Most of my best ideas are
really things I need myself. When it turns out they already exist,
there's one less mighty task that I need to undertake.

> 
> > btw, it is also my contention that most ideas for
> > doing things can be
> > safely blurted out in public fora / blogs. Any ideas
> > worth pursuing
> > take enough work that people wont normally steal
> > them, in fact they
> > think the idea is crap (I can't see that...) until
> > it is made
> > concrete. Ideas aren't something people want to
> > grab, you usually have
> > to ram them down people's throats.
> 
> And besides, for most ideas really worth doing, our
> own lives are enriched even if someone else rips them
> off and successfully implements them.  

Yes! That's the other major reason that I blog my ideas, because it'd
be really cool if someone would "steal" them (hey, they are freely
given)  & implement them. Pleeeese!

> For instance,
> say I suddenly realized a simple, safe, cheap, and
> reliable way to upload people that could be done with
> today's technology, and I bounced it off people, one
> of whom went ahead and did it without telling me while
> I was still bouncing it around.  Net result: it
> becomes possible for people like me to upload.  Yes, I
> don't collect the corresponding fortune...but I and
> those I care about could have immortality (or, at
> least, rid ourselves of most of the age-related causes
> of death) if we choose.  I'd still win, right along
> with most of the human race.

Right on.

> 
> That said, you do have to look out for yourself. 

Even I don't blog *all* of my ideas... :-D

> But
> making the world better can, sometimes, bring us far
> more material rewards than going after the material
> rewards themselves.  Sometimes.

You have to do *something* yourself. But I find (no idea what other
people's experience is) that I have vastly more ideas than I have the
ability to implement. eg: if I have a couple of usable ideas per week,
but each one takes at least a few months on average to implement. Some
require vast teams & fortunes, or established networks. Some are just
plain evil (eg: my idea of putting self-checkout machines in
supermarkets that give out prizes occassionally (cash if possible,
even if its just a "gift voucher" for the store), basically poker
machines). By far the majority of those ideas are just pouring down
the plug hole.

Finding something to do myself is never a problem, it's the job of
choosing between them that's difficult. And I can't afford most of my
own time, which sucks.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Aug 17 05:47:38 2004
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:47:38 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
Message-ID: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

New government data also shows that President Bush's tax cuts have shifted
the overall tax burden to the middle class from the wealthiest Americans.:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/APWires/headlines/D84GNDMG1.html

Olga








From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 17 06:28:41 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:28:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV22lsp3jm9D6000211c7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <001e01c48423$70f28400$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Kevin Freels
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
> 
> Whatever you do, if you have a good idea, follow up on it... I 
> designed a device in 1996 where a computer touch screen could be
mounted to a 
> headstone and a person could leave messages for loved ones (or hated
ones)...

Kevin do not despair, there are *plenty* of variations on
that theme that are not patented.  That particular idea is
so obvious it isn't much value.  Figure out a way that
someone could set up a virtual presence on one's chat group
after one perishes, something that emulates one's writing style,
political position, sense of humor etc, then generates
messages from that person from beyond.  Imagine a poster on 
extropians who is suspected of leaning slightly to the right 
politically (it isn't hard to do).  Suppose that person met 
with an untimely end (evolution forbid).  Then whenever a 
left-leaning politician is elected, the script could 
generate bitter messages from the deceased.  Or say things 
like "Im rolling over in my grave down here.  Or rather I 
would be if I had one.  Im rolling over in my dewar.  Hey, 
how are you nanotech proles coming along? Do hurry, its 
cold in here..."  That kinda stuff.  It would be a hoot.  spike  



From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 17 06:53:50 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:53:50 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Olga Bourlin
> Tax Burden Gap
> 
> 
> New government data also shows that President Bush's tax cuts 
> have shifted the overall tax burden to the middle class from the 
> wealthiest Americans.:
> 
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/APWires/headlines/D84GNDMG1.html

Olga

Quote from the article about a family that is on
hard times:

	So the family budget tightened. That meant fewer cable channels,
more meals at 	home, postponed doctor appointments, missed vacations,
delayed credit card 	payments, all to "keep the wolf away from the
door," she said.

Oh god no!  Not fewer cable channels!  Mercy, anything but that!

I am trying to imagine explaining to my late grandparents 
that life is now so hard that I am forced to eat meals 
at home and can afford only 70 cable channels.  If I
postpone doctor appointments, their level of medical care
was so poor that such a delay was a blessing.  If I miss
a vacation or two, they seldom took one.  Delay credit card
payments?  They didn't even have credit cards, and no one
is forcing me to get them today.  Any wolf that showed up at 
their door would be in grave danger of meeting face to face 
with Mr. Twelve Gage.

Lets get some perspective.  Some will always be way richer than
others, that isn't going away.  But today our poor have hamburger 
and TVs.  Modern poor people face far greater danger from obesity 
and alcoholism than from starvation and disease.  That's progress, 
is it not?  OK bad example.  But let us measure our success or 
failure by comparing our lives to those of our ancestors.  
Better or worse?

s







From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Aug 17 07:25:27 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040816215754b7d2a1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040817072527.40693.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes! That's the other major reason that I blog my
> ideas, because it'd
> be really cool if someone would "steal" them (hey,
> they are freely
> given)  & implement them. Pleeeese!

Good example: I'm currently working on a theoretical
way to tap zero-point energy.  I emphasize
"theoretical" because the academics who've reviewed it
can't find any reason why it wouldn't work, but are
reluctant to say it would since the result is close to
perpetual motion.  (It actually does have an energy
source it's converting into motion, just one that no
one's been able to tap before, and which appears to
happen to be all around us.  So it would technically
not break the laws of thermodynamics, despite
appearing to...if the theory proves correct, of
course.)  I've got the IP protections in place, but
I've only got 'til March to provide a working example
or release it to the public domain.

If I can make it work, my course is obvious.  If I
can't...well, maybe someone else can follow my course
and find what I missed.  (Or find out why the theory
doesn't work.)  Until then, it's a science experiment
that might or might not produce interesting results,
depending on information it's intended to ferret out.

It's been an interesting project, since one needs good
understanding of quantum mechanics to know why it
might work, and good understanding of nanolithography
to understand how it can be manufactured.  I've been
working with the Stanford Nanofabrication Facility on
the latter; unfortunately, the equipment I need has
been offline for over a month now, and I suspect it
won't get fixed in the next few days.  (I might be
willing to bounce a more detailed version of the
theory off anyone who knows QM, if you're interested -
but please *DON'T* ask unless/until you know all about
the Casimir force and what produces it.  Otherwise,
you won't be able to give useful input, and you'll
have to rely on my possibly mistaken impressions to
understand the field being discussed.  If anyone knows
both QM and nanolithography...tell me, so I can
convince myself I'm not the only one. ;) )

But the moral: even something like this, with obvious
potential for riches (again, if it works)...if I had
to choose between being ripped off or never seeing it
implemented, my choice is clear.  I had to keep
reminding myself of that, to convince myself to seek
academic review.  If I hadn't, I never would have seen
certain flaws in my initial idea that would, in fact,
have stopped it from working even if the basic theory
were correct.

> You have to do *something* yourself. But I find (no
> idea what other
> people's experience is) that I have vastly more
> ideas than I have the
> ability to implement.

*nods*  Example: I've got investments in one of the
start-up low-cost reusable rocket ventures most of us
have heard of, and ideas for what I'd like to do once
they succeed...but for the moment, I'm content to wait
for that time, knowing there isn't much I could do
right now to speed it up, while I do something else to
pay the bills.


From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Aug 17 07:47:14 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:47:14 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] a review url'd
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040816183700.01d7f6a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040816183700.01d7f6a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0408170047201a4375@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:39:46 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:
> Not quite on topic, but hey. :)
> 
> http://www.thealienonline.net/ao_030.asp?tid=2&scid=21&iid=2503
> 
> is a review by Dr. Adam Roberts, a newish and excellent British sf writer
> and critic, of my latest book, *x, y, z, t*, along with a thumbnail of the
> now-familiar beautiful cover art by extrope Anders Sandberg (who seems to
> have vanished, alas, from our midst).
> 

What do you mean 'Not quite on topic'?
It is permissable to have a few posts that are not about Bush or
Kerry, isn't it????  ;)

BillK


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug 17 08:02:18 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:32:18 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] a review url'd
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0408170047201a4375@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040816183700.01d7f6a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<ee50357e0408170047201a4375@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081701025647d1a3@mail.gmail.com>

Good review there Damien, congratulations! 

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 08:47:14 +0100, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 18:39:46 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:
> > Not quite on topic, but hey. :)
> >
> > http://www.thealienonline.net/ao_030.asp?tid=2&scid=21&iid=2503
> >
> > is a review by Dr. Adam Roberts, a newish and excellent British sf writer
> > and critic, of my latest book, *x, y, z, t*, along with a thumbnail of the
> > now-familiar beautiful cover art by extrope Anders Sandberg (who seems to
> > have vanished, alas, from our midst).
> >
> 
> What do you mean 'Not quite on topic'?
> It is permissable to have a few posts that are not about Bush or
> Kerry, isn't it????  ;)
> 
> BillK
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug 17 09:35:50 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:05:50 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs (except the really
	big ones)
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081702354ea3c1e3@mail.gmail.com>

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/17/business/17auto.html?th

Safety Gap Grows Wider Between S.U.V.'s and Cars

DETROIT, Aug. 16 - The gap in safety between sport utility vehicles
and passenger cars last year was the widest yet recorded, according to
new federal traffic data.

People driving or riding in a sport utility vehicle in 2003 were
nearly 11 percent more likely to die in an accident than people in
cars, the figures show. The government began keeping detailed
statistics on the safety of vehicle categories in 1994.

(etc... see the second page though that says large SUVs are safer than
medium sized passenger cars or medium sized SUVs)

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From gregburch at gregburch.net  Tue Aug 17 11:30:31 2004
From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 06:30:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs (except the
	reallybig ones)
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081702354ea3c1e3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDAEGFCJAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>

I've been offline a lot lately, and will never truly catch up, so the more important threads from weeks gone by will have to do without my dubious commentary.  But here's my take on SUVs (from a long time ago):

http://www.gregburch.net/cars/suvs.html

Greg Burch
The Headless Horseman of the Apocalypse
My Blog: http://gregburch.net/burchismo.html

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Emlyn
> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 4:36 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs (except the
> reallybig ones)
> 
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/17/business/17auto.html?th
> 
> Safety Gap Grows Wider Between S.U.V.'s and Cars
> 
> DETROIT, Aug. 16 - The gap in safety between sport utility vehicles
> and passenger cars last year was the widest yet recorded, according to
> new federal traffic data.
> 
> People driving or riding in a sport utility vehicle in 2003 were
> nearly 11 percent more likely to die in an accident than people in
> cars, the figures show. The government began keeping detailed
> statistics on the safety of vehicle categories in 1994.
> 
> (etc... see the second page though that says large SUVs are safer than
> medium sized passenger cars or medium sized SUVs)
> 
> -- 
> Emlyn
> 
> http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 17 13:30:39 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 06:30:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:

> New government data also shows that President Bush's tax cuts have
> shifted
> the overall tax burden to the middle class from the wealthiest
> Americans.:
> 
> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/APWires/headlines/D84GNDMG1.html

Of course, the expansion of the earned income tax credit to help the
bottom 50% pay no income taxes at all had nothing to do with the
increased tax burden for the middle class...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 17 16:42:03 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:42:03 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>



> > New government data also shows that President Bush's tax cuts have
> > shifted
> > the overall tax burden to the middle class from the wealthiest
> > Americans.:

It's always been my impression that the wealthiest Americans represent such
a small portion of the nation that the middle class has always carried the
burden. EVen with a flat tax, the wealthiest Americans would be paying more
in dollars than the average Joe.  Why is it that people think they should
also pay a higher percentage even though it has minimal impact on the
overall revenues? I am so glad I'm not wealthy because I would be
perpetually pissed about everyone always expecting me to pay an ever
increasing "fair share".


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Aug 17 17:58:16 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 12:58:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 11:42 AM 8/17/2004 -0500, Kevin wrote:

>It's always been my impression that the wealthiest Americans represent such
>a small portion of the nation that the middle class has always carried the
>burden.

Look at some data.

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html

< In the United States, the richest 1 percent of households owns 38 percent 
of all wealth. >


<MM: What portion of the wealth is owned by the upper groups?

Wolff: The top 5 percent own more than half of all wealth.

In 1998, they owned 59 percent of all wealth. Or to put it another way, the 
top 5 percent had more wealth than the remaining 95 percent of the 
population, collectively.

The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it owned 83 
percent of all wealth.

This is a very concentrated distribution. >

Whether this is a good or bad thing is another matter.

Damien Broderick





From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 17 19:05:18 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:05:18 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs (except
	thereallybig ones)
Message-ID: <102540-22004821719518582@M2W103.mail2web.com>

From: Greg Burch 

>I've been offline a lot lately, and will never truly catch up, so the more
>important threads from weeks gone by will have to do without my dubious
>commentary.  But here's my take on SUVs (from a long time ago):

http://www.gregburch.net/cars/suvs.html


Very funny, Greg!  

Thumbs down on SUVs, especially when there is one person in the darn thing,
or one person and a child somewhere in the back and a sign that says,
"Child on Board."  Or there is no one on board and it is parked in a space
for compact cars.

I'll have to hug a tree on this one and also the art of aesthetics - those
bit things just look ridiculous!

Natasha




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




From hibbert at mydruthers.com  Tue Aug 17 20:36:49 2004
From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 13:36:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>	<BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
	<6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <41226C61.5090906@mydruthers.com>

Damien forwarded some statistics:
> In 1998, they owned 59 percent of all wealth. Or to put it another
> way, the top 5 percent had more wealth than the remaining 95 percent 
 > of the population, collectively.
> 
> The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, 
> it owned 83 percent of all wealth.

But notice that these are statistics for wealth, not income.  In the US 
(and I have to assume until corrected, in Australia as well) most taxes 
are based on income, not wealth.  If you wanted to raise the income tax 
enough on the wealthy to counter their assets, you'd have to structure 
the taxes very carefully, or you'd snare people with lots of income but 
not much wealth, or people whose earnings merely resembled that of the 
wealthy.

I assume this difficulty is part of the reason the wealthy don't bear 
more of the burden.  Another part, obviously, is that the wealthy are 
willing to, and can afford to hire lawyers and lobbyists to make sure 
taxes don't hit them very hard.

Chris
-- 
C. J. Cherryh, "Invader", on why we visit very old buildings:
       "A sense of age, of profound truths.  Respect for something
       hands made, that's stood through storms and wars and time.
       It persuades us that things we do may last and matter."

Chris Hibbert
hibbert at mydruthers.com
http://mydruthers.com



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Aug 17 21:09:49 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:09:49 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <41226C61.5090906@mydruthers.com>
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
	<6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<41226C61.5090906@mydruthers.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040817160616.01c87e88@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 01:36 PM 8/17/2004 -0700, Chris wrote:

>Damien forwarded some statistics:
>
>>The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it owned 
>>83 percent of all wealth.
>
>But notice that these are statistics for wealth, not income.  In the US 
>(and I have to assume until corrected, in Australia as well) most taxes 
>are based on income, not wealth.

You need to read the full interview I url'd; e.g.:

< MM: To what extent is inequality addressed through tax policy?
Wolff: One reason we have such high levels of inequality, compared to other 
advanced industrial countries, is because of our tax and, I would add, our 
social expenditure system. We have much lower taxes than almost every 
Western European country. And we have a less progressive tax system than 
almost every Western European country. As a result, the rich in this 
country manage to retain a much higher share of their income than they do 
in other countries, and this enables them to accumulate a much higher 
amount of wealth than the rich in other countries.

Certainly our tax system has helped to stimulate the rise of inequality in 
this country. >

However:

<MM: To what extent is the wealth inequality trend simply reflective of the 
rising level of income inequality?
Wolff: Part of it reflects underlying increases in income inequality, but 
the other significant factor is what has happened to the ratio between 
stock prices and housing prices. The major asset of the middle class is 
their home. The major assets of the rich are stocks and small business 
equity. If stock prices increase more quickly than housing prices, then the 
share of wealth owned by the richest households goes up. This turns out to 
be almost as important as underlying changes in income inequality. For the 
last 25 or 30 years, despite the bear market we've had over the last two 
years, stock prices have gone up quite a bit faster than housing prices. >

Damien Broderick






From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 17 21:12:03 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] question re solar sails
In-Reply-To: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20040817211203.48490.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com>

Extropes,

Perhaps you've heard of the recent Japanese
launch/deployment of two solar sails.

Japan unfurls solar sail in space

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3555048.stm

The piece ends with the following sentence:

"Both deployments were successful and the rocket
splashed into the sea at about six minutes 40 seconds
after lift-off."

This leaves me with the impression that the rocket did
not reach orbital velocity.  So I'm wondering, did the
solar sails also fall back to earth, and if not, why
not?

What chall folks think?

Best, Jeff Davis

   "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                           Ray Charles



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Aug 17 21:24:25 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] question re solar sails
In-Reply-To: <20040817211203.48490.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040817212425.38771.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Both deployments were successful and the rocket
> splashed into the sea at about six minutes 40
> seconds
> after lift-off."
> 
> This leaves me with the impression that the rocket
> did
> not reach orbital velocity.  So I'm wondering, did
> the
> solar sails also fall back to earth, and if not, why
> not?

The deployments were successful.  That means the
mechanism to put the sails out there succeeded.  You
might think that's an insanely small step, but it one
has to make sure one can put these things out there
with them snagging or breaking before one can actually
test to see if the sails work, no?

The sails themselves were almost inconsequential to
the test.  One could almost have used cloth or the
like, save for concerns that cloth might not act the
same way as whatever they're using as sail material,
which would have made this test pointless.


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Tue Aug 17 21:43:36 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:43:36 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <102540-22004821719518582@M2W103.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040817163640.04d3f008@unreasonable.com>

[ Natasha and Greg opined on SUVs ]

As posters in the last month's thread on driver safety showed, published 
analysis or discussion of the relative risks and benefits of a vehicle 
choice can rarely withstand rigorous review.

I recently bought a Toyota 4Runner, a medium-sized SUV. I have been fond of 
the vehicle category since the 1970's, long before the current boom.

I often transport objects that would not fit in a station wagon.

I often drive on surfaces where 4WD is useful (or, at least, more 
pleasant). In just the past few days, I've encountered grooved roads, steep 
hills, dirt roads, major potholes, mud, and heavy rain. And this is August.

In February, here in New England, driving a different class of vehicle in 
other years has meant leaving my vehicle a mile from home because the road 
was impassible, sliding uncontrollably down an icy hill into traffic, 
skidding into a snowbank, or simply having to go the long way around 
because I knew my car wouldn't make it up a hill.

More generally for extropians, a suitably chosen and outfitted SUV, *with* 
the experience to use it effectively, can be a life-saver in a variety of 
natural or man-made circumstances, either in getting away from a hazard or 
to a medical facility.

By the way, if you are concerned about fuel economy, SUV hybrids are now 
becoming available, such as the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid.


-- David Lubkin.




From gingell at gnat.com  Tue Aug 17 23:04:28 2004
From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:04:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>

Spike writes:

 > Lets get some perspective. Some will always be way richer than
 > others, that isn't going away. But today our poor have hamburger
 > and TVs. Modern poor people face far greater danger from obesity
 > and alcoholism than from starvation and disease. That's progress,
 > is it not? OK bad example. But let us measure our success or
 > failure by comparing our lives to those of our ancestors. Better or
 > worse?

 This isn't the point though - the article is making an argument that
 we're see a widening gap between rich and poor and a shrinking middle
 class. Pointing out that most people most places are better off in
 material terms than they were a couple of generations ago is beside
 the point.

 I guess there might be a case that, in the long run, countries with
 very lopsided income and wealth distributions eventually do better
 for everyone than countries with a big middle class. I can't think of
 an obvious historical argument though.

 Matt


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 18 01:43:53 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:13:53 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hidden Cargo Pants
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081718438702b3b@mail.gmail.com>

Another major innovation from Scott-E-Vest, you go tigers!

Read about it here...
http://virtualemlyn.blogspot.com/

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From duggerj1 at charter.net  Wed Aug 18 02:11:56 2004
From: duggerj1 at charter.net (duggerj1 at charter.net)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:11:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The other space program
Message-ID: <3948sc$60bgto@mxip09a.cluster1.charter.net>

Tuesday, 17 August 2004

And for nogistalgia's sake, we will now return to the Extropia-class-carrier-and-its-merry-crew thread. Great fun, I admit. But once again, at least two of the extropes with US Navy experience will watch from the pier as it goes to sea. 

> Aircraft carriers are already called miniature cities.
> They're not nearly as spread out as the real thing,
> but they are livable (by certain types of people, at
> least) for several months at a time.  And if one
> substituted hydroponics (powered by solar cells on the
> gasbags) in place of some of the military systems,
> resupply wouldn't be as much of an issue.  (It'd still
> be needed from time to time...but then, what proper
> city doesn't have mail service?)

Would anyone find it surprising that Buckminster Fuller speculated on flying cities? You can find the web version of his book Synergetics through Google, if you've interest.

-- 
Jay Dugger     :	314-551-8414
   http://www.vss.fsi.com/~dugger

Jay Dugger     :     Til Eulenspiegel
http://www.owlmirror.net/~duggerj/
Sometimes the delete key serves best.



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Aug 18 02:52:57 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:52:57 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] just test pls ignore
Message-ID: <009101c484ce$779f6240$362c2dcb@homepc>

had email delivery probs and seeing if this shows up via web
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040818/64104d73/attachment.html>

From duggerj1 at charter.net  Wed Aug 18 03:14:45 2004
From: duggerj1 at charter.net (duggerj1 at charter.net)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:14:45 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
Message-ID: <3948se$6b3803@mxip08a.cluster1.charter.net>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> 
> For disk drives, we see exactly the "problem" you mention. Drives have 
> quit doubling
> in capacity, and instead are now dropping in price, specifically because 
> a nominal 1-drive
> system has "enough" capacity.  You should look at
>   http://www.pricewatch.com
> occasionally to get a feel for this trend. Disk capacity improvement 
> have consistently
> outpaced processors performance improvements for at least the last five 
> years. The current
> "sweet spot" for cost/GB is at about 250GB for $.50/GB, at retail.  Add 
> $500 for a cheap
> computer to house four drives: you get 1TB for $1000.

Well, not quite so cheap as that. Having just bought 1000 GB of disk space in the last three months, I confidently state it costs a little more than $1000. Dan's estimate might prove right for a stationary set-up. 

As portable computers turn into wearables, and as cell phones do the same, we'll see demand for ever-larger portable storage. In particular, I suspect as medicine improves medical monitoring will become biotelemetry. This might increase demand for very reliable, compact and high-density data storage. If black-boxes serve well in vehicles, could they serve as well in biological systems? People, children, valuable animals, crops and their symbiotes, all might need data storage like this. As it grows cheaper, more applications turn economical. 

> 
> The only way I know to use this much disk at home is to store DVDs. 
> Storing audio
> CDs hardly counts: my entire CD collection fits on <<300GB with lossless 
> compression.

You can see other ideas for this kind of storage space in Microsoft's MyLifeBits project. <http://research.microsoft.com/barc/mediapresence/MyLifeBits.aspx>

Video swallows disk space, and with wearable cameras one can very well have a personal Wayback Machine for one's own life. Today it is very easy to have a personal Wayback Machine for the Internet--just use wget as your default web browser.

Unfortunately, the real problem with this volume of data storage is the user interface. Already a professional society of organizers exists for possessions. <http://www.napo.net/> Any bets on how long before these branch out into organizing your digitized life, into ordering one's N-Bytes of data? I'll go even odds on 27 months, +/- 9 months.

So how do you eventually handle this? Abandon the hierachical file system to mere googling? Hire a butler equal parts remembrance agent, OpenCyc, and ALICE to explain where you left what and why? Or do you build a memory palace in a gibsonian-style cyberspace to remind one's self of everything?


> You can store about 5 audio CDs with lossless compression (flac) in one 
> GB, for a storage
> cost of $.20/CD. Storage cost for a DVD would be about $4.00, which is a 
> small fraction

Double these numbers for a back-up copy of valuable data. :)

[snip]

> Kevin Freels wrote:
> 
[snip]

>> What you
>> are saying is that now, since we no longer have that need, the market for
>> these improvements in processing speeds and storage is no longer 
>> there. (I
>> have had 40GB for going on 3 years and still only use 9 of it.)
>>

You have got to be kidding. It's not more pron you need, just move more often. Packing a terabyte of disk space is so much easier than packing a terabyte worth of hard copy. One fits into a backpack complete with computer, and it's not the bookshelves.

>> From: "Dan Clemmensen" <dgc at cox.net>
>>  
>>
>>> We joke about this, but the reality is different.
>>>
>>> At some point during the last ten years, most of us crossed a threshold.
>>> Prior to the threshold, We did not have enough disk space or processing
>>> power. We spent as much money on a computer as our comfort level

Still don't have enough--ambition grows with access to tools. Digitize everything, and start learning about data mining, text analysis, and so on.

[snip]

-- 
Jay Dugger     :	314-551-8414
   http://www.vss.fsi.com/~dugger

Jay Dugger     :     Til Eulenspiegel
http://www.owlmirror.net/~duggerj/
Sometimes the delete key serves best.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 03:40:42 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:40:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
Message-ID: <20040818034042.39344.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

manage to retain a much higher share of their income than they do in
other countries, and this enables them to accumulate a much higher
amount of wealth than the rich in other countries. 
 
you wronggly assume that the wealthy are even subject to the tax
regieme. theyre not for the most part, at least those who hang onto it
for generations. instead, they keep it in foreign trusts which invest
here but pay no tax here because the foreign trust is a nonresident
alien here.
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <thespike at satx.rr.com>
wrote:
> At 01:36 PM 8/17/2004 -0700, Chris wrote:
> 
> >Damien forwarded some statistics:
> >
> >>The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it
owned 
> >>83 percent of all wealth.
> >
> >But notice that these are statistics for wealth, not income.  In the
US 
> >(and I have to assume until corrected, in Australia as well) most
taxes 
> >are based on income, not wealth.
> 
> You need to read the full interview I url'd; e.g.:
> 
> < MM: To what extent is inequality addressed through tax policy?
> Wolff: One reason we have such high levels of inequality, compared to
other 
> advanced industrial countries, is because of our tax and, I would
add, our 
> social expenditure system. We have much lower taxes than almost every

> Western European country. And we have a less progressive tax system
than 
> almost every Western European country. As a result, the rich in this 
> country manage to retain a much higher share of their income than
they do 
> in other countries, and this enables them to accumulate a much higher

> amount of wealth than the rich in other countries.
> 
> Certainly our tax system has helped to stimulate the rise of
inequality in 
> this country. >
> 
> However:
> 
> <MM: To what extent is the wealth inequality trend simply reflective
of the 
> rising level of income inequality?
> Wolff: Part of it reflects underlying increases in income inequality,
but 
> the other significant factor is what has happened to the ratio
between 
> stock prices and housing prices. The major asset of the middle class
is 
> their home. The major assets of the rich are stocks and small
business 
> equity. If stock prices increase more quickly than housing prices,
then the 
> share of wealth owned by the richest households goes up. This turns
out to 
> be almost as important as underlying changes in income inequality.
For the 
> last 25 or 30 years, despite the bear market we've had over the last
two 
> years, stock prices have gone up quite a bit faster than housing
prices. >
> 
> Damien Broderick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 18 03:59:34 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:29:34 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] just test pls ignore
In-Reply-To: <009101c484ce$779f6240$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <009101c484ce$779f6240$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081720592ef9ab3@mail.gmail.com>

I can see it (if that helps)

Emlyn

----- Original Message -----
From: Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:52:57 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] just test pls ignore
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>


had email delivery probs and seeing if this shows up via web

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





-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 18 04:41:45 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:11:45 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] just test pls ignore
In-Reply-To: <009101c484ce$779f6240$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <009101c484ce$779f6240$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081721412e8e3298@mail.gmail.com>

More test crap, ignore this also. Stop reading now. Now! Really really
really. Ey, I give up.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:52:57 +1000, Brett Paatsch
<bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> had email delivery probs and seeing if this shows up via web
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 18 06:33:26 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:33:26 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081718438702b3b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

Think of the very best cook you have ever known in your
life, the meals that masterful chef prepared, and how you
loved to devour those delectable viands, which would tempt
the palates of connoisseurs from both hemispheres.  To
those of more delicate sensibilities, they would add a
still more aesthetic charm.  

Now what if that chef were cooking for you three squares
a day, 7/52.  What would happen?

Remember those frozen dinners that showed up in the 1970s,
how vile they were?  How much better they are today.
Like life forms, food is evolving.  Those foods which few
people devour soon fall off the radar screen, replaced by
robust Krispy Kremes, those toxic toroids of luscious
lipoproteins, McDonalds burgers and other such life-threatening
delights.  It occurred to me that all the mechanisms that will 
cause food to evolve quickly have been put in place in the past 
half century: worldwide distribution networks, franchises,
centralized supply sources which can study which foods
sell best in which places.  These mechanisms quickly tune up 
the process, propagating the best food memes and rejecting 
the only slightly less successful.  The result is that food 
is becoming ever more tempting, contributing to the alarming
increase of human adipose all over the world.  It is analogous 
to having our favorite chef available more and more often.

Extrapolate this trend into the future.  Is there any
reason to believe that food is as good as it will ever
get?  Why?  If it continues to get ever more irresistible
as time goes on, what scenarios can we imagine?  Will flab
continue to overtake an ever larger percentage of people?
Or will we eventually reverse course and demand less tasty
foods?  Will better nutrition education help?  Will more
and more people perish of diabetes and weight related
heart disease, or will it soon level off?

spike  



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 18 06:43:52 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:13:52 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food
In-Reply-To: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040817234377df839b@mail.gmail.com>

I think we'll get more and more tempting food, causing continuing
problems until we finally get the heavily demanded magic-fix-me-up
pills that we need to deal with all this crap. I hope so, anyway...
who says you can't have your cake and eat it too?

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *



On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:33:26 -0700, Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Think of the very best cook you have ever known in your
> life, the meals that masterful chef prepared, and how you
> loved to devour those delectable viands, which would tempt
> the palates of connoisseurs from both hemispheres.  To
> those of more delicate sensibilities, they would add a
> still more aesthetic charm.
> 
> Now what if that chef were cooking for you three squares
> a day, 7/52.  What would happen?
> 
> Remember those frozen dinners that showed up in the 1970s,
> how vile they were?  How much better they are today.
> Like life forms, food is evolving.  Those foods which few
> people devour soon fall off the radar screen, replaced by
> robust Krispy Kremes, those toxic toroids of luscious
> lipoproteins, McDonalds burgers and other such life-threatening
> delights.  It occurred to me that all the mechanisms that will
> cause food to evolve quickly have been put in place in the past
> half century: worldwide distribution networks, franchises,
> centralized supply sources which can study which foods
> sell best in which places.  These mechanisms quickly tune up
> the process, propagating the best food memes and rejecting
> the only slightly less successful.  The result is that food
> is becoming ever more tempting, contributing to the alarming
> increase of human adipose all over the world.  It is analogous
> to having our favorite chef available more and more often.
> 
> Extrapolate this trend into the future.  Is there any
> reason to believe that food is as good as it will ever
> get?  Why?  If it continues to get ever more irresistible
> as time goes on, what scenarios can we imagine?  Will flab
> continue to overtake an ever larger percentage of people?
> Or will we eventually reverse course and demand less tasty
> foods?  Will better nutrition education help?  Will more
> and more people perish of diabetes and weight related
> heart disease, or will it soon level off?
> 
> spike
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com  Wed Aug 18 10:47:18 2004
From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:47:18 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food
In-Reply-To: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <412333B6.7070805@dsl.pipex.com>

Spike wrote:

>Extrapolate this trend into the future.  Is there any
>reason to believe that food is as good as it will ever
>get?  Why?  If it continues to get ever more irresistible
>as time goes on, what scenarios can we imagine?  Will flab
>continue to overtake an ever larger percentage of people?
>Or will we eventually reverse course and demand less tasty
>foods?  Will better nutrition education help?  Will more
>and more people perish of diabetes and weight related
>heart disease, or will it soon level off?
>  
>
Food is hard.  Creating food is still an unsolved problem; we're still 
learning.  As with most things, our initial reaction to the problem of 
the inadequacy of (processed/fast) food has been nostalgia: we want 
people to go back to the old way of doing things.  I think, however, 
that fast food is a  genuinely positive development.  Food preparation 
is difficult, arduous, and requires a great deal of knowledge.  Fast 
food is no less great a development than, say, the introduction of the 
washing machine; it just has some wrinkles that need to be ironed out.  
I think, for the most part, as we solve the problems the solutions will 
be taken up by industry: if it was healthy to eat McDonalds every day, 
they'd have more customers than they do now.  It's a straightforward 
incentive.

I think also that it's primarily the fact that McDonalds et al can't 
reach the larger, more health-conscious, middle-class demographic now 
that causes them to take the strategy of foisting large portions of food 
on the unfortunate demographic they can reach (i.e., the poor and people 
in a hurry).  As fast food is able to serve more of the population 
(i.e., relatively wealthy return customers), the incentives to tailor 
food toward addiction and inadequancy of fulfilment drop off.

BM


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Wed Aug 18 11:45:08 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:45:08 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food
In-Reply-To: <412333B6.7070805@dsl.pipex.com>
References: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<412333B6.7070805@dsl.pipex.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0408180727120.-306993@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


Hm. What an interesting thought! Agreed, more food is available more
often... summer fruit in winter, fresh vegs year round, etc. But...
still the quality is frequently "off" so I buy locally fresh when
available. And grow what I can because even locallly grown isn't as
yummy as fresh picked off my own plants!

The expense of pre-prepared food in the grocery is too high. I buy
bread and milk and butter and such, but people think of those as
basic although they used to be made at home. I look at the "pre-cut"
"fresh" veggies in my supermarket and they are nasty, all brown edges
and wilted leaves, even though they're in special "fresh-keeper" bags
and twice the price. I don't buy them. Tried a few, not again. Ugh.

IMO pre-prepared food has a *long* way to go before it replaces plain
food. Krispy Kreme donuts are an occasional treat, though! :)))

Regards,
MB

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Bryan Moss wrote:

> Spike wrote:
>
> >Extrapolate this trend into the future.  Is there any
> >reason to believe that food is as good as it will ever
> >get?  Why?  If it continues to get ever more irresistible
> >as time goes on, what scenarios can we imagine?  Will flab
> >continue to overtake an ever larger percentage of people?
> >Or will we eventually reverse course and demand less tasty
> >foods?  Will better nutrition education help?  Will more
> >and more people perish of diabetes and weight related
> >heart disease, or will it soon level off?
> >
> >
> Food is hard.  Creating food is still an unsolved problem; we're still
> learning.  As with most things, our initial reaction to the problem of
> the inadequacy of (processed/fast) food has been nostalgia: we want
> people to go back to the old way of doing things.  I think, however,
> that fast food is a  genuinely positive development.  Food preparation
> is difficult, arduous, and requires a great deal of knowledge.  Fast
> food is no less great a development than, say, the introduction of the
> washing machine; it just has some wrinkles that need to be ironed out.
> I think, for the most part, as we solve the problems the solutions will
> be taken up by industry: if it was healthy to eat McDonalds every day,
> they'd have more customers than they do now.  It's a straightforward
> incentive.
>
> I think also that it's primarily the fact that McDonalds et al can't
> reach the larger, more health-conscious, middle-class demographic now
> that causes them to take the strategy of foisting large portions of food
> on the unfortunate demographic they can reach (i.e., the poor and people
> in a hurry).  As fast food is able to serve more of the population
> (i.e., relatively wealthy return customers), the incentives to tailor
> food toward addiction and inadequancy of fulfilment drop off.
>


From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Aug 18 14:26:15 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:26:15 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question About Integrity of Genes after Death
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040818072248.02d86560@mail.earthlink.net>

I received an email from Julie Lavoie:

"I need to study more specificaly the future of us gene after we are death 
since they legislate they can use it if we didn't notice by writing to 
maintain the integrity of the body. In fact I would like to create a study 
group to realise another of my inventions.

Thank for your collaboration!"
__________________________________________

Many thanks for helping Julie with her query.

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/20040818/b6f201a5/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Aug 18 14:43:01 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:43:01 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040817163640.04d3f008@unreasonable.com>
References: <102540-22004821719518582@M2W103.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040818074056.03624490@mail.earthlink.net>

At 05:43 PM 8/17/04 -0400, David wrote:


>By the way, if you are concerned about fuel economy, SUV hybrids are now 
>becoming available, such as the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid.

Yes, I've seen them.  Nice.

I'm sticking with my 1992 Benz - mileage is very great and I cannot afford 
a new car right now :-) I like luxury cars, sports cars scar me.

N



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



From megao at sasktel.net  Wed Aug 18 11:48:06 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:48:06 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food-Pharma meets Nutra
References: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<412333B6.7070805@dsl.pipex.com>
Message-ID: <412341F4.1F5AAE37@sasktel.net>

Commercializing designer food is a huge problem.
We here in Canada have "novel food" which is regulated to need pre-market
testing.
However we have under the NHPD an exemption which allows a health
practitioner
CAM or regular MD to prescribe a formulation and allow the custome to have
it custom formulated.

There is still the "psyche of inevitability" in the mainstream population.
Only yesterday while helping re-roof a cousin's house another neighbour
said,
"what it all that stuff you do only makes you live 6 months longer?"
So what , it's my right to risk not changing the natural course of events.

By the time I know the answers it will be too late for both of us.. right.
I  am pasting a piece regarding my custom food tastes
and where the "Pharma meets the Nutra" in a diet.
Evolution from a pharma sense has to be coupled with evolution from a
gastronomic sense.  You can make designer foods look like the everday stuff,
but then you strip
it of a new identity that might define it and "brand" it.
Why breed a cantaloupe so it looks and tastes like a watermelon.... is my
point.
*****************************************
Subject:
        Time for me to be a test case - E45 CARDS Project
   Date:
        Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:52:49 -0500
   From:
        "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." <megao at sasktel.net>


I have beside me my MMAR application which my General Practitioner
filled out for me Nov 10, 2003.

I am using the Category 3 First Medical Specialist Form.

My indications are for long standing back pain from years of operating a
farm.
Over the years I utilized a number of nutritional supplements.
Over the 2000 year  as I was consuming large quantities of test product
for
a multi-component medical (Natural Health Product) food I experience a
remission which has proved to be permanent.  Part of the therapy was 2-6
grams of hemp
bud eaten daily.  For 3 years I used dried and reformulated bud in the
bar.
Since Feb 2004 I have used fresh daily bud usually of the hemp cannabis
variety, but occaisionally of a  marijuana chemotype at bedtime.

I now do all the activities I did before the early 1980's when all this
began, without any re-occurance of the condition.

I do have in addition to the cannabis a nutritional program which
includes 2 X 24 gram servings in a food bar form containing  20
other food derived supplements (such as a 10% soy isoflavone soy germ
concentrate)

The details are on the website for all that.

In addition, I take the following daily.
10-15 grams (Berberis) Barberry Bark (ground and mixed with juice)
10-15 grams of  (Centella Asiatica) Gotu Kola (mixed with juice)
Conjugated Linoleic Acid
Alpha Lipoic Acid
Fish oil
Levamisole , an immunostimulant 150 mg daily
5-15 grams of fresh hemp bud chewed  or in a salad
500Mcg Vitamin B-12
A good quality Multi Vitamin-Mineral
20mg Lipitor

Usually a strong Cocao and Coffee and milk "High Test"  mixture in the
morning

Infrequently  when I drive home overtired I chew a nicorette gum for a 2
hour session.

So, my MMAR application states 5 grams cannabis in an oral food product.

Today I went in for a copy of my latest physical done on July 29, 2004

I am 49, 5 ft 91/2, 175 pounds ( 10 pounds heavier than before 2003),
and short-sighted since I was 14.

My medical profile reads thusly:

-PSA 0.6
Normal = 0.00- 4.0
-TSH (thyroid) 0.922
Normal= 0.35-5.0
-Electrocardiogram=normal
-Fasting Glucose= 4.7
Normal=3.6-6.1  so I have a good average blood sugar management level
-After meal Glucose= 3.9
Normal = 3.6-6.1
However note that most people have a higher blood sugar level after
eating, mine actually is
as good as it gets when others might go up substantially.
Urea= 4.7
Normal= 3.6-6.1
Creatine=91
Normal=60-130
Total Bilirubin=8
Normal=2-20
Alt=42
Normal=21-73
So my kidneys and liver are not suffering any stress
Cholesterol  (Low) 3.69
Normal= 3.8-5.2
Triglicerides=.89
Normal=.35-2.00
HDL Cholesterol= 1.36
Normal=.9-2.4
Cholesterol/HDLC=2.71
LDL=1.92
So even with a breakfast with 5 eggs and all I have enough cholesterol
to be healthy by not an overly
large amount of the LDL  and triglycerides.

I have had physicals since age 40 , all within average specifications

Treatment Goals:
My application is to maintain my physical conditon and prevent
cardiovascular disease,
keep arthritis and lower back weaknesses from becoming chronic
inflammation and  pain again.
As well ,  normal age related neurological decline is to be slowed down
somewhat.
Bone density is to be maintained.
Cancer prevention  is a goal as well.
As well the supplements are designed to minimize damage if a
catastrophic event should happen.
This is a life-long therapeutic program.

At age 49 while things  are considered normal,  there undoubtedly  is
age-related  biochemical degeneration silently working away.

I had intended to apply last December, but was waiting for changes of
the MMAR  to the
promised simplified form or maybe  a simple Rx.

My doctor and I discussed things today, and agreed that hunting down a
specialist  in Regina to
sanction a health restorative-maintenace program which involves numerous

natural health products would be virtually impossible, not to mention
enormously time consuming.
We also agreed that when there  is a waiting list for sick people, for
me to take a specialists time
was not only a waste of his time but detrimental to those on a waiting
list.

So when I left I said, OK I guess this is the time to do what I must do:
and that is this:
File fior the MMAR and refer to the Smith Falls Case as well as
leverage.

Not above the law
Ottawa Citizen August 9, 2004
Editorial

A marijuana grow-op in Smiths Falls has done all Canadians a
favour by focusing a bright light on the federal
government's flagrant violation of the rule of law in its
handling of medical marijuana.

Last week, police raided Carasel Harvest Supply Corp., which
operates in an old Canadian Tire building, after they
learned (through media reports) that the company had started
growing marijuana even though Health Canada hadn't given the
company a licence yet. Health Canada's refusal to give a
licence to Carasel is now being challenged in the courts as
an "unconstitutional barrier" to medicinal marijuana users.

Right now, the health ministry will let an eligible sick
person grow marijuana, and it will let that person designate
someone else to grow marijuana on his or her behalf, but it
won't let more than one user designate the same other person
to do the growing. That means the only legal multiple-client
grower is the government's single source in Flin Flon, whose
product many users dismiss as ditchweed.

This policy is more than addled: it's unconstitutional. Last
fall, the Ontario Court of Appeal struck down three Health
Canada rules on marijuana-growing, including the no-
multiple-customers one, on the grounds that they effectively
forced many users to buy their medicine from drug dealers --
what the government called "unlicensed suppliers."

The rules, the court's three judges wrote, "create an
alliance between the Government and the black market whereby
the Government authorizes possession of marijuana for
medical purposes and the black market supplies the necessary
product."

Health Canada dropped two rules so users could now pay
growers and the lowering the medical standards for some of
them, but it decided to ignore the court's decision that
said a grower should be able to supply more than one user.
Spokeswoman Aggie Adamczyk says the regulators consider the
court's order "useful guidance" and believe they're living
up to the principles laid out by the judges.

It's hard to see how Health Canada can say that, as the
court's decision was clear: Health Canada either had to
scrap its whole regulation system and try again, or keep the
existing system minus the three rules that were
unconstitutional and "of no force and effect." The
department decided to ignore the court, Ms. Adamczyk says,
because growers working for more than one user might find
ways to sell extra marijuana on the side, thus supplying the
black market.

Health Canada doesn't get to follow the court orders it
agrees with and skip the ones it doesn't: if you tried it,
you'd go to jail. Besides, such doublethink disregards the
whole basis of the judges' orders: that the old rules forced
legal users to buy their medicine from drug dealers.

The volume of the supply aside, a single grower with a
profit motive is easier to keep an eye on, and has a
stronger incentive to comply with the rules, than a horde of
amateurs with separate production costs to pay.

Canadians shouldn't have to wait for Carasel's case to wend
its way through the court system before the federal
government comes up with a marijuana policy that's both
constitutional and coherent.
Contact: letters at thecitizen.canwest.com


>Cannabis Culture
>Date: Wednesday, August 11, 2004
>Canadian pot possession laws still invalid?
>by Reverend Damuzi Cannabis Culture

 Exciting new med-pot challenge reveals flaws in law
On August 4, police in Smith Falls, Ontario raided
medical cannabis grower Carasel, a company whose owners
hoped to provide high-quality pot to government-licensed
medical users. At the heart of the raid is a basic
disagreement between the federal government and Ontario
courts which invalidates Canada's marijuana possession laws.

Soon after the August 4 raid, renowned cannabis defender and
university law professor Alan Young announced an exciting new court
case. Associates of
Carasel are suing the federal government.

The grounds for the suit go back almost a year, to
October 7, 2003, when the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered
the federal government to amend med-pot regulations so that
growers, like Carasel, could apply to grow for more than one
licensed med-pot user. Currently, licensed growers can only
provide medicine to one patient. Despite the court order,
the federal government never made the change, and so
Carasel's application was either never processed or denied,
and they were eventually raided.

The federal government also failed to comply with the
Ontario Court's order to make med-pot exemptions easier for
patients to get. Currently, the regulations require that
certain patients get the approval of two medical
specialists, an almost impossible feat for people suffering
from rare illnesses or living in rural areas. The court
ordered that the government change the requirement to one
specialist.

Because of the government's history of bad faith, Alan
Young plans to be a witness in the case rather than an
attorney. "I have the right issue, the right litigants, but
I knew I wasn't going to do the case for a number of
reasons," Young told Cannabis Culture. "Primarily I want to
provide evidence of Health Canada's obstructionist approach,
and because I've been doing this work pretty much from the
beginning, the evidence mostly comes from me. [Compassion
Centre lawyer] Ron Marzel is willing to work on this as
attorney."


There are even deeper issues behind the federal
government's bad faith and stalling around med-pot. The
Ontario Court of Appeal's October, 2003 order to change med-
pot regulations was an attempt to sew up a constitutional
deficiency in the possession laws.

When the Ontario Court of Appeal made the order to
change the med-pot regulations, they also ordered a period
of pot-possession amnesty, from August 1, 2001 to the date
of their ruling. During this period, pot possession laws
were deemed unconstitutional.

So the government's continued failure to make the change
required by the Ontario Court of Appeal means that pot
possession laws - even for recreational use - are still
constitutionally deficient.

Across Canada, challenges to the law are mounting. In
Quebec, for example, Marijuana Party Leader Marc Boris St
Maurice is arguing the constitutionality of his marijuana
possession charges.

"Whether you're carrying marijuana because you think it
looks pretty, or because you found it, or because perhaps
you like to rub it on your hair at night, because it smells
nice. None of that is relevant. Whether it is for medical
use or other use, none of that is relevant," St-Maurice told
the press. "The law is bad, and so the offense must be taken
out."

****************************************************


 Aug 11 (1 day ago)

From: Arla Johnson <arla_j at hotmail.com>
To: mychanl at sccd.sk.ca
Cc: mfj.eav at gmail.com, cattlelack at sasktel.net, r.mwick at asktel.net,
buffalom at mts.net
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:17:41 -0600
Subject: E45 Legal details.. please confirm reciept of and presentation
to Committee
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Add sender to contacts list |
Trash this message | Show original
ATTN: CARDS Committee: LEGALITY of E45

This is the exact process this project E45  is using  with  references
to the legality of each step.

The Market Development area of the project creates a contact list of
health practitioners based on specialities related to conditions
cannabinoids may benefit.
EAV has a number of contacts who can provide specific leads to get this
part started.
Robert R. will develop a procedure to contact and inform  practitioners
of the method of access we can offer to  medical marijuana clients as
well as the physical formulations they can be provided within.

-The NHPD regulations  quoted specifically permit custom formulation
upon the recommendation
of a health practitioner's recommendation for a patient.
SEE- E45  application , clarification of legal issues , item #9

Between August 15-30 a condo complex prototype will begin to  be
constructed within EAV's Lake Alma facility.  This will be modified so
that it suits the pilot stage requirements.

On or about Aug 15-Aug 30 EAV  can remove from land owned by Morris
Johnson  upon which
Crag, a  variety of hemp  was seeded July 05.  These plants  plants go
to Lake Alma for harvest/processing.

These plants,  an estimated number of 1000,  will be transferred into
Condo physical configurations within  the EAV facility at Lake Alma.

-EAV has Hemp permit 04-E0031-C-02 which covers processing of hemp at
this site.

These first plants will be grown in soil similar to the first R&D condo
of which a photo is supplied with this application.  The pot size and
lighting will be upgraded based on experience with
the R&D condo @SW34-01-16 Feb 29 to date.

Hemp materials will be continuously harvested in a form which has whole
immature seed heads.
These will be frozen for further processing.

Our experience to date with plants growing since Feb 29 2004 at
SW34-01-16 is that
under indoor conditions hemp has a much longer productive lifespan than
it has under field conditions.  Plants 6 months old are still producing
to date.  It appears that hemp might be
continuously harvested for several months under the right conditions.

Initial Condo contract holders will be assisted to apply for MMAR
permits.

Initial clients will be persons presenting with medical conditions which
require CBD, the only cannabinoid present in hemp.  This will include
rheumatoid and other arthritis, and possibly
irritable bowl syndrome and glaucoma.

The NHPD regulations referred to above,  permit us to incorporate these
immature seed heads into ony one of our food formulations  or create one
to order.  Each bar in this case will have 2grams of this form of
cannabis. Customers will be supplied with enough of this product
immediately upon signing a condo contract to cover the time expected to
get their MMAR applications completed by an MD and processed by Health
Canada.

The initial Rx for this material only requires a GP or Complementary
Alternative Medicine practitioner so will happen similtaneous to the
signing of a Condo Contract.

This corresponds to the 250 bar minimum for custom formulation batches
and will last for the first 125 days.

These formulations contain only processed hemp and no THC so are
regulated by the
Hemp Production  regulations.  Representative samples of the hemp
materials (field of origin) are submitted to Health Canada approved labs
by CFIA persons who come out and sample the field of origin during the
normal  growing season.


The daily consumption of cannabis in this  manner constitutes the same 4
grams which
the MMAR application will ask for on their MMAR permit.  There is no
requirement on the MMAR applicaction to specify which chemotype of
cannabis is being consumed.

Once the medical client recieves their MMAR permit, a variety specific
to their exact needs
will be selected  by them or their physician or EAV and seeds or clones
started.

The Condo complex at Lake Alma will start these plants in a hydroponic
high intensity production
condo setting.

The original  hemp plants may be transferred to this hydroponic  setting
or remain in soil at this point.

For persons with severe pain with their arthritis, for example a variety
with THC  may  constitute
the portion of their medication which will be consumed at bedtime.
This provides relief without disrupting daily functioning.

For persons with certain cancers CBG and CBN should be present in
significant quantities as these are more specific to tumor inhibition.

As medical clients with THC, CBG CBN or other cannabinoid containing
condos get up and running
a supply of these chemotypes for new clients  will become available
immediately
upon the MMAR reciept.

As the MMAR evolves SEE- E45 CARDS application, Legal issues section #12
Regulatory affairs:Parliamentary....... this lag time for approval may
shorten substantially.

As well as physicians become more aware of the applications of for
cannabis based medicines
the time for a patient to see a doctor for an RX will decrease as well.

The point being, is that we have developed a legal method to take the
patient through the
process and create a supply of medically useful product which starts
immediately upon the signing of a Condo Contract

SEE #8 item of submitted to CARDS with original application June 18 and
listed with
"additional information submitted to support the application"

E45  Project results might be presented to the Health Canada as an
example of what
pharmacists could access "based on a pharmaceutical care model".
See: E45 CARDS application, Legal issues section #12 Regulatory affairs:
Parliamentary, (at the very end of that subsection).

All facets of this project have been reviewed for their legality, and we
feel certain we have covered  everything.

Morris
















Bryan Moss wrote:

> Spike wrote:
>
> >Extrapolate this trend into the future.  Is there any
> >reason to believe that food is as good as it will ever
> >get?  Why?  If it continues to get ever more irresistible
> >as time goes on, what scenarios can we imagine?  Will flab
> >continue to overtake an ever larger percentage of people?
> >Or will we eventually reverse course and demand less tasty
> >foods?  Will better nutrition education help?  Will more
> >and more people perish of diabetes and weight related
> >heart disease, or will it soon level off?
> >
> >
> Food is hard.  Creating food is still an unsolved problem; we're still
> learning.  As with most things, our initial reaction to the problem of
> the inadequacy of (processed/fast) food has been nostalgia: we want
> people to go back to the old way of doing things.  I think, however,
> that fast food is a  genuinely positive development.  Food preparation
> is difficult, arduous, and requires a great deal of knowledge.  Fast
> food is no less great a development than, say, the introduction of the
> washing machine; it just has some wrinkles that need to be ironed out.
> I think, for the most part, as we solve the problems the solutions will
> be taken up by industry: if it was healthy to eat McDonalds every day,
> they'd have more customers than they do now.  It's a straightforward
> incentive.
>
> I think also that it's primarily the fact that McDonalds et al can't
> reach the larger, more health-conscious, middle-class demographic now
> that causes them to take the strategy of foisting large portions of food
> on the unfortunate demographic they can reach (i.e., the poor and people
> in a hurry).  As fast food is able to serve more of the population
> (i.e., relatively wealthy return customers), the incentives to tailor
> food toward addiction and inadequancy of fulfilment drop off.
>
> BM
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From megao at sasktel.net  Wed Aug 18 11:50:17 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:50:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food-Pharma VS Nutra
References: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<710b78fc040817234377df839b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <41234279.BE21D4DD@sasktel.net>

Subject:
          Marketing Products Using FDA Health Claims
     Date:
          Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:02:21 -0400 (EDT)
     From:
          "Forbes.com Alerts" <alerts at forbesdigital.com>
 Reply-To:
          "Forbes.com Alerts Unsubscribe"
<alerts-unsubscribe at forbesdigital.com>
       To:
          Alerts Recipients <alerts-rcpt at forbesdigital.com>




Marketing Products Using FDA Health Claims

How have companies been marketing their products using health and wellness
claims from the FDA?

Click the link below to read the full story:
http://www.forbes.com/2004/08/18/0818findsvphealth.html


Emlyn wrote:

> I think we'll get more and more tempting food, causing continuing
> problems until we finally get the heavily demanded magic-fix-me-up
> pills that we need to deal with all this crap. I hope so, anyway...
> who says you can't have your cake and eat it too?
>
> --
> Emlyn
>
> http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
>
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 23:33:26 -0700, Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Think of the very best cook you have ever known in your
> > life, the meals that masterful chef prepared, and how you
> > loved to devour those delectable viands, which would tempt
> > the palates of connoisseurs from both hemispheres.  To
> > those of more delicate sensibilities, they would add a
> > still more aesthetic charm.
> >
> > Now what if that chef were cooking for you three squares
> > a day, 7/52.  What would happen?
> >
> > Remember those frozen dinners that showed up in the 1970s,
> > how vile they were?  How much better they are today.
> > Like life forms, food is evolving.  Those foods which few
> > people devour soon fall off the radar screen, replaced by
> > robust Krispy Kremes, those toxic toroids of luscious
> > lipoproteins, McDonalds burgers and other such life-threatening
> > delights.  It occurred to me that all the mechanisms that will
> > cause food to evolve quickly have been put in place in the past
> > half century: worldwide distribution networks, franchises,
> > centralized supply sources which can study which foods
> > sell best in which places.  These mechanisms quickly tune up
> > the process, propagating the best food memes and rejecting
> > the only slightly less successful.  The result is that food
> > is becoming ever more tempting, contributing to the alarming
> > increase of human adipose all over the world.  It is analogous
> > to having our favorite chef available more and more often.
> >
> > Extrapolate this trend into the future.  Is there any
> > reason to believe that food is as good as it will ever
> > get?  Why?  If it continues to get ever more irresistible
> > as time goes on, what scenarios can we imagine?  Will flab
> > continue to overtake an ever larger percentage of people?
> > Or will we eventually reverse course and demand less tasty
> > foods?  Will better nutrition education help?  Will more
> > and more people perish of diabetes and weight related
> > heart disease, or will it soon level off?
> >
> > spike
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 megaquark at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 18 12:56:36 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 07:56:36 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com><BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com><6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><41226C61.5090906@mydruthers.com>
	<6.1.1.1.0.20040817160616.01c87e88@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV6a72uX5edPJ00007bd8@hotmail.com>

I don;t think the gapo between rich and poor is important at all. Who really
cares what they have? WHy should they be brought down? Is it just a matter
of jealousy? If they are rich, and own all that wealth, so what? The only
real matetr of importance is whether or not everyone else is suffering from
it. If the poorest people's lives are continually improving, I fail to see
how thier wealth matters at all. If they didn;t exist, would we be any
better or worse off?

Also, those figures are wealth, not income. If someone owns a bunch of land
that is very valuable, that is wealth. We are talking about income
taxes...unless you want a separate wealth tax as well.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at satx.rr.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap


> At 01:36 PM 8/17/2004 -0700, Chris wrote:
>
> >Damien forwarded some statistics:
> >
> >>The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it owned
> >>83 percent of all wealth.
> >
> >But notice that these are statistics for wealth, not income.  In the US
> >(and I have to assume until corrected, in Australia as well) most taxes
> >are based on income, not wealth.
>
> You need to read the full interview I url'd; e.g.:
>
> < MM: To what extent is inequality addressed through tax policy?
> Wolff: One reason we have such high levels of inequality, compared to
other
> advanced industrial countries, is because of our tax and, I would add, our
> social expenditure system. We have much lower taxes than almost every
> Western European country. And we have a less progressive tax system than
> almost every Western European country. As a result, the rich in this
> country manage to retain a much higher share of their income than they do
> in other countries, and this enables them to accumulate a much higher
> amount of wealth than the rich in other countries.
>
> Certainly our tax system has helped to stimulate the rise of inequality in
> this country. >
>
> However:
>
> <MM: To what extent is the wealth inequality trend simply reflective of
the
> rising level of income inequality?
> Wolff: Part of it reflects underlying increases in income inequality, but
> the other significant factor is what has happened to the ratio between
> stock prices and housing prices. The major asset of the middle class is
> their home. The major assets of the rich are stocks and small business
> equity. If stock prices increase more quickly than housing prices, then
the
> share of wealth owned by the richest households goes up. This turns out to
> be almost as important as underlying changes in income inequality. For the
> last 25 or 30 years, despite the bear market we've had over the last two
> years, stock prices have gone up quite a bit faster than housing prices. >
>
> Damien Broderick
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 13:12:12 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 06:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040818074056.03624490@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20040818131212.77530.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:

> 
> I'm sticking with my 1992 Benz - mileage is very great and I cannot
> afford a new car right now :-) I like luxury cars, sports cars scar
> me.

Is that scar or scare? Or both? ;)

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From gregburch at gregburch.net  Wed Aug 18 13:15:07 2004
From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:15:07 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040817163640.04d3f008@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEGLCJAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>

> From: David Lubkin
>
> In February, here in New England, driving a different class of vehicle in 
> other years has meant leaving my vehicle a mile from home because 
> the road 
> was impassible, sliding uncontrollably down an icy hill into traffic, 
> skidding into a snowbank, or simply having to go the long way around 
> because I knew my car wouldn't make it up a hill.
> 
> More generally for extropians, a suitably chosen and outfitted 
> SUV, *with* 
> the experience to use it effectively, can be a life-saver in a variety of 
> natural or man-made circumstances, either in getting away from a 
> hazard or 
> to a medical facility.
> 
> By the way, if you are concerned about fuel economy, SUV hybrids are now 
> becoming available, such as the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid.

One of the things that galls me about the SUV craze is that in a sense it has spoiled it for people who really need and/or use SUVs for what they are good at.  I don't aim my car-guy sneers at folks in that category, and I acknowledge that that there is a relatively narrow category of driver/utily for which an SUV is basically the perfect car.

I also welcome the development of more sensible SUVs.  The new breed of vehicles that are basically "jacked-up, 4wd station wagons" get my thumbs up (for instance, I think the Infiniti F35/45 is way, way cool looking and not too far over the top.  I almost bought one recently, which would have required writing a zillion words of explanation at my anti-SUV page.  My wife saved me that chore by deciding that she wanted a P/T Cruiser, which is basically precisely what I've been saying most people who drive SUVs should have (in the process helping to explain why we've been together for 25 years...)  

I've actually devoted way too much drive-time thought to the problems involved in designing a "rational SUV."  With the exception of the raw mass of the current crop of truck-derived SUVs, there's nothing inherently wrong with the basic platform.  So I've developed a list of design concepts for such an "extropian SUV:"

** Materials.  Replacing the acres of sheet steel in the body work of SUVs with composites would save hundreds of pounds of mass.
** Frame design.  By replacing the heavy, old-fashioned ladder frame with a spidery space frame, more mass could be shaved.  With modern robotic fabrication techniques, it's much easier to employ space frames than it used to be.  Major manufacturers can do this so that a technology that used to be the sole reserve of custom race cars could be brought to the mass market.  Good design could recapture the supposed safety benefits of the massive traditional SUV's crashworthiness with crush zones.
** Hybird Motors.  As you point out, this is happening and, ironically, the greater space available in the SUV platform makes them a natural for hybrid technology.
** Suspension.  Again with modern manufacturing technology the greater number and complexity of parts required to use a real independent rear suspension (IRS) isn't a problem.  I've noted that more and more small and mid-size SUVs are starting to have IRS.  The benefits in improved handling are significant, and the loss in gross pulling power in getting rid of the heavy, inflexible solid rear axle isn't felt by the soccer moms who never need to tow a mobile ICBM.
** Center of Gravity.  The first three factors above will naturally lower the center of gravity (the hybrids' placement of their batteries down low in the frame, for instance).  Further employment of a little thought to move as many components to the bottom of the design as possible can do this.  Even more smarts employed to make an actively-controlled suspension that raises and lowers the vehicle for various modes finishes the C/G problem.

Greg Burch
The Headless Horseman of the Apocalypse
http://www.gregburch.net/burchismo.html


From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Aug 18 15:16:31 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:16:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEGLCJAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
Message-ID: <003301c48536$5a204910$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Greg Burch
...
> One of the things that galls me about the SUV craze is that 
> in a sense it has spoiled it for people who really need 
> and/or use SUVs for what they are good at... 
> Infiniti F35/45 is way, way cool looking and not too far over 
> the top... Greg Burch

Greg, part of the appeal of the SUV is the notion that
should one fall upon hard times, one could live in it.
There was a period in my own life when I would gladly
have lived in my car, had I owned a car at that time.

There is a silver lining to all this in a sense.  Currently
used SUV and van prices are dropping to the extent that they
will surely be the vehicle of choice for the underclasses.
Since they also get poor gas mileage, as the price of fuel
rises, the underclass are less likely to take them
joyriding, or anywhere besides to work and to the local
McDonalds.  That will in the long run cause our roads to
be less crowded.

The thread title should be "real extropians *with money*
don't drive SUVs."  

Of course the parking lot of the local Walmart will become
more crowded, but thats a whole nuther problem.

spike



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 18 15:29:46 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:29:46 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F72QTm5TlXAnK00058df7@hotmail.com>

You could rather easily live out of a 1990 saab hatchback with fold down 
seats.

People make excuses for SUVs, but it's hard to justify a "need".

BAL

>From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:16:31 -0700
>
> > Greg Burch
>...
> > One of the things that galls me about the SUV craze is that
> > in a sense it has spoiled it for people who really need
> > and/or use SUVs for what they are good at...
> > Infiniti F35/45 is way, way cool looking and not too far over
> > the top... Greg Burch
>
>Greg, part of the appeal of the SUV is the notion that
>should one fall upon hard times, one could live in it.
>There was a period in my own life when I would gladly
>have lived in my car, had I owned a car at that time.
>
>There is a silver lining to all this in a sense.  Currently
>used SUV and van prices are dropping to the extent that they
>will surely be the vehicle of choice for the underclasses.
>Since they also get poor gas mileage, as the price of fuel
>rises, the underclass are less likely to take them
>joyriding, or anywhere besides to work and to the local
>McDonalds.  That will in the long run cause our roads to
>be less crowded.
>
>The thread title should be "real extropians *with money*
>don't drive SUVs."
>
>Of course the parking lot of the local Walmart will become
>more crowded, but thats a whole nuther problem.
>
>spike
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Aug 18 15:51:46 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:51:46 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDOEGLCJAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040817163640.04d3f008@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040818103034.01dc82b0@unreasonable.com>

Greg wrote:

>I acknowledge that that there is a relatively narrow category of 
>driver/utily for which an SUV is basically the perfect car.

I don't think it's that narrow. For starters, there's a hefty chunk of the 
population that lives, works, or recreates in the frozen north or a rural 
setting, or would otherwise buy a pickup truck with a cab.

Sub/urban drivers who would not often require SUV features could still 
benefit from them in emergency situations, but some of the gain stems from 
others who are also fleeing being ill-prepared. Were LA to face a calamity 
that not all could survive, I'd rather Natasha have a relative advantage.

>Good design could recapture the supposed safety benefits of the massive 
>traditional SUV's crashworthiness with crush zones.

Doesn't some of the crashworthiness derive from raw weight? Won't a heavier 
instance of the same design have more crashworthiness than a lighter 
version? I'm recalling homework problems involving momentum and kinetic 
energy in elastic and inelastic collisions.

>** Hybird Motors.  As you point out, this is happening and, ironically, 
>the greater space available in the SUV platform makes them a natural for 
>hybrid technology.

I'd rather see a design that could run on anything that poured or burned. 
Why are diesels rare in consumer vehicles? Why didn't the steam revival 
succeed? (Years back, there was a good article on them in analog. "Steamer 
Time?" by Wallace West, in the 9/1968 issue.)

>the loss in gross pulling power in getting rid of the heavy, inflexible 
>solid rear axle isn't felt by the soccer moms who never need to tow a 
>mobile ICBM.

Many soccer moms have daughters who are into horses. In my married days, we 
had a Suburban to pull a horse trailer. Damn heavy.

And wouldn't a soccer mom need to tow mobile ICBMs in an "Ungoverned" 
future? I've met a few Second Amendment Sisters who'd be up for it.

>** Center of Gravity.  The first three factors above will naturally lower 
>the center of gravity (the hybrids' placement of their batteries down low 
>in the frame, for instance).  Further employment of a little thought to 
>move as many components to the bottom of the design as possible can do 
>this.  Even more smarts employed to make an actively-controlled suspension 
>that raises and lowers the vehicle for various modes finishes the C/G problem.

Some SUVs have this. (As did our 1970 Citroen wagon. It's amusing to see 
car manufacturers touting innovative features, like a second set of 
headlights that are linked to the steering wheel, that we had 30 years ago.)


-- David Lubkin.




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 18 16:00:04 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:00:04 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F29tQoPAzdaQY000596f7@hotmail.com>

Considering demographics, the numbers of people who tow boats (or horses) is 
way lower than SUV purchases.

I live in Atlanta and I see tons and tons of SUVs. It ices about once a year 
here and a good awd sedan will perform just as well as a hummer in those 
conditions.

Maybe it's dream of towing horses or surviving a nuclear holocost that's 
attracting all these SUV buyers.

All of the arguments except towing capacity apply equally to a volvo or bmw 
awd wagan as to an SUV.

BAL

>From: David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:51:46 -0400
>
>Greg wrote:
>
>>I acknowledge that that there is a relatively narrow category of 
>>driver/utily for which an SUV is basically the perfect car.
>
>I don't think it's that narrow. For starters, there's a hefty chunk of the 
>population that lives, works, or recreates in the frozen north or a rural 
>setting, or would otherwise buy a pickup truck with a cab.
>
>Sub/urban drivers who would not often require SUV features could still 
>benefit from them in emergency situations, but some of the gain stems from 
>others who are also fleeing being ill-prepared. Were LA to face a calamity 
>that not all could survive, I'd rather Natasha have a relative advantage.
>
>>Good design could recapture the supposed safety benefits of the massive 
>>traditional SUV's crashworthiness with crush zones.
>
>Doesn't some of the crashworthiness derive from raw weight? Won't a heavier 
>instance of the same design have more crashworthiness than a lighter 
>version? I'm recalling homework problems involving momentum and kinetic 
>energy in elastic and inelastic collisions.
>
>>** Hybird Motors.  As you point out, this is happening and, ironically, 
>>the greater space available in the SUV platform makes them a natural for 
>>hybrid technology.
>
>I'd rather see a design that could run on anything that poured or burned. 
>Why are diesels rare in consumer vehicles? Why didn't the steam revival 
>succeed? (Years back, there was a good article on them in analog. "Steamer 
>Time?" by Wallace West, in the 9/1968 issue.)
>
>>the loss in gross pulling power in getting rid of the heavy, inflexible 
>>solid rear axle isn't felt by the soccer moms who never need to tow a 
>>mobile ICBM.
>
>Many soccer moms have daughters who are into horses. In my married days, we 
>had a Suburban to pull a horse trailer. Damn heavy.
>
>And wouldn't a soccer mom need to tow mobile ICBMs in an "Ungoverned" 
>future? I've met a few Second Amendment Sisters who'd be up for it.
>
>>** Center of Gravity.  The first three factors above will naturally lower 
>>the center of gravity (the hybrids' placement of their batteries down low 
>>in the frame, for instance).  Further employment of a little thought to 
>>move as many components to the bottom of the design as possible can do 
>>this.  Even more smarts employed to make an actively-controlled suspension 
>>that raises and lowers the vehicle for various modes finishes the C/G 
>>problem.
>
>Some SUVs have this. (As did our 1970 Citroen wagon. It's amusing to see 
>car manufacturers touting innovative features, like a second set of 
>headlights that are linked to the steering wheel, that we had 30 years 
>ago.)
>
>
>-- David Lubkin.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From jonkc at att.net  Wed Aug 18 16:32:56 2004
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:32:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac><000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>
Message-ID: <014601c48541$1431e840$a5ff4d0c@hal2001>

The top 1% of the nation's taxpayers pay over 23% of the entire federal
income tax burden; that's half again as much as the bottom 2/3, even though
they are 67 times as numerous they pay less than 16% of the money needed to
operate the government. Thus if you are going to lower taxes in a
economically significant way it must effect people who actually pay taxes,
and that means it will effect the very rich more than the very poor.
Otherwise it's not economics, it's just a publicity stunt.

John K Clark    jonkc at att.net




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 17:03:59 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <003301c48536$5a204910$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040818170359.6179.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Of course the parking lot of the local Walmart will become
> more crowded, but thats a whole nuther problem.

Sure, but with 4wd, driving over the obstructions becomes much more
practical. I'm waiting to see 4wd shopping cart scooters for disabled
shoppers. "mud sale on aisle 32!"

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 17:09:01 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F29tQoPAzdaQY000596f7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040818170901.7574.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Considering demographics, the numbers of people who tow boats (or
> horses) is 
> way lower than SUV purchases.
> 
> I live in Atlanta and I see tons and tons of SUVs. It ices about once
> a year 
> here and a good awd sedan will perform just as well as a hummer in
> those conditions.

depends on the tires, of course. Hummers more likely to have useful
tires, the volvo is going to have some wimpy all seasons or rain tires,
which are pretty useless in the especially icy winter conditions seen
in the south. We northerners are always entertained by newsclips of
southerners in winter storms spinning all over the place...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Aug 18 18:15:59 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:15:59 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F29tQoPAzdaQY000596f7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040818134609.050022f8@unreasonable.com>

Brian Lee wrote:

>All of the arguments except towing capacity apply equally to a volvo or 
>bmw awd wagan as to an SUV.

An AWD wagon will function as well as a 4WD vehicle under ordinary Atlanta 
city conditions. However, it lacks the 4L mode of a true 4WD. The Volvo and 
BMW also lack the other off-road features of a decent 4x4, such as ground 
clearance and underbody plating.

A sizable chunk of my life (and, I believe, of Mike's) has been spent 
living or traveling in circumstances where a 4x4 is preferable or necessary.

Also, Consumer Reports does not consider the Volvo or BMW AWD wagons to be 
as reliable as the 4Runner.


-- David Lubkin.




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Aug 18 18:35:20 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:35:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food
In-Reply-To: <412333B6.7070805@dsl.pipex.com>
Message-ID: <20040818183520.48863.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Bryan Moss <bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> I think also that it's primarily the fact that
> McDonalds et al can't 
> reach the larger, more health-conscious,
> middle-class demographic now 
> that causes them to take the strategy of foisting
> large portions of food 
> on the unfortunate demographic they can reach (i.e.,
> the poor and people 
> in a hurry).  As fast food is able to serve more of
> the population 
> (i.e., relatively wealthy return customers), the
> incentives to tailor 
> food toward addiction and inadequancy of fulfilment
> drop off.

I don't particularly see that McDonalds et al tailors
their food this way - any more than food was already
addictive.  (We need to eat to live, so we are wired
to think of eating as a good thing.)  As I see it,
it's more a matter of economics and what happens to
have been developed.

The current crop of fast food is cheap to make in
bulk.  That will likely remain a requisite for any
mass-marketed food.  Healthier food is more expensive
to produce.  The math leads to today's result.  But
it's also the case that healthier foods are being
produced in greater quantities (a number of fast food
places offer salads, for example), which drives their
costs down in addition to research into how to produce
them cheaper.  (The various steps used today to
squeeze every dollar out of a hamburger were not
thought up overnight.)

I'm looking forwards to the day when yeast, algae, or
similar edible substances can be grown, flavored, and
textured on the spot in any restuarant-sized kitchen,
which should remove a lot of the infrastructure cost,
especially if flavors and vitamins can likewise be
produced in vats in the kitchen.  This could also have
a significant liberalizing effect: if a city is placed
under seige by those who would use force to get their
way, or resupply is threatened by corporate interests
that have little to do with feeding the people, the
restaurants can thumb their noses at these would-be
masters and keep operating.  (This would be more
useful where the rule of law breaks down, since the
law could repossess the restaurant if the law's still
working.)


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Aug 18 19:19:57 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:19:57 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <101530-220048318191957721@M2W036.mail2web.com>


From: Mike Lorrey 

--- Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:

> 
> I'm sticking with my 1992 Benz - mileage is very great and I cannot
> afford a new car right now :-) I like luxury cars, sports cars scar
> me.

Is that scar or scare? Or both? ;)

Both! ... been scared more than once by fast-paced vehicles.  (But I meant
to say scare of course).

N

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




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Wed Aug 18 19:56:03 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:56:03 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F36PzQT456UnH0005b940@hotmail.com>

Actually, Volvo makes a raised version (XC70) that does offer the clearance 
of an SUV and they function very well in off-road conditions.

Additionally, I made it through the winters of Minnesota in a non-AWD 
station wagon.

The amount of off-road driving done by typical SUV owners is negligible in 
the comparison, although it seems that you do a lot of off-roading in yours.

BAL

>From: David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:15:59 -0400
>
>Brian Lee wrote:
>
>>All of the arguments except towing capacity apply equally to a volvo or 
>>bmw awd wagan as to an SUV.
>
>An AWD wagon will function as well as a 4WD vehicle under ordinary Atlanta 
>city conditions. However, it lacks the 4L mode of a true 4WD. The Volvo and 
>BMW also lack the other off-road features of a decent 4x4, such as ground 
>clearance and underbody plating.
>
>A sizable chunk of my life (and, I believe, of Mike's) has been spent 
>living or traveling in circumstances where a 4x4 is preferable or 
>necessary.
>
>Also, Consumer Reports does not consider the Volvo or BMW AWD wagons to be 
>as reliable as the 4Runner.
>
>
>-- David Lubkin.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Aug 18 20:42:20 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:42:20 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F36PzQT456UnH0005b940@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY17-F36PzQT456UnH0005b940@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0408181342fef6a99@mail.gmail.com>

I am having some difficulty relating the detailed discussion about the
advantages of SUVs with Emlyn's original post.

Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
their drivers in increasing numbers.

Quote:
"Even according to the revised figures there were mixed results in the
2003 figures, with deaths in sport utility vehicles (SUVs) rising
dramatically, traffic deaths in motorcycle crashes increasing for the
6th year in a row, and fatalities in crashes involving large trucks on
the upswing.
Rollover deaths continued at high levels due to the ever-increasing
proportion of light trucks in the passenger vehicle fleet. Overall,
rollover deaths in SUVs jumped nearly 7 percent, from 2,471 in 2002 to
2,639 in 2003. The majority of people killed in SUVs, 6 of every 10,
die in rollover crashes."

David may be the exception that proves the rule, like the 90 year-old
chain smoker next door, but you can't argue with the road kill
figures. That's how Nader got famous, when the motor industry was
selling cars that killed people in excessive numbers.

BillK


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 18 21:20:43 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0408181342fef6a99@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040818212043.65501.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am having some difficulty relating the detailed discussion about
> the advantages of SUVs with Emlyn's original post.
> 
> Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
> might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
> their drivers in increasing numbers.

What it shows is that increasing numbers of incompetent drivers are
driving vehicles that they do not take the time to learn to drive
responsibly. Years ago the owner of a Subaru dealership told me: "2wd
will get you out of situations you normally wouldn't get out of, but it
will get you into situations you normally wouldn't get into." He was
right, but learning to tell the difference between the two sorts of
situations is the key to safe driving of any kind.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From paatschb at optusnet.com.au  Wed Aug 18 22:19:46 2004
From: paatschb at optusnet.com.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:19:46 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Just test2 pls ignore 
Message-ID: <001701c48571$78501790$362c2dcb@homepc>

Testing new userid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040819/a9f7ed78/attachment.html>

From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Aug 18 22:19:49 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:19:49 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Just test pls ignore
Message-ID: <001b01c48571$7d1e4170$362c2dcb@homepc>

Texting old userid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040819/7b16d834/attachment.html>

From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Aug 18 23:13:39 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:13:39 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0408181342fef6a99@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BAY17-F36PzQT456UnH0005b940@hotmail.com>
	<BAY17-F36PzQT456UnH0005b940@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040818182616.061e9978@unreasonable.com>

BillK wrote:

>Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
>might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
>their drivers in increasing numbers.
>         :
>but you can't argue with the road kill
>figures. That's how Nader got famous, when the motor industry was
>selling cars that killed people in excessive numbers.

Funny you should bring up Nader. There's a fairly good case that he 
misrepresented what was going on. As with thalidomide and with Erin 
Brockovich, reality differs from "what everyone knows."

http://www.corvaircorsa.com/handling01.html
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/printts20040303.shtml

I see you participated in the July thread "Driver safety and the 
immortalist" but apparently don't agree with the points raised about the 
distinction between correlation and causation, and the difficulty in 
teasing out causes.

As in everything else, safety is not the only consideration in vehicle 
selection. And no vehicle choice will be the safest under all plausible 
driving scenarios. To me, the goal of a discussion among immortalists is to 
clarify the options and trade-offs so we can each make informed decisions 
for ourselves and recommendations for those we love.

>but you can't argue with the road kill figures.

*That's* plain goofy. We can and do argue with anything.


-- David Lubkin.




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Aug 18 23:42:15 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:42:15 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Just test pls ignore
References: <001b01c48571$7d1e4170$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <00ce01c4857c$fdd6d3d0$362c2dcb@homepc>

apologies for noise on the channel. Nothing to read here as is diagnostics only

- Im seeing if old userid still gets mailed via server software to my mail program

contents of my posts in a thread are not showing on exi list bbs unless they are replied to by other posters in which case its their post that pick them up

suspect email attachment is being added either by setting in my new outlook express client or the server mailprog and server software is handling by culling attachment as per with eugen's posts where all content is in attachments

David if you read this and can assist pls do
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040819/6e03acf5/attachment.html>

From evmick at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 19 01:09:46 2004
From: evmick at earthlink.net (Everitt Mickey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:09:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
Message-ID: <4123FDDA.90306@earthlink.net>

BillK apparently said.

>Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
> might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
> their drivers in increasing numbers.

You know?....this kind of non logic really ticks me off.

Real extropians oughta know better.

Since WHEN can an inantimate object display any type of violition?  Do guns kill people?  Do trucks kill people?  Does aspirin kill people? Does TV kill people?  Is it a great conspiricay of the inantimate to kill off humans?  NO....in actuality stupid people kill themselves (which in the long run is a good thing)and others...(which is a bad thing) ....but by ascribing this logic to their actions they are releived of guilt...yeaa!...verily my brothers and cistern....gain martryr status......holy victimhood.... and are  free to go about killing more people.  

Worse....this type of thinking gives the  (can't think of a sufficiently bad descriptive adjective....<bleeding hearts?...no.....liberals?...No....<@#$%&*>....yeah...but inappropriate to the venue) ......er......"people-who-know-what's-best-for-everyone-else" ammunition so that they can make MORE AND More and more and more RULES.

To my way of thinking this attitude is similar if not identical to that of the Bad guys of 911 fame.  After all THEY know god's will....they....<urp>

Etc. etc. etc....yammer yammer yammer.....

This really gets my goat.  <throwing cap on ground....jumping up and down onit.>

Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....where "killer dust storms...and killer sun....and Killer...."

"Against stupidity....the gods themselves contend in vain"
"For centuries engineers have been trying to foolproof technology.....so far the fools are winning"



From evmick at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 19 01:29:06 2004
From: evmick at earthlink.net (Everitt Mickey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:29:06 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Killer SUV's (oh my)
Message-ID: <41240262.5020805@earthlink.net>

and the same mentality that brings Killer SUV's b rings....


Tadaaaaaaaaaa

*IDIOTS IN SERVICE*
This week, my phone went dead and I had to contact the telephone repair 
people. They promised to be out between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. When I 
asked if they could give me a smaller time window, the pleasant 
gentleman asked,
"Would you like us to call you before we come?"
I replied that I didn't see how he would be able to do that, since our 
phones weren't working. He also requested that we report future outages 
by email. I asked him,
"Does YOUR email work without a telephone line?"






*IDIOTS AT WORK*
I was signing the receipt for my credit card purchase when the clerk 
noticed I had never signed my name on the back of the credit card. She 
informed me that she could not complete the transaction unless the card 
was signed. When I asked why, she explained that it was necessary to 
compare the signature I had just signed on the receipt. So I signed the 
credit card in front of her. She carefully compared the signature to the 
one I had just signed on the receipt. _As luck would have it_,
they matched.





*IDIOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
*I live in a semi rural area. We recently had a new neighbor call the 
local township administrative office to request the removal of the Deer 
Crossing sign on our road. The reason:
"too many deer were being hit by cars"
and he didn't want them to cross there anymore.








*IDIOTS IN FOOD SERVICE*
*My daughter went to a local Taco Bell and ordered a taco.** She asked 
the person behind the counter for minimal lettuce." He said he was 
sorry, but they only had iceberg.*






*IDIOT SIGHTING*
*I was at the airport, checking in at the gate when an airport employee 
asked, "Has anyone put anything in your baggage without your 
knowledge?"** To which I replied, "If it was without my knowledge, how 
would I know?" He smiled knowingly and nodded, "That's why we ask." *






*IDIOT SIGHTING
**The stoplight on the corner buzzes when it's safe to cross the street. 
I was crossing with an intellectually challenged coworker of mine when 
she asked if I knew what the buzzer was for. I explained that it signals 
blind people when the light is red. Appalled, she responded,
"What on earth are blind people doing driving?"*






*IDIOT SIGHTING*
*I work with an individual who plugged her power strip back into itself 
and for the life of her couldn't understand why her system would not 
turn on.*








*IDIOT SIGHTING
**When my husband and I arrived at an automobile dealership to pick up 
our car, we were told the keys had been locked in it. We went to the 
service department and found a mechanic working feverishly to unlock the 
driver's side door. As I watched from the passenger side, I 
instinctively tried the door handle and discovered that it was unlocked. 
"Hey," I announced to the technician, "It's open!" To which he replied, 
"I know - I already got that side."
*








From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Thu Aug 19 01:52:02 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:52:02 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
References: <4123FDDA.90306@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <00fc01c4858f$1f3e4a50$362c2dcb@homepc>

Everitt Mickey wrote:

 > Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....where "killer dust
> storms...and killer sun....and Killer...."
> 
> "Against stupidity....the gods themselves contend in vain"
> "For centuries engineers have been trying to foolproof technology
> .....so far the fools are winning"

Thanks for that Evmick in the wastes of New Mexico. I *feel*
better having just read your "rant" (and I'm not being ironic).  

Don't feel too bad though about Mexico though the homo sapiens
turkiens count is pretty high everwhere. All nations all peoples
and all parties. 

Good health to you and try not to choke on turkey feathers.

Regards,
Brett Paatsch  

PS: Sorry folks for the erratic posts of late I'm wresting with
tech issues and people issues and "biting off more than I can
chew issues".  Guess you could say I have  "issues" :-)  




From dgc at cox.net  Thu Aug 19 02:03:00 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:03:00 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] and the nano/holo fun goes on...
In-Reply-To: <3948se$6b3803@mxip08a.cluster1.charter.net>
References: <3948se$6b3803@mxip08a.cluster1.charter.net>
Message-ID: <41240A54.1070703@cox.net>

duggerj1 at charter.net wrote:

>Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>  
>
>>[Claimed a current cost of $1000/TB]
>>    
>>
>
>Well, not quite so cheap as that. Having just bought 1000 GB of disk space in the last three months, I confidently state it costs a little more than $1000. Dan's estimate might prove right for a stationary set-up. 
>
>As portable computers turn into wearables, and as cell phones do the same, we'll see demand for ever-larger portable storage. In particular, I suspect as medicine improves medical monitoring will become biotelemetry. This might increase demand for very reliable, compact and high-density data storage. If black-boxes serve well in vehicles, could they serve as well in biological systems? People, children, valuable animals, crops and their symbiotes, all might need data storage like this. As it grows cheaper, more applications turn economical. 
>  
>
Portable storage is "temporary." You eventually get back to your home 
base, or to a place from which you can communicate with your base for 
"free." therefore, the cost for massive storage should be at a fixed 
location, not a portable location. I built a 1TB store at my house last 
year for <$1000. To evaluate the requirement for portable storage, you 
need to compute the average data rate for data accumulation times the 
amount of time you will be cut off from a "free" connection to your 
permanent store. note that the examples you cite have trivial data 
rates, <<10Kbps average, and therefore have inconsequential storage 
costs. The costs of the battery overwhelm the cost of a Flash ram at 
this rate. (10Kbps=36Mbps/hr=108MB/day, or <$20.)

>>The only way I know to use this much disk at home is to store DVDs. 
>>Storing audio
>>CDs hardly counts: my entire CD collection fits on <<300GB with lossless 
>>compression.
>>    
>>
>
>You can see other ideas for this kind of storage space in Microsoft's MyLifeBits project. <http://research.microsoft.com/barc/mediapresence/MyLifeBits.aspx>
>
>Video swallows disk space, and with wearable cameras one can very well have a personal Wayback Machine for one's own life. Today it is very easy to have a personal Wayback Machine for the Internet--just use wget as your default web browser.
>
>Unfortunately, the real problem with this volume of data storage is the user interface. Already a professional society of organizers exists for possessions. <http://www.napo.net/> Any bets on how long before these branch out into organizing your digitized life, into ordering one's N-Bytes of data? I'll go even odds on 27 months, +/- 9 months.
>
>So how do you eventually handle this? Abandon the hierachical file system to mere googling? Hire a butler equal parts remembrance agent, OpenCyc, and ALICE to explain where you left what and why? Or do you build a memory palace in a gibsonian-style cyberspace to remind one's self of everything
>  
>
This is all very interesting, but the organization of the data has at 
most a minor impact on the size of the data, except to the extent that a 
sophisticated system can reduce the amount of storage.

You need to run the numbers again. A 1Mbps continuous video is likely to 
be more than enough, after compression. 1Mbps is 3.6Gb/hr, or 
3.6Gb*24hr*1B/8b=10.8GB per day. If you can get home once a day (where 
"home" == "free" access to home) then you only need 10.8 GB of portable 
store. Portable store is currently a LOT more expensive than 
non-portable, but that is not what we were discussing: your portable 
store is a temporary buffer.

Continue to do the math: 10GB/day is 3650GB/yr, or 3.65TB/yr. That's 
$3650/yr at today's prices, but the prices is dropping at 50%/yr. (Yes, 
counterintuitivly, it's faster than Moore's Law.) That says that by the 
time you can get around to implementing a fully-documented life, the 
lifetime cost will be <$3,000. That's lifetime cost, not yearly cost.
Of course, as your life becomes richer (due to augmented intelligence) 
you will need to increase the bit rate required to capture it, unless of 
course your data compression capabilities increase in proportion.

Just for the heck of it, let's consider the cost of the portable store.: 
10.8GB. Let's go for the expensive approach: flash. Looking at 
www.pricewatch.com, we see that flash (in the form of USB flashs drives) 
costs $100/GB, retail, quantity 1. So we can store 10.8GB for $1100, 
plus the rest of he cost of your wearable, and we can confidently expect 
this cost to come down by half every 18 months or better. Size of the 
buffer goes up with the acquisition bit rate, but it goes down with the 
"cost" of connectivity with home. A reasonable first approximation would 
be that the size will less than double each year and the cost per GB 
will be less than half/GB each year, so the yearly cost of temporary 
(protable, buffer) storage will decrease each year.

Conclusion: for leading-edge geeks, a continuous life-record is already 
easily in economic reach. The current cost is primarily the system 
development cost, not the HW cost.

>>You can store about 5 audio CDs with lossless compression (flac) in one 
>>GB, for a storage
>>cost of $.20/CD. Storage cost for a DVD would be about $4.00, which is a 
>>small fraction
>>    
>>
>
>Double these numbers for a back-up copy of valuable data. :)
>
>  
>
I did :-)
I'm keeping two live copies of my CD collection, one active, one backup. 
Ripping about 1000 CD's took a lot of time, and my time is valuable. It 
would have been cheaper to store the result onto DVD-RW, except that the 
time to do so was more expensive than doubling the amount of hard disk.

Note that "double" is really a brute-force approach, based on laziness. 
I'm using a brute-force backup scheme. If I used RAID-5, I could get the 
same level of backup at a 25% increment instead of a 100% increment.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 19 02:07:41 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:07:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F29tQoPAzdaQY000596f7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <005501c48591$4f9c9330$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Brian Lee
 
> Maybe it's dream of towing horses or surviving a nuclear 
> holocost that's attracting all these SUV buyers.

YES!  You don't want to destroy the proletariat's dreams, 
do you?

> All of the arguments except towing capacity apply equally to 
> a volvo or bmw awd wagan as to an SUV.  BAL

Hmmm, I don't know Brian.  I would think living in an
SUV would be easier duty than a Saab, and would be
cheaper to fix.  Furthermore the price of a well-used
SUV is lower than Saab, Volvo or BMW in the US.  I can
see 20 yr old SUVs becoming the ride of choice for the
under classes, or rather they already are.  The 
underclasses also enjoy  complete immunity to criticism.

spike



From dgc at cox.net  Thu Aug 19 02:19:42 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:19:42 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] evmick's idiot sightings
In-Reply-To: <41240262.5020805@earthlink.net>
References: <41240262.5020805@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <41240E3E.6000405@cox.net>

Everitt Mickey wrote:

>
>
> *IDIOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
> *I live in a semi rural area. We recently had a new neighbor call the 
> local township administrative office to request the removal of the 
> Deer Crossing sign on our road. The reason:
> "too many deer were being hit by cars"
> and he didn't want them to cross there anymore.
>
>
ROTFLAMAO!!!

PLEASE tell me that these are not personal idiot sightings!? In any 
case, they are hilarious. This particular one sounds like my neighborhood.


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 02:34:20 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:34:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <1092882860.26349@whirlwind.he.net>

BillK wrote:
> 
> Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
> might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
> their drivers in increasing numbers.


SUVs are in all likelihood killing people who made stupid choices,
whether how they drive or in their choice of vehicles in which to drive.

The problem is ultimately ignorance, not SUVs.  SUVs are very safe *if
used correctly*, and safer than any other vehicle under many conditions.
 Most of the drivers I see around here are soccer moms playing Pole
Position on the freeway, completely oblivious to the parameters that
were assumed in the design of the vehicle to make it off-road worthy and
causing a market shift such that most SUVs now made are not actually
off-road worthy to compensate for the poor driving of the people who buy
them now.  And even if they are off-road capable, most people do not
have the slightest clue how to drive off-road.  Owning an SUV no more
makes you off-road ready than owning a computer makes you a software
engineer, and the lack of even basic knowledge of this among suburban
owners of SUVs explains 100% of all stranded "off-roaders" I've pulled
out of the wilderness over the years.

There is nothing inherently unsafe about SUVs, it is just that a larger
percentage of the people who drive them now know nothing about how to
drive them and so treat them like some type of indestructible car.  In
other words, an education problem.  It is the same as how virtually all
firearm accidents happen because some fool wasn't following the basic
rules of firearm safety or didn't feel the need to learn them.  If you
give unfamiliar power tools to monkeys, bad things are bound to happen.


j. andrew rogers



From joe at barrera.org  Thu Aug 19 02:53:35 2004
From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:53:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <1092882860.26349@whirlwind.he.net>
References: <1092882860.26349@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <4124162F.9050803@barrera.org>

J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

>  following the basic rules of firearm safety or didn't feel the need
>  to learn them. If you give unfamiliar power tools to monkeys, bad
>  things are bound to happen.

Well, the problem is that someone ELSE gave these power tools to
these monkeys, and I'm here driving to work in a Honda del Sol
hoping some monkey doesn't plot a course over my body.

In other words, *I'm* not the one handing out guns to ducks.
(reference to old Kilban cartoon)

- Joe



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Thu Aug 19 03:13:33 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:13:33 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <4123FDDA.90306@earthlink.net>
References: <4123FDDA.90306@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0408182252200.-40949401@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


Horray for Evmick!!!!!! :)

Well said indeed. :)

Thank you.
Regards,
MB


On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Everitt Mickey wrote:

> BillK apparently said.
>
> >Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
> > might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
> > their drivers in increasing numbers.
>
> You know?....this kind of non logic really ticks me off.
>
> Real extropians oughta know better.
[...]


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 19 03:13:03 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:13:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] evmicks idiot sightings
Message-ID: <20040819031303.7202.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

up in northern NH is this fellow named Wild Billy Donovan. one night
driving home a bit tipsy in the fog, he struck a moose with his pickup
(aregular car woulda been fatal to the driver, so there). He called the
sheriff to report the accident. Ivestigation folllowed, when he asked
the sheriff if he could have the carcass.
 Sheriff says no, the moose herd is state property.
So Bill hires himself alawyer and sues the state, because its herd
animal was in the road after dark, crossing outside a crossing zone,
not wearing a flourescent vest, and no indicator lights either.
Billy won himself a new truck, and the state changed the law to let you
keep your roadkill....
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> Everitt Mickey wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > *IDIOTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
> > *I live in a semi rural area. We recently had a new neighbor call
the 
> > local township administrative office to request the removal of the 
> > Deer Crossing sign on our road. The reason:
> > "too many deer were being hit by cars"
> > and he didn't want them to cross there anymore.
> >
> >
> ROTFLAMAO!!!
> 
> PLEASE tell me that these are not personal idiot sightings!? In any 
> case, they are hilarious. This particular one sounds like my
neighborhood.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Thu Aug 19 03:12:31 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:12:31 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] "sensitive" war
References: <000001c48292$3d723ef0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <013e01c4859a$5dea4af0$362c2dcb@homepc>

Spike wrote: 

> I admit I am at a loss in this election.  I see no real
> differences in how the two front runners will handle
> the war.  [X] says he will fight a more sensitive war.  But
> all war is hell, there is no reforming it. 

Can't agree Spike. "Sensitive" doesn't necessarily mean
weak and soppy. Though it might. It might mean using all 
the senses. The best warriors notice the subtle things. If
they don't they aren't the best warriors.

*Sometimes*, but not always, the use of soft weapons 
(like diplomacy) can save the lives of your own troops. 

Or if you don't care about your troups it can save you 
the cost of replacing your military consumables which you
may need sometime to deploy when the soft weapons
won't work.  

*Sometimes* its the warrior (the hawk that looks like the
dove) who gets past the technology and the mindsets that 
are aimed at killing big fierce warriors.  

When that is the case the commander that uses his senses
best, the one that is most "sensitive" will waste less of his
troups, or whatever else he (or she) values. 

There was a scene in the movie Braveheart where Edward
the Longshanks give an order to fire arrows into a mellee and
his second in charge says "pardon me Sire, but won't we hit
our own troups?" To which Longshanks replies "yes, but we
will hit theirs too, and WE have reserves". 

An insensitive warrior (or commander) is one with lots of 
scars or unhappy troops or constituents, because they miss
the easy wins.  He or she wins (if they win) only having taken
a suboptimal route given their own resources.  Insensitity,
even in war, will produce waste.

And often the wars the commanders are fighting are not the
wars the soldiers on either side think are being fought. 

Brett 










From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 19 03:48:16 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians dont drive SUVs
Message-ID: <20040819034816.99973.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

nope, your a duc`
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <joe at barrera.org> wrote:
> J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> 
> >  following the basic rules of firearm safety or didn't feel the
need
> >  to learn them. If you give unfamiliar power tools to monkeys, bad
> >  things are bound to happen.
> 
> Well, the problem is that someone ELSE gave these power tools to
> these monkeys, and I'm here driving to work in a Honda del Sol
> hoping some monkey doesn't plot a course over my body.
> 
> In other words, *I'm* not the one handing out guns to ducks.
> (reference to old Kilban cartoon)
> 
> - Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From evmick at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 19 04:10:48 2004
From: evmick at earthlink.net (Everitt Mickey)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:10:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0408181342fef6a99@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BAY17-F36PzQT456UnH0005b940@hotmail.com>
	<ee50357e0408181342fef6a99@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <41242848.3040701@earthlink.net>

BillK wrote:

> and fatalities in crashes involving large trucks on
>the upswing.
>
>  
>

Not according to the figures I"VE seen.....the reverse actually.  Makes 
me wonder.

To wit....in the last two or three years the annual fatalities involving 
motor vehickles have hit an all time low of less than 5,000 (five 
thousand) a year...of which several HUNDRED have involved big trucks.  
(so naturally...they make the laws applying to trucks more stringent.)  
Each year the figger gets less..

Some federal alphabet soupe agency..(FHMSA?).. figures.....I read it in 
a magazine...(Trucker's News)....don't have URL's for magazines....

I'm a trucker....I pay attention to these things.

EvMick

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



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 04:55:05 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:55:05 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <4124162F.9050803@barrera.org>
References: <1092882860.26349@whirlwind.he.net> <4124162F.9050803@barrera.org>
Message-ID: <F0347AD0-F19B-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 18, 2004, at 7:53 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
>>  following the basic rules of firearm safety or didn't feel the need
>>  to learn them. If you give unfamiliar power tools to monkeys, bad
>>  things are bound to happen.
>
> Well, the problem is that someone ELSE gave these power tools to
> these monkeys, and I'm here driving to work in a Honda del Sol
> hoping some monkey doesn't plot a course over my body.


Yeah, well that's the problem: how do you distribute the damage.  
Because someone's ox is going to be gored no matter what, and it won't 
be equitable to some not insignificant group.  You don't have any more 
right to drive a Honda del Sol than someone else has a right to drive a 
Chevy Suburban.  You do have a right to file for criminal and civil 
charges no matter what they are driving, though that probably won't 
matter to you if you are dead.

The fact of the matter is that the people got what the people tacitly 
voted for.  As a general rule, you can't legislate against stupidity 
without exacting a worse toll than letting the stupidity running its 
course, in no small part because stupidity only pays attention to 
legislation part of the time.

Nope, being on a planet covered in low-functioning chimps operating 
heavy machinery is a given of the system.  Pick your armor and your 
weapons accordingly.

Heavier and pricier sedans offer some of the best protection on the 
highway, whether you get hit by a Suburban or a Prius under normal road 
conditions, but saving money won't be a consideration.  The primary 
safety argument for proper SUVs only comes into play in hazard 
conditions where the wheels no longer have controlled contact with a 
fully engineered road surface e.g. snow, gravel, or off-road, or where 
you are likely to occasionally run into or over things.  (In some parts 
of the US, there are State highways that are gravel.)

j. andrew rogers



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 19 05:07:07 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:07:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <013e01c4859a$5dea4af0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
western civilization of an attack by some sort of
weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.  We
are developing antimissile tech, but seems to me
another parallel defense would be to encourage
urban sprawl.  An enormous smeared out suburbs
would be far less vulnerable to attack than an
enormous highly concentrated city, would it not?
The argument is made that urban sprawl is bad for
wildlife, but the alternative may encourage an
attack which would be bad for both humans and
wildlife.  Perhaps cities have outlived their
usefulness.

spike



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 05:12:18 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:12:18 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>
Message-ID: <57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 17, 2004, at 4:04 PM, Matthew Gingell wrote:
>  I guess there might be a case that, in the long run, countries with
>  very lopsided income and wealth distributions eventually do better
>  for everyone than countries with a big middle class. I can't think of
>  an obvious historical argument though.


Class mobility, a function of wealth rather than income, matters at 
least as much as the distribution, as this is what provides much of the 
motivation to dare great things.  Very wealthy people contribute a lot 
to society by being able to risk very large sums of capital on things 
that interest them, including many things that the government will 
neither have the will nor the interest to fund regardless of merit.  
This money builds the companies and pays for the research that 
generates the majority of the technology we enjoy today.  The engine of 
innovation is powered by private capital, and one thing history has 
shown is that in hindsight most government funded "innovations" were 
either unnecessary, expensive, or economically irrelevant.

If you have nothing but a middle class, who provides the capital 
required to have a strong economy?

The irony is that progressive income taxes destroy class mobility.

j. andrew rogers



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 05:36:14 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:36:14 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <AF6FAC5A-F1A1-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Spike wrote:
> Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
> western civilization of an attack by some sort of
> weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.  We
> are developing antimissile tech, but seems to me
> another parallel defense would be to encourage
> urban sprawl.  An enormous smeared out suburbs
> would be far less vulnerable to attack than an
> enormous highly concentrated city, would it not?
> The argument is made that urban sprawl is bad for
> wildlife, but the alternative may encourage an
> attack which would be bad for both humans and
> wildlife.  Perhaps cities have outlived their
> usefulness.


The economic optimum would probably be something closer to clusters of 
dense "micro-cities" connected by very efficient transport networks.

You could sweep huge amounts of suburbia into a very small footprint if 
you built vertically such that the density was more like Chicago.  
Separate each of these so that there is 3-5 miles between any two 
micro-cities, with farms, open space, and whatever else is needed in 
between.  My back-of-the-envelope seems to indicate that this would 
work pretty well, at least in theory.  I don't know that people would 
like living in high-rises though, and it would require some adjustment 
of economic assumptions.  Much more environmentally friendly though.


j. andrew rogers



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Thu Aug 19 05:42:48 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 15:12:48 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <AF6FAC5A-F1A1-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<AF6FAC5A-F1A1-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081822422a9eaf93@mail.gmail.com>

Upload us all and store us in server farms deep underground, under
miles of concrete. Yeah!

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:36:14 -0700, J. Andrew Rogers
<andrew at ceruleansystems.com> wrote:
> 
> On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Spike wrote:
> > Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
> > western civilization of an attack by some sort of
> > weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.  We
> > are developing antimissile tech, but seems to me
> > another parallel defense would be to encourage
> > urban sprawl.  An enormous smeared out suburbs
> > would be far less vulnerable to attack than an
> > enormous highly concentrated city, would it not?
> > The argument is made that urban sprawl is bad for
> > wildlife, but the alternative may encourage an
> > attack which would be bad for both humans and
> > wildlife.  Perhaps cities have outlived their
> > usefulness.
> 
> 
> The economic optimum would probably be something closer to clusters of
> dense "micro-cities" connected by very efficient transport networks.
> 
> You could sweep huge amounts of suburbia into a very small footprint if
> you built vertically such that the density was more like Chicago.
> Separate each of these so that there is 3-5 miles between any two
> micro-cities, with farms, open space, and whatever else is needed in
> between.  My back-of-the-envelope seems to indicate that this would
> work pretty well, at least in theory.  I don't know that people would
> like living in high-rises though, and it would require some adjustment
> of economic assumptions.  Much more environmentally friendly though.
> 
> 
> j. andrew rogers
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From evmick at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 19 05:52:20 2004
From: evmick at earthlink.net (Everitt Mickey)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:52:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution of food
In-Reply-To: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <002201c484ed$4a708460$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <41244014.5000301@earthlink.net>

Vegatables is what food eats.

EvMick


From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Aug 19 08:13:19 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 04:13:19 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04081822422a9eaf93@mail.gmail.com>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>	<AF6FAC5A-F1A1-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<710b78fc04081822422a9eaf93@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4124611F.9000403@pobox.com>

Emlyn wrote:
> Upload us all and store us in server farms deep underground, under
> miles of concrete. Yeah!

Rewrite all the matter in human space to run a common operating system with 
protected memory.  Yeah!

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence


From scerir at libero.it  Thu Aug 19 08:31:52 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:31:52 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
References: <4123FDDA.90306@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000601c485c6$fb151c20$c0be1b97@administxl09yj>

> Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....
> where "killer dust storms...and killer sun...."

Lucky you. Killer rocks here
http://www.docushare.it/mediasoft/stradale/segnali/2132_0.jpg

In Italy SUVs and SAVs (sport activity vehicle, I suppose,
term invented by BMW) "kill" other people, i.e. people
walking, people crossing the road, bikers. We use SUVs 
and SAVs just in town. Passion. Fashion.  



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 19 13:29:21 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:29:21 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F28U0aK40K1E500061693@hotmail.com>

I wasn't saying that it would be as comfortable in a 1990 saab hatchback as 
in a 1990 suburban, only that it's possible (I mean it's already got to be 
pretty bad to be living in a car right?). (BTW, a 1990 900 can be purchased 
for around 2k so they are dirt cheap).

I think that if the underclasses start buying used SUVs because of their 
lower price, it will be because of SUV's perception as a "status car". Don't 
ask me why it got this way, but people are proud of driving SUVs like they 
used to be proud of BMWs or MBs. But the underclasses will be in for a shock 
as they discover that SUVs are expensive as well. The only one's that really 
hold together are a couple of Japanese models (Pathfinder, Pilot, etc) and 
1) those are as statusy as the Explorere/Suburban and 2) they are more 
expensive than their domestic counterparts.

BAL

>From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:07:41 -0700
>
> > Brian Lee
>
> > Maybe it's dream of towing horses or surviving a nuclear
> > holocost that's attracting all these SUV buyers.
>
>YES!  You don't want to destroy the proletariat's dreams,
>do you?
>
> > All of the arguments except towing capacity apply equally to
> > a volvo or bmw awd wagan as to an SUV.  BAL
>
>Hmmm, I don't know Brian.  I would think living in an
>SUV would be easier duty than a Saab, and would be
>cheaper to fix.  Furthermore the price of a well-used
>SUV is lower than Saab, Volvo or BMW in the US.  I can
>see 20 yr old SUVs becoming the ride of choice for the
>under classes, or rather they already are.  The
>underclasses also enjoy  complete immunity to criticism.
>
>spike
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From dwish at indco.net  Thu Aug 19 13:37:04 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:37:04 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <000601c485c6$fb151c20$c0be1b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <200408191244.i7JCiiS9012681@br549.indconet.com>



Good sounds like more parking places for the rest of us....

You just need a good hug from John Kerry and you'll feel better...

Dustin Wish
System Engineer & Programmer
INDCO Networks
Pres. OSSRI
********************************************************
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead
 where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
***********************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 3:32 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.

> Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....
> where "killer dust storms...and killer sun...."

Lucky you. Killer rocks here
http://www.docushare.it/mediasoft/stradale/segnali/2132_0.jpg

In Italy SUVs and SAVs (sport activity vehicle, I suppose,
term invented by BMW) "kill" other people, i.e. people
walking, people crossing the road, bikers. We use SUVs 
and SAVs just in town. Passion. Fashion.  

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



From dwish at indco.net  Thu Aug 19 13:40:52 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:40:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Both Sides With John Kerry 
In-Reply-To: <ED6B7A40D8CE434293BB3656A160340A32E485@LEONARD.london.autocue.net>
Message-ID: <200408191248.i7JCmVS9012868@br549.indconet.com>

Both Sides With John Kerry 

Former Democratic front-runner Howard Dean recently criticized current
Democratic front-runner John Kerry for taking the wrong positions (by Dean's
lights) on both the liberation of Kuwait, which Kerry opposed, and the
liberation of Iraq, which he supported. As we all know, Kerry has tried to
have it both ways on Iraq, voting "yes" on the October 2002 resolution
authorizing war, then proclaiming himself shocked that President Bush
actually waged the war Congress authorized. 

It turns out Kerry was no less two-faced about Kuwait 13 years ago. The New
Republic's blogger Noam Scheiber credits TNR intern Josh Benson with digging
up an item that appeared in the magazine's March 25, 1991, issue, quoting a
pair of letters Kerry wrote to constituent Wallace Carter of Newton Centre,
Mass.: 

Jan. 22, 1991: "Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition . . .
to the early use of military force by the US against Iraq. I share your
concerns. On January 11, I voted in favor of a resolution that would have
insisted that economic sanctions be given more time to work and against a
resolution giving the president the immediate authority to go to war." 

Jan. 31, 1991: "Thank you very much for contacting me to express your
support for the actions of President Bush in response to the Iraqi invasion
of Kuwait. From the outset of the invasion, I have strongly and
unequivocally supported President Bush's response to the crisis and the
policy goals he has established with our military deployment in the Persian
Gulf."

Dustin Wish
System Engineer & Programmer
INDCO Networks
Pres. OSSRI
*******************************************************
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead
 where there is no path and leave a trail."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
***********************************************




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 19 13:45:08 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 09:45:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
Message-ID: <BAY17-F34tnhkSrNNOC00057907@hotmail.com>

I'm not sure if this was a joke post or not.

But I think that cars are tools, and choosing an improper, unsafe tool is 
non-optimal.

I equte SUV-defending with fat people who talk about glandular problems 
while eating McDonalds. Of course fast food isn't necessarily the problem, 
but eating it every day is unwise.

Just like SUVs have thier purposes, but no way should they equate for 25% of 
US auto sales. SUVs kill their drivers and passengers because they are more 
unsafe than comperable sedans. That's pretty simple analysis.

I'm not advocating a ban on SUVs, but currently SUVs have several major tax 
incentives going for them. So effectively the gov't wants you to buy a 
dangerous, gas-guzzling SUV and my taxes subsidize SUVs.

BAL

>From: Everitt Mickey <evmick at earthlink.net>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:09:46 -0500
>
>BillK apparently said.
>
>>Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
>>might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
>>their drivers in increasing numbers.
>
>You know?....this kind of non logic really ticks me off.
>
>Real extropians oughta know better.
>
>Since WHEN can an inantimate object display any type of violition?  Do guns 
>kill people?  Do trucks kill people?  Does aspirin kill people? Does TV 
>kill people?  Is it a great conspiricay of the inantimate to kill off 
>humans?  NO....in actuality stupid people kill themselves (which in the 
>long run is a good thing)and others...(which is a bad thing) ....but by 
>ascribing this logic to their actions they are releived of 
>guilt...yeaa!...verily my brothers and cistern....gain martryr 
>status......holy victimhood.... and are  free to go about killing more 
>people.
>
>Worse....this type of thinking gives the  (can't think of a sufficiently 
>bad descriptive adjective....<bleeding 
>hearts?...no.....liberals?...No....<@#$%&*>....yeah...but inappropriate to 
>the venue) ......er......"people-who-know-what's-best-for-everyone-else" 
>ammunition so that they can make MORE AND More and more and more RULES.
>
>To my way of thinking this attitude is similar if not identical to that of 
>the Bad guys of 911 fame.  After all THEY know god's will....they....<urp>
>
>Etc. etc. etc....yammer yammer yammer.....
>
>This really gets my goat.  <throwing cap on ground....jumping up and down 
>onit.>
>
>Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....where "killer dust storms...and 
>killer sun....and Killer...."
>
>"Against stupidity....the gods themselves contend in vain"
>"For centuries engineers have been trying to foolproof technology.....so 
>far the fools are winning"
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 19 14:05:54 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:05:54 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] What does a Bear do in the Woods?
Message-ID: <127090-22004841914554126@M2W096.mail2web.com>

Drink beer!

"It turns out the bear was a bit of a beer sophisticate. He tried a
mass-market Busch beer, but switched to Rainier Beer, a local ale, and
stuck with it for his drinking binge."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/West/08/18/bear.beer.reut/index.html

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




From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 19 14:30:04 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 07:30:04 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Both Sides With John Kerry 
In-Reply-To: <200408191248.i7JCmVS9012868@br549.indconet.com>
Message-ID: <008b01c485f9$05a4e4e0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Dustin Wish
> 
> Both Sides With John Kerry 
> 
> Former Democratic front-runner Howard Dean recently criticized current
> Democratic front-runner John Kerry for taking the wrong 
> positions... Dustin Wish

Perhaps Howard Dean's fortunes will be revived.  Another
October surprise?  You may recall he was deselected by
the news media simply for screaming YEEAAAHHH into a 
microphone.  I would think it permissible for a few
YEEAAAHHHs to escape from a candidate during an election,
should it not?  spike



From megao at sasktel.net  Thu Aug 19 15:15:46 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:15:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense,
	and rural revitalization concept
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<AF6FAC5A-F1A1-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <4124C422.4221A026@sasktel.net>

Actually from those of us in the Rural areas, that sounds wonderful.
The sewer/water/hydro/gas  infrastructure would be decentralized and that
has
some benefits.  It boggles the mind how large metropolis's  can avoid major

catastrophe's with such massive infrastructure support systems to maintain.

The only down side is physical transportation.
Speaking from experience, we in Saskatchewan have about a million people
scattered between 2 larger cities (200,000 each) , 10 smaller centers
(10,000 each)
and a mutitude of small halets scattered over a civilized space of 440 X
440 miles.

We have a "Grid Road System" which has more miles of highway (rural average
is a grid of roads spaced at 2 mile intervals) than any other canadian
jurasdiction.

In the booming 70's the roads were built and many covered with asphalt.
Heavier traffic in the 80's and 90's have kept the paved ones  in a
permanent state of disrepair.. as they were never built to sustain the
weight and speed of modern
semi's , B-trains and such.

Much of the rural rail system has been dismantled over the last 20 years as
well.

More people in each rual center might increase population from 1 to perhaps
10 million ideally, but the connecting road infrastructure would then have
to be
maintained to city rather than rural standards.

I for one would see this population transferance as  a wonderful thing.

On the terrrism side it would make mass extinction next to impossible as it
undoes
100 years of steady rural depopulation.

Rural decentalized power generation from wind similar to the 4 Billion USD
project Enron had planned for North Dakota our neighbouring USA state would
then certainly come to pass.
Distribution of liquid fuels to a decentalized network of hydrogen
catalytic conversion stations would then be economically viable.

The move from a centralized export based commodity economy to a
"decentalized network of clusters" finished product manufacturing economy
base for a centralized finished product export economy would be wonderful
goal for the next 30 years out here.

What has been severly lacking is the integration of , human willpower,
economic drive and
psychological positivity of attitude.

We here in Saskatchewan are called by our neighbour provinces  "The Gap".
The saying goes , " Manitoba sucks and Alberta blows".

So lets hope those terrorists keep scaring the bejeegers out of everybody.
As the "motel 6" commercial goes "we'll keep the lights on".

Pharmer Mo from LA North, Eh, ......AKA ...... Morris Johnson



"J. Andrew Rogers" wrote:

> On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Spike wrote:
> > Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
> > western civilization of an attack by some sort of
> > weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.  We
> > are developing antimissile tech, but seems to me
> > another parallel defense would be to encourage
> > urban sprawl.  An enormous smeared out suburbs
> > would be far less vulnerable to attack than an
> > enormous highly concentrated city, would it not?
> > The argument is made that urban sprawl is bad for
> > wildlife, but the alternative may encourage an
> > attack which would be bad for both humans and
> > wildlife.  Perhaps cities have outlived their
> > usefulness.
>
> The economic optimum would probably be something closer to clusters of
> dense "micro-cities" connected by very efficient transport networks.
>
> You could sweep huge amounts of suburbia into a very small footprint if
> you built vertically such that the density was more like Chicago.
> Separate each of these so that there is 3-5 miles between any two
> micro-cities, with farms, open space, and whatever else is needed in
> between.  My back-of-the-envelope seems to indicate that this would
> work pretty well, at least in theory.  I don't know that people would
> like living in high-rises though, and it would require some adjustment
> of economic assumptions.  Much more environmentally friendly though.
>
> j. andrew rogers
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Aug 19 16:28:37 2004
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (mail at HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:28:37 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 11, Issue 21
In-Reply-To: <200408191341.i7JDfB003645@tick.javien.com>
References: <200408191341.i7JDfB003645@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <04Aug19.122838-0400_edt.311102-13468+15982@ams.ftl.affinity.com>

Everitt Mickey <evmick at earthlink.net> wrote,
> and the same mentality that brings Killer SUV's b rings....

Funny stuff.  It's good to have you back. 

> *IDIOTS IN SERVICE*
> "Would you like us to call you before we come?"
> I replied that I didn't see how he would be able to do that, since our 
> phones weren't working. He also requested that we report future outages 
> by email. I asked him,
> "Does YOUR email work without a telephone line?"

This wouldn't be idiotic for me.  I have a cell-phone and a cable-modem 
Internet connection.  Both work fine while my home telephone is dead.  Nor 
is it really idiotic that they can't schedule the time more precisely.  They 
have no idea what is wrong or how long it will take for each call, so 
subsequent appointments cannot be scheduled.  Trying to get a more exact 
time won't actually make it happen. 

> *IDIOTS AT WORK*
> I was signing the receipt for my credit card purchase when the clerk 
> noticed I had never signed my name on the back of the credit card. She 
> informed me that she could not complete the transaction unless the card 
> was signed. When I asked why, she explained that it was necessary to 
> compare the signature I had just signed on the receipt. So I signed the 
> credit card in front of her. She carefully compared the signature to the 
> one I had just signed on the receipt. _As luck would have it_,
> they matched.

The flaw here is not that the clerk asked the patron to sign the card.  This 
is proper procedure when encountering a blank card.  The problem is that she 
then proceeded to process the cards normally, which does include comparing 
the signature on the receipt to the one on the card.  What she should have 
done is use the alternate procedure for unsigned cards, which is to get the 
card signed and then compare it to the signature on a photo ID provided by 
the patron.  VISA has very specific procedures for these cases at 
<http://usa.visa.com/business/merchants/fraud_basics_cardpresent.html?it=il_ 
/business/merchants/fraud_basics_index.html#link3> 

> *IDIOT SIGHTING*
> *I was at the airport, checking in at the gate when an airport employee 
> asked, "Has anyone put anything in your baggage without your 
> knowledge?"** To which I replied, "If it was without my knowledge, how 
> would I know?" He smiled knowingly and nodded, "That's why we ask." *

The Air Carrier Standard Security Program describes the security procedures 
that air carriers must follow.  Although no longer required, there used to 
be two different questions that they were supposed to ask.  The above 
question isn't one of them.  They are supposed to ask if you packed your own 
bags and if the bags have been in your control at all times since you packed 
them.  If so, you can confirm that no one has put anything in your bags 
without your knowledge.  American Airlines paid fines in 2001 for not asking 
the appropriate questions. 

 --
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> 




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 19 18:38:02 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:38:02 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F8HbSzxdWGHpP00064357@hotmail.com>

>From: "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
>To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:34:20 -0700
>
>BillK wrote:
> >
> > Why should we care whether in certain specific circumstances an SUV
> > might be preferred? The road death figures show that SUVs are killing
> > their drivers in increasing numbers.
>
>
>The problem is ultimately ignorance, not SUVs.  SUVs are very safe *if
>used correctly*,
...
>There is nothing inherently unsafe about SUVs, it is just that a larger
>percentage of the people who drive them now know nothing about how to
>drive them and so treat them like some type of indestructible car.  In
>other words, an education problem.  It is the same as how virtually all
>firearm accidents happen because some fool wasn't following the basic
>rules of firearm safety or didn't feel the need to learn them.  If you
>give unfamiliar power tools to monkeys, bad things are bound to happen.
>j. andrew rogers

There are things inherently unsafe about many SUVs. They have a higher 
tendency to roll over (not just due to driver ignorance). They also make the 
road less safe for non-SUV owners by obstructing their view.

So it is a little more than just "use wisely". If you take an excellent 
driver and have them drive a sedan and an SUV, they will have more 
roll-overs and be more unsafe in the SUV even though their driving skill is 
excellent.

Sort of like handing a monkey a chainsaw and an axe. More injuries with a 
chainsaw than an axe (using the monkey's dexterity as the skill level).

BAL




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 19 19:15:18 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <000601c485c6$fb151c20$c0be1b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <20040819191518.39542.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:

> > Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....
> > where "killer dust storms...and killer sun...."
> 
> Lucky you. Killer rocks here
> http://www.docushare.it/mediasoft/stradale/segnali/2132_0.jpg
> 
> In Italy SUVs and SAVs (sport activity vehicle, I suppose,
> term invented by BMW) "kill" other people, i.e. people
> walking, people crossing the road, bikers. We use SUVs 
> and SAVs just in town. Passion. Fashion.  

A conflation has occured though, in this duscussion. The stats say that
more people are dying in accidents in which trucks and SUVs are
involved. They don't say that those people are in the cars being struck
by the trucks and SUVs, and as the truck/SUV population increases, more
people are going to be hit by, or hit, trucks/SUVs. It says nothing
about the relative danger of being IN a truck or SUV, and Bill, et al
should recognise this important distinction.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 19 19:20:38 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:20:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F8HbSzxdWGHpP00064357@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040819192038.35711.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There are things inherently unsafe about many SUVs. They have a
> higher tendency to roll over (not just due to driver ignorance). 

Wrong. A driver's unwise misestimation of the center of gravity and G
tolerance of a vehicle in cornering, due to too many years driving low
slung cars with different feel characteristics, is not the fault of the
vehicle. Your assertion is as bad as claiming that guns kill people by
jumping up and shooting them all by their selves.

> They also make the 
> road less safe for non-SUV owners by obstructing their view.

I am not responsible for YOUR choice of a short vehicle, any more than
a train engineer is responsible for you being parked on the railroad
tracks as he hits you.

Stop copping out and take responsibility for your own choices and actions.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 19:56:20 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:56:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <1092945380.3442@whirlwind.he.net>

> There are things inherently unsafe about many SUVs. They have a higher 
> tendency to roll over (not just due to driver ignorance). They also
make the 
> road less safe for non-SUV owners by obstructing their view.


There are many things inherently unsafe about EVERY type of vehicle --
engineering is about trade-offs.  To reverse your assertion above, small
sedans are inherently less safe because they give poor visibility.  All
you are saying is that $VEHICLE is the safest of all vehicles iff the
entire universe is engineered to be optimal for the design of $VEHICLE.
 Welcome to the real world.


> So it is a little more than just "use wisely". If you take an excellent 
> driver and have them drive a sedan and an SUV, they will have more 
> roll-overs and be more unsafe in the SUV even though their driving
skill is 
> excellent.


You take your Prius on a gravel highway up in the mountains and I'll
take the unused Bronco sitting in my driveway.  The Prius is inherently
less safe even if you never see another vehicle.  Which would you rather
be in if you hit a moose or cattle or got stuck in a rainstorm on that road?

There is a hell of a lot more to safety than a moderately higher
probability of rollovers, which are a tiny portion of the bigger
calculus.  For a skilled driver who understands the parameters of an
SUV, a rollover is not a major concern.  Of the rollovers I've seen
around here (more than half of which were sedans), the SUVs generally
appeared to be the aforementioned soccer moms that like to play Pole
Position while yapping on the phone and putting on make-up.  Their
number was coming up anyway (in terms of having an accident), the choice
of an SUV just helped parameterize the mode.


j. andrew rogers




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 19 20:09:15 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:09:15 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
Message-ID: <BAY17-F20qqryBme5ty00064a33@hotmail.com>

Actually, drivers and passengers of SUVs have more injuries. But that 
doesn't really matter does it? If more SUVs = more people outside of SUVs 
dying then that's still bad right?

BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
>Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
>
> > > Evmick....in the wastes of New Mexico....
> > > where "killer dust storms...and killer sun...."
> >
> > Lucky you. Killer rocks here
> > http://www.docushare.it/mediasoft/stradale/segnali/2132_0.jpg
> >
> > In Italy SUVs and SAVs (sport activity vehicle, I suppose,
> > term invented by BMW) "kill" other people, i.e. people
> > walking, people crossing the road, bikers. We use SUVs
> > and SAVs just in town. Passion. Fashion.
>
>A conflation has occured though, in this duscussion. The stats say that
>more people are dying in accidents in which trucks and SUVs are
>involved. They don't say that those people are in the cars being struck
>by the trucks and SUVs, and as the truck/SUV population increases, more
>people are going to be hit by, or hit, trucks/SUVs. It says nothing
>about the relative danger of being IN a truck or SUV, and Bill, et al
>should recognise this important distinction.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>_______________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Aug 19 20:14:53 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <1092945380.3442@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <20040819201453.23176.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
wrote:
> You take your Prius on a gravel highway up in the
> mountains and I'll
> take the unused Bronco sitting in my driveway.  The
> Prius is inherently
> less safe even if you never see another vehicle. 
> Which would you rather
> be in if you hit a moose or cattle or got stuck in a
> rainstorm on that road?

Does Mount Hamilton Road/San Antonio Valley Road, in
mid-California, count?  (Also known as Route 130.)  I
took that from Del Puerto Canyon Road all the way
past Mount Hamilton and Lick Observatory to San Jose
(Alum Rock Avenue, at least) in my Prius.  Rough and
winding and at high speed (I think I averaged around
40; it felt safe enough once I got the hang of it at
low speed), and I wouldn't dare do it in a high
center of gravity SUV.

Granted, it was (mostly) paved, and dry.  And there
wasn't any wildlife on the road (although there were a
few other vehicles who passed me).  But the low center
of gravity was what kept me on the road.


From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Aug 19 20:34:36 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:34:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <20040819191518.39542.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040819191518.39542.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e04081913342d890a40@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:15:18 -0700 (PDT), Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> A conflation has occured though, in this duscussion. The stats say that
> more people are dying in accidents in which trucks and SUVs are
> involved. They don't say that those people are in the cars being struck
> by the trucks and SUVs, and as the truck/SUV population increases, more
> people are going to be hit by, or hit, trucks/SUVs. It says nothing
> about the relative danger of being IN a truck or SUV, and Bill, et al
> should recognise this important distinction.
> 

No, Mike. The fatality statistics *are* analysed by type of vehicle.
The 2003 stats mostly show reductions in deaths from 2002, because
2002 was a bit above the trend line. So it is not all bad news. The
reduction in fatalities is probably linked to the increase in seat
belt wearing that has been noted and the reduction in alcohol-related
fatalities.

Occupants killed in Motor Vehicle Crashes, by type of vehicle

                                                            2002      
               2003
Total Passenger vehicles                      32,843                     31,904
           Cars                                        20,569         
           19,460
           Vans                                         2,109         
             2,066
           SUVs                                        4,031          
            4,446
           Pickup Trucks                            6,100             
         5,904
           Large trucks                                 689           
              723
           Other                                           469        
                 510
           Unknown                                      104           
              334

(Note the 10% increase in SUV occupants killed).


Occupants killed in Rollover Crashes by type of vehicle

                                                             2002     
                  2003
Passenger car                                      4,794              
        4,433
Van                                                        699        
                 724
SUV                                                     2,471         
             2,639
Pickup truck                                          2,755           
           2,569


As there are about 3 to 4 times as many cars registered as SUVs and
vans, then SUVs and vans do kill their occupants in rollovers far more
than would be expected.

The stats are actually incredibly detailed.
See: <http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/>

BillK


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 19 20:07:16 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:07:16 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F23KwRPQIWDO300000183@hotmail.com>

Yes, of course it depends on the tires (and many other factors). My point is 
that SUVs without winter tires will perform just as poorly as sedans/wagons 
without winter tires. AWD drives, but there's nothing magical about an SUV 
that makes it perform better on ice.

It is pretty funny watching Atlanta drivers freak out at the little snow and 
ice we get. Of course, if you can recover from laughing about people buying 
up all the bread and water at the grocery store.

BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 10:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Considering demographics, the numbers of people who tow boats (or
> > horses) is
> > way lower than SUV purchases.
> >
> > I live in Atlanta and I see tons and tons of SUVs. It ices about once
> > a year
> > here and a good awd sedan will perform just as well as a hummer in
> > those conditions.
>
>depends on the tires, of course. Hummers more likely to have useful
>tires, the volvo is going to have some wimpy all seasons or rain tires,
>which are pretty useless in the especially icy winter conditions seen
>in the south. We northerners are always entertained by newsclips of
>southerners in winter storms spinning all over the place...
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 20:43:22 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:43:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <1092948202.19269@whirlwind.he.net>

> Does Mount Hamilton Road/San Antonio Valley Road, in
> mid-California, count?  (Also known as Route 130.)  I
> took that from Del Puerto Canyon Road all the way
> past Mount Hamilton and Lick Observatory to San Jose
> (Alum Rock Avenue, at least) in my Prius.  Rough and
> winding and at high speed (I think I averaged around
> 40; it felt safe enough once I got the hang of it at
> low speed), and I wouldn't dare do it in a high
> center of gravity SUV.


Ummm... SUVs don't spontaneously rollover under normal road conditions,
they are only more likely to roll over under certain adverse
circumstances.  Just like guns don't spontaneously shoot people.

Other than being very windy, the road in question is quite tame and easy
to drive safely.  I've even taken the previously mentioned Bronco up it
a few times, which has a true off-road suspension system making it even
more susceptible to rollover, and did not have any problems.  Definitely
not ideal, but perfectly safe if I don't try to keep up with every
low-CG sedan that flies by.

Obviously I would take that road slower in a Bronco than an expensive
sports sedan because that is smart -- I am familiar with the operating
parameters of both vehicles.  Just like I would drive the sport sedan
slower than the 4x4 on gravel or in the snow.  Ignorance is no excuse
under the laws of physics.

j. andrew rogers




From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Aug 19 20:45:04 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:45:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e04081913342d890a40@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20040819191518.39542.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<ee50357e04081913342d890a40@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e04081913455cc792ba@mail.gmail.com>

Try again, formatting screwed up in previous post.

Occupants killed in Motor Vehicle Crashes, by type of vehicle

                                              2002           2003
Total Passenger vehicles         32,843       31,904
           Cars                           20,569       19,460
           Vans                            2,109         2,066
           SUVs                           4,031         4,446
           Pickup Trucks               6,100         5,904
           Large trucks                     689           723
           Other                               469           510
           Unknown                          104           334

(Note the 10% increase in SUV occupants killed).

Occupants killed in Rollover Crashes by type of vehicle

                                               2002         2003
Passenger car                         4,794        4,433
Van                                           699           724
SUV                                        2,471       2,639
Pickup truck                            2,755        2,569

As there are about 3 to 4 times as many cars registered as SUVs and
vans, then SUVs and vans do kill their occupants in rollovers far more
than would be expected.
 
The stats are actually incredibly detailed.
See: <http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/>

BillK


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Thu Aug 19 20:51:36 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:51:36 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F24xV8gjaMZLC00007270@hotmail.com>

If you stand in front of me, are you responsible for obstructing my view? 
Should I move to accomodate your actions? Take responsibility for blocking 
my view.

Rollovers aren't always the driver's fault, side impacts for example can 
happen to the most skillful driver (who is not able to maneuver as well in 
an SUV) and the SUV can flip.

Not to mention, the Fed subsidizing small business purchase of SUVs or their 
greater consumption of road surface.

Stop being an SUV-apologist.

BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:20:38 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are things inherently unsafe about many SUVs. They have a
> > higher tendency to roll over (not just due to driver ignorance).
>
>Wrong. A driver's unwise misestimation of the center of gravity and G
>tolerance of a vehicle in cornering, due to too many years driving low
>slung cars with different feel characteristics, is not the fault of the
>vehicle. Your assertion is as bad as claiming that guns kill people by
>jumping up and shooting them all by their selves.
>
> > They also make the
> > road less safe for non-SUV owners by obstructing their view.
>
>I am not responsible for YOUR choice of a short vehicle, any more than
>a train engineer is responsible for you being parked on the railroad
>tracks as he hits you.
>
>Stop copping out and take responsibility for your own choices and actions.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>_______________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Thu Aug 19 21:05:48 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:05:48 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
Message-ID: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>


Let us put this topic another way, because some of the perspectives
being applied are far too narrow:


Should we ban or penalize sedan drivers because they are a clear
asymmetric hazard to motorcyclists?  Most cars never have more than one
person in them and are typically used just to move between two points,
so why not a motorcycle, which gets better gas mileage to boot?  I see
idiots in sedans nearly run into motorcyclists all the time, acting like
they own the road.  And a motorcyle can take a corner at speeds that
would roll a car.  We could clearly do with having far fewer cars on the
road and more motorcycles, and imagine all the parking space that would
free up.

This is no more or less specious an argument than much of the SUV versus
sedan argument.  You can relabel "SUV" to "sedan" and "sedan" to
"motorcycle", and essentially apply the same arguments with similar
validity.

Hopefully this makes the real calculus more apparent; most people seem
to be arguing from personal preference or ideology rather than
addressing the underlying calculus of personal transportation choices.


j. andrew rogers



From matus at matus1976.com  Thu Aug 19 21:37:23 2004
From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:37:23 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F34tnhkSrNNOC00057907@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <006a01c48634$b9f37ca0$6501a8c0@GREYBOOK>

Brian Lee said:
> 
> Just like SUVs have thier purposes, but no way should they equate for
25%
> of
> US auto sales. SUVs kill their drivers and passengers because they are
> more
> unsafe than comperable sedans. That's pretty simple analysis.
> 

But they are more safe if they are used properly, that's the sad thing.
Simply having more metal around and a more massive vehicle makes one
safer in an accident.  If the tracks were just widened a bit and the CoG
lowered, and a rudimentary change to the front end geometry made,
lowering the bumper, SUV's would be safer all around.  

Mike Lorrey said:
> The stats say that more people are dying in accidents in which trucks
and > SUVs are involved. They don't say that those people are in the
cars being > struck by the trucks and SUVs, <...> It says nothing 
> about the relative danger of being IN a truck or SUV, and Bill, et al 
> should recognise this important distinction.

Indeed, the occupant is safer in an SUV, especially if he drives
properly.  Which is why, as an extropian who is concerned about living a
long time, Id like to get a tractor trailer cab (cab only) and drive
around properly in that, given the most likely way I will die is in a
car accident.

Extropians concerned about living as long as possible should get big
vehicles, wear their seat belts, and drive slower.  

A recent issue of Motorcycle Consumer News argued (convincingly imo)
that the sharp increase recently in Motorcyclist fatalities in the US
has corresponded almost directly with the increase in light truck
registrations.  Even though the number of accidents are going down with
motorcyclists, the accidents are more deadly.  This becomes more clear
when considering that most vehicles other than light trucks have lower
bumpers and hit motorcyclists at their legs as the primary point of
impact.  SUV's are much higher and might hit a rider at his chest or
shoulder level, some of the larger SUVs are even at head level to people
hunched over on sport bikes.
So motorcyclists on the list (spike et al) beware, imagine all those
SUV's about as huge danger zones.

Michael Dickey




From matus at matus1976.com  Thu Aug 19 21:45:35 2004
From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 17:45:35 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F20qqryBme5ty00064a33@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <006b01c48635$df420110$6501a8c0@GREYBOOK>

> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Lee
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
> 
> Actually, drivers and passengers of SUVs have more injuries. But that
> doesn't really matter does it? If more SUVs = more people outside of
SUVs
> dying then that's still bad right?
> 
> BAL
> 

Of course its bad, but it comes down to a fundamental issue of rights.
I see many parallels to the gun debate, which usually centers around if
everybody is more or less safe when guns are more prevalent.  I don't
care, I care if *I* am more or less safe.  Am I more or less safe if I
carry a gun?  (not trying to start another gun debate, just trying to
make a point) Am I more or less safe in an SUV compared to a Honda
Civic?  Even if on average fewer people are killed if all SUV's were
outlawed, if I, as an individual, who drives properly, doesn't drink,
and wears his seatbelt, is made less safe by such laws then they are
fundamentally wrong.  The right of the minority (those made more safe by
driving SUV's) are not to be abandoned to the ignorance of the majority
(morons who cant drive vehicles with higher CoG's) 

Michael Dickey




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 19 21:54:29 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
In-Reply-To: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <20040819215429.3557.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com>




> Should we ban or penalize sedan drivers because they
> are a clear
> asymmetric hazard to motorcyclists?  Most cars never
> have more than one
> person in them and are typically used just to move
> between two points,
> so why not a motorcycle, which gets better gas
> mileage to boot?  I see
> idiots in sedans nearly run into motorcyclists all
> the time, acting like
> they own the road.  And a motorcyle can take a
> corner at speeds that
> would roll a car.  We could clearly do with having
> far fewer cars on the
> road and more motorcycles, and imagine all the
> parking space that would
> free up.

I ride a motorcycle and sedans are far less hazardous
to us than SUVs. I have a sedan, but I only use it if
I need to carry cargo or carry multiple people. When I
am just commuting, I ride my bike. And incidently the
only accident that I have ever been in on my
motorcycle was with a guy who was driving an SUV. He
didn't see me because he had too much steel around him
to be concerned about what or who he hit. Yes...
motorcyclist and SUV drivers are natural enemies.
Having to share the road with them takes away many of
the advantages of riding a motorcycle. People sit
fairly high on a motorcycle allowing us to see over
sedans in front of us, unfortunately we can't see over
the really big SUVs. Motorcycles can legally share
lanes with vehicles in California meaning we can get
around gridlock by moving between vehicles. The really
big SUVs take up the whole lane and thus prevent lane
sharing with them. I would say that SUV's and the
people who drive them are as diametrically opposed to
me, my motorcycle, and all that we stand for that one
can get and still be deserving of oxygen.   ;)
 

=====
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!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Thu Aug 19 23:26:12 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:26:12 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>

 > Hopefully this makes the real calculus more apparent; most 
> people seem to be arguing from personal preference or ideology
> rather than addressing the underlying calculus of personal 
> transportation choices.

Most people are naturally going to be biased of course but I am
not clear what you mean by "underlying calculus of personal choice".

Obviously roads are shared spaces not private spaces and if
one chooses to drive on them with any vehicle then one chooses
to venture out and to take risks in a world of other drivers. 

So far that's just another instance of being alive and living in nature
with other animals. 

Clearly people choose a variety of vehicles for a variety of reasons
(function, enjoyment, their own safety) and most would agree
(I think) that they ought not be constrained by laws from exercising
any choices that harm or increase the risk to no one else and (I think)
they should be permitted choices that harm themselves if they want
to trade-off enjoyment or their own safety for their own reasons
thats entirely their business and good luck to 'em.

But IF there are statistics that show that some peoples choices
actually ARE increasing the overall risk on public roads to people
other than themselves, then what could be the possible grounds
for either making or declining to make laws aimed at shifting the
hazard away from that class of road users who are being placed
at increased risk through no fault of their own?

I think there may be some folk that don't want any laws at all
even ones that were based on good statistics and sound public
policy - this seems irrational to me.  

Obviously we all have private interests, preferences, sunk costs in
particular vehicles etc that are going to bias us - thats a given. 

But still a public road is something that is constructed as part of
a public policy which requires some sort of legal framework to 
make it work. If we think only in terms of someones ox will always
get gored then it seems that we are denying our personal opportunity
to influence what public policy gets formed. That seems to me to be
a stance that works against the person that holds its own self interest.

If there has to be some public policy and some minimal set of laws 
or rules to make it work then what could be wrong with considering
what that public policy (what those laws) should be?

Have some "libertarians" become so anti-law that they are actually
settling for less net freedom than they'd get if they argued for good 
statistics (or good science) and good public policy? 

Brett Paatsch

 








From evmick at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 20 02:27:10 2004
From: evmick at earthlink.net (Everitt Mickey)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:27:10 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <006a01c48634$b9f37ca0$6501a8c0@GREYBOOK>
References: <006a01c48634$b9f37ca0$6501a8c0@GREYBOOK>
Message-ID: <4125617E.5040601@earthlink.net>

Matus wrote:

Which is why, as an extropian who is concerned about living a
long time, Id like to get a tractor trailer cab (cab only) and drive
around properly in that, 


hmmmmmmm...actually "bobtail" is more dangerous....harder to 
control...doesn't stop so well...tends to spin.

That's what I do.  Only I have the whole shebang.  Tractor and trailer.  
Gross weight sometimes as much as 150,000 lbs.

I drive slower and careful...and pay attention to my surroundings....AND 
i'm subject to ungodly addittional laws that would drive most people nutz.

But strangely enough....I feel much safer driving thru 
....say.....Dallas...Houston....or any metro area...than in perhaps a 
honda or a geo.

If....(big if...I don't own one...but the wife has a Pickup)...i ever 
get an auto I'm thinking of a Hummer II.

If I had my druthers it'd be a Motorhome based on a semi as the 
"mothership" pulling or carrying said hummer.

But that's another story..

EvMick (finally leaving the wastes of NewMexico and west Texas 
bound....stopped in El Paso for supper)




From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Fri Aug 20 04:34:00 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:34:00 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
In-Reply-To: <027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
	<027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <2830E16C-F262-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 19, 2004, at 4:26 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> But IF there are statistics that show that some peoples choices
> actually ARE increasing the overall risk on public roads to people
> other than themselves, then what could be the possible grounds
> for either making or declining to make laws aimed at shifting the
> hazard away from that class of road users who are being placed
> at increased risk through no fault of their own?
...
> I think there may be some folk that don't want any laws at all
> even ones that were based on good statistics and sound public
> policy - this seems irrational to me.


You are trying to address the symptoms and ignoring the cause.  The 
vast majority of all accidents are caused by people being careless 
and/or stupid.  The choice of vehicle may affect the damage pattern, 
but it wasn't the choice of vehicle that caused the damage to happen.  
You can take away the person's SUV and give them a Prius and you won't 
be stopping any accidents, you'll just have a different kind of carnage 
with a different distribution.

There are many different dimensions to the problem, which you still 
haven't figured out.  If all vehicles on the road were identical, it 
would more evenly distribute the carnage, something you apparently 
champion.  If you maximized the utility of a vehicle for a given 
person, you would expect a widely varying range of vehicles on the road 
even if you leave personal taste out of the picture, and suboptimal 
utility is often unsafe as you get closer to the edges.  Most drivers 
only have competence at driving specific types of vehicles, and in a 
significant number of cases, no vehicles.  The typical road hazards a 
person faces and their probabilities varies widely from locale to 
locale.  Vehicle cost is another major factor, since increased safety 
comes at increasing cost and diminishing returns.

What you want to do is optimize the entire driving world to maximize 
YOUR utility to the detriment of everyone else.  For a big portion of 
the world, whatever you want to drive is less safe, less useful, and 
more expensive overall.

In short, you are being authoritarian and selfish.  Selfish is okay, 
but you can cram the authoritarian part.  I'm not going to sacrifice 
substantial safety and utility in my life so that you can have an 
extremely marginal increase in your safety when you choose to drive on 
the roads just because it makes you feel better.  The universe doesn't 
revolve around your desires.


If you want to live in a padded room your whole life, go right ahead.  
The rest of us will continue doing things, recognizing that every 
increase in utility comes with a risk.  Sometimes the increase in 
utility is worth the risk, sometimes it is not, but who are you to 
decide whether or not that is the case.  If you don't like the risks of 
driving, don't drive.  Most people find the utility worth the risks 
whether there are SUVs on the road or not.


j. andrew rogers



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Aug 20 04:43:14 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:13:14 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Numberless Tribe Proves the Unthinkable
Message-ID: <710b78fc04081921434c2762df@mail.gmail.com>

Numberless Tribe Proves the Unthinkable
http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2004-08-19-3
Unable to count, group without precise number system shows how
language limits thought

This is an interesting defense of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. However,
it seems flawed to me.

What the study in the article shows is that people who have never
invented basic mathematics (discovered?), wont be able to perform
basic mathematical procedures, and also wont have language to describe
these procedures. So it would follow to me that these people could
probably learn basic maths (if they cared to, which they probably
don't), and would co-opt foreign words to describe new concepts, or
make some up, or a bit of both.

However, the article proclaims that, because these guys don't have
basic math or the language for it, that the lack of language causes
the inability to use basic math.

Isn't this a clear cut case of conflating correlation with causation?

Note that the original (weak) statement of Sapir-Whorf is pretty much
self evident and I'm not arguing with that. But the article implies
that this supports *strong* SWH, which is something else entirely!

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 20 05:21:29 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:21:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <20040819201453.23176.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c48675$8e684430$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Granted, it was (mostly) paved, and dry.  And there
> wasn't any wildlife on the road (although there were a
> few other vehicles who passed me).  But the low center
> of gravity was what kept me on the road.

Please forgive the vast departure from the subject, but
this comment reminded me of an amusing incident that happened
at work (I am easily amused).  We had a manlift, which is 
like a cherry picker device for reaching stuff up high:

http://www.aerialsales.com/

We were extending it to wacky angles with the basket
cantilevered way out there.  I couldn't figure out why
the topple alarm wasn't howling: my back of the envelope
calcs showed the CG must be right at the front wheels.
I was baffled until I learned that the tires are filled
with lead shot.  A single digit precision calc suggested 
the wheels weighed over 600 pounds each, moving
the GC well inside the safety zone.  

We should be able to pull off some excellent gags or 
illusions with a car in which the four wheels weigh more 
than the rest of the car.  Ideas?

spike   



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 20 05:22:00 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:22:00 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <20040819201453.23176.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000101c48675$9f24c820$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

>  Brian Lee
>
> ...SUVs or their greater consumption of road surface.

Thats a positive result Brian.  If more people drive big
cars, it encourages governments to build roads wider.  In
the next 20 to 50 yrs the world will progress to all 
renewable energy sources, which will be more expensive 
than the fossil fuels we now pump outta the ground, so
you can be sure cars will be smaller, lighter and probably 
slower.  Then we will enjoy the legacy of good wide roads,
on which we drive our smirkmobiles with lots of luxurious
room everywhere.  Parking lots will hold buttloads of
small cars.  We will have great stories to tell our
grandchildren about how much fun cars use to be, that
sorta thing.  So we get some good stuff along with the
drawbacks.  {8-]  spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Aug 20 05:22:31 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 22:22:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <20040819201453.23176.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000201c48675$b19f01a0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>



> Matus:
> ...the sharp increase recently in Motorcyclist fatalities in the US
has corresponded almost directly with the increase in light truck
registrations...

Ja but be careful with the conclusion that the trucks
are the cause of the increase in biker deaths.  One
can show a very high correllation coefficient between
biker deaths and light truck registrations, but that
does not prove a cause/effect.  A better correlation
is seen between biker deaths and the increasing average
age of bikers.  Clearly motorcycling has become far more
mainstream, moving out of the exclusively young male
crowd it once was.

This gets us several different ways.  An older biker
is more likely to perish in the same accident that a
young squid will survive.  As we age, our reflexes get
slower.  If we do not compensate by riding easier, we
are more likely to perish in a single vehicle accident,
which accounts for most of the recent increase in biker 
deaths.  We also have more guys (and gals) taking up
biking in their later years.  You can be sure one will
*never* be as good a rider and the kid who grew up on them.  

My *mother* for instance, recently got a motorcycle,
at age 62 fer cryin out loud.  I was appalled of course,
and feel partially responsible.  I took her to an antique
motorcycle gathering where she met a number of people so
much like herself: retired adventurous types.  I would
prefer she wouldn't ride, but she didn't stop me from
doing so 33 years ago.

She also gave me bad advice as a child: always wear
clean underwear, so that if you get in an accident and
the medics cut away your clothing, it will not be an
embarrassment.  Terrible advice for bikers.  Always
wear your rattiest old dirty underwear, or if you are
a macho straight male, wear frilly pink lacy undergarments.
Then when you are tempted to go too fast, remember that
even a minor accident could be fatal, for you would die
of sheer embarrassment if the nurses saw you in that.  
So underwear can be a safety item.

> So motorcyclists on the list (spike et al) beware, imagine all those
> SUV's about as huge danger zones.   Michael Dickey

Ja that is an issue, but Ill tell you what scares me
even more: the increase in elderly car drivers.  Nothing
makes me squirm like coming up to an intersection where
the other road has a stop sign and I see a puffy white head
looking the other way.  Did she already look my direction
and decide there is nothing coming?  Will she dart out 
and slay me the instant I reach the intersection?  Which
way will I toss this bike if she pulls out?

As luck would have it, the silicon valley is not well
suited for retirees; they move away.  But riding a
motorcycle in my home town in Florida can cause one 
to soil one's lacy pink undergarments.

spike    



From gingell at gnat.com  Fri Aug 20 06:02:45 2004
From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 02:02:45 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>
	<57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com>

J. Andrew Rogers writes:

 > Class mobility, a function of wealth rather than income, matters at 
 > least as much as the distribution, as this is what provides much of the 
 > motivation to dare great things.  

 Social mobility is a function of the ease with which individuals can
 accumulate wealth - it's the integral of net income with respect to
 time, plus or minus a constant for what an individual starts off
 with. 
 
 We can look at income distribution in terms of how many people have
 been able to achieve great things, that is take it as the end point
 of the analysis rather than the initial condition. How many
 opportunities for advancements exist on various points on the
 distribution: Do we have a society in which most people find it
 possible to improve their lot somewhat, or do we have a
 winner-take-all society in which enormous rewards accrue to a few?

 If nothing else, I think it should be pretty clear that our extremely
 steep income distribution curve suggests something peculiar is going
 on with our allocation of human capital.

 > Very wealthy people contribute a lot to society by being able to
 > risk very large sums of capital on things that interest them,
 > including many things that the government will neither have the
 > will nor the interest to fund regardless of merit. This money
 > builds the companies and pays for the research that generates the
 > majority of the technology we enjoy today.

 A wealthy society with a healthy economy will find useful ways to
 employ its wealth, regardless of how it's distributed. My pension
 fund is every bit as interested in a diverse portfolio of risk /
 reward tradeoffs as is the Rockefeller family fortune. 

 > The engine of innovation is powered by private capital, and one
 > thing history has shown is that in hindsight most government funded
 > "innovations" were either unnecessary, expensive, or economically
 > irrelevant.
 
 I don't see how this assertion relates to the rest of your argument,
 but it's true as far as it goes. (With lots of qualifiers for the
 provision of public goods, funding activities with positive
 externalities, etc.)

 > If you have nothing but a middle class, who provides the capital 
 > required to have a strong economy?

 The market provides the capital. In any economy wealth is going to
 seek a return, and the banking system and financial markets will find
 ways to offer it. That's true whether "wealth" is million checking
 accounts or a single trust fund.

 > The irony is that progressive income taxes destroy class mobility.

 It would indeed be ironic if it were true, but it's difficult to make
 a sensible case that it is. 

 Matt
 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Aug 20 07:18:35 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:18:35 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<2830E16C-F262-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <000901c48685$e87d13a0$362c2dcb@homepc>

> On Aug 19, 2004, at 4:26 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> > But IF there are statistics that show that some peoples choices
> > actually ARE increasing the overall risk on public roads to people
> > other than themselves, then what could be the possible grounds
> > for either making or declining to make laws aimed at shifting the
> > hazard away from that class of road users who are being placed
> > at increased risk through no fault of their own?
> ...
> > I think there may be some folk that don't want any laws at all
> > even ones that were based on good statistics and sound public
> > policy - this seems irrational to me.
>
 > You are trying to address the symptoms and ignoring the cause.  The
> vast majority of all accidents are caused by people being careless
> and/or stupid.

I am not championing ignorance, carelessness or stupidity. I am
on the contrary recognizing that there are other species of these.

>The choice of vehicle may affect the damage pattern,
> but it wasn't the choice of vehicle that caused the damage to happen.
> You can take away the person's SUV and give them a Prius and you won't
> be stopping any accidents, you'll just have a different kind of carnage
> with a different distribution.

Your still missing my point (perhaps I wasn't clear) the existence of
good statistics, good data, is something that intelligent but not stupid
people will take account of. It is one difference between scientific and
anecdotal evidence. And the willingness to integrate scientific rather than
anecdotal evidence into our thinking and to try to form policy based on
it and to use it to pursuade others to base their policy on it is the
opposite of stupid.

> There are many different dimensions to the problem, which you still
> haven't figured out.  If all vehicles on the road were identical, it
> would more evenly distribute the carnage, something you apparently
> champion.

No. I "champion" looking to see if  the amount of carnage (however it is
defined) can be REDUCED rather than distributed. If it can't be reduced
then I am all for distributing it away from me personally (that is selfish)
and towards the damn fools that are causing the dangers to others (that is
my selfish public policy I would prefer to actively discriminate against
stupidity rather than let the chips fall where they may).  I think not
looking
at the statistical data (if there is data available) is another species of
stupid.
It seems like you are missing that point.

>If you maximized the utility of a vehicle for a given
> person, you would expect a widely varying range of vehicles on the road
> even if you leave personal taste out of the picture, and suboptimal
> utility is often unsafe as you get closer to the edges.  Most drivers
> only have competence at driving specific types of vehicles, and in a
> significant number of cases, no vehicles.  The typical road hazards a
> person faces and their probabilities varies widely from locale to
> locale.  Vehicle cost is another major factor, since increased safety
> comes at increasing cost and diminishing returns.
>
> What you want to do is optimize the entire driving world to maximize
> YOUR utility to the detriment of everyone else.

Of COURSE I'd want that. Wouldn't you? And of course neither of us
will get what we want. We'd be but two views only. But that is merely
the starting point for a deeper recognition. If I want to optimise for me
and you want to optimise for you and so on ... then so long as we are
all rational none of us will object to getting rid of inefficencies and
risks
that we've been inadvertly posing to each other at no net gain to
ourselves.

Bugger the oxes will get gored anyway stuff. Neither of us are driving
teams of oxen. The sentiment it expresses as well as the content of
the analogy is out of date, or should be.

>  For a big portion of  the world, whatever you want to drive is less
> safe, less useful, and more expensive overall.
>
> In short, you are being authoritarian and selfish.  Selfish is okay,
> but you can cram the authoritarian part.

I'd agree with that sentiment but you are misdirecting it :-)

> I'm not going to sacrifice substantial safety and utility in my life so
that
> you can have an extremely marginal increase in your safety when you
> choose to drive on the roads just because it makes you feel better.
> The universe doesn't revolve around your desires.

Obviously. Nor yours. Just as obviously. But with intelligence and a
willingness to look at data we can reduce net risks without offsetting
loss of other goods.  I'm arguing for better risk MANAGEMENT
by more involvement in public policy and law-making by those that
are intelligent and self interested. Coz if they don't get involved the
laws will be made by the unintelligently self interested.

How would I tell which you were? I'd  tell in part by seeing if you
could differentiate between anecdotal evidence and good statistics.

I think we are talking past each other ;-)

Brett Paatsch




From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Fri Aug 20 07:28:53 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:28:53 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com>
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>
	<57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com>
Message-ID: <96EFE3AA-F27A-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 19, 2004, at 11:02 PM, Matthew Gingell wrote:
>> If you have nothing but a middle class, who provides the capital
>> required to have a strong economy?
>
>  The market provides the capital. In any economy wealth is going to
>  seek a return, and the banking system and financial markets will find
>  ways to offer it. That's true whether "wealth" is million checking
>  accounts or a single trust fund.


I would define any person who can command vast quantities of capital, 
whether from a few wealthy sources or millions of middle-class folks, 
as "wealthy".  This was the basic scheme of the old communist bloc, 
where no one had much in the way of income, but a few folks near the 
top of the political food chain controlled millions or billions of 
dollars.  Wealth mostly has to do with the amount of capital you 
control, whether millions of peasants gave it to you or a trust fund 
did.

My original point was more that you can't have vast quantities of 
capital under the control of a small number of people without also 
having a de facto "wealthy" class.  There are a dozen different 
creative ways to dress it up, but the result is roughly equivalent.  
All that happens when everyone is nominally in the middle-class is that 
the pool of the wealthy (no matter what its guise) becomes very, very 
small which is not a fertile economic ecology.

And yes, progressive income taxes destroy class mobility by making it 
difficult to escape the middle class.  There were a few economics 
papers published several years ago that showed a lovely mathematical 
correlation between effective income tax rates as a function of income 
and the distribution of wealth in a population.  Steeply progressive 
rates concentrate control of capital in the hands of a few.  How making 
it progressively difficult to convert income into wealth is supposed to 
help class mobility is beyond me.  If the tax structure aggressively 
limits the conversion of income into wealth, exactly how is that 
supposed to help people in the lower economic strata that have income 
but little or no wealth?


j. andrew rogers



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Fri Aug 20 07:49:17 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:49:17 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
In-Reply-To: <000901c48685$e87d13a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<2830E16C-F262-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<000901c48685$e87d13a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <6FF415E7-F27D-11D8-A551-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 20, 2004, at 12:18 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> I think not looking
> at the statistical data (if there is data available) is another 
> species of
> stupid.  It seems like you are missing that point.


I'm not missing that at all.  What is apparent is that the statistics 
you are referring to have little to no relevance to what makes good 
policy.  You are reading all manner of causation from a correlation, 
and in a fashion that patently ignores known causal factors that *are* 
relevant to the discussion.

Those statistics are fine, but shrewd analysis suggests they are almost 
context free and bring little to the policy table beyond providing a 
prop for use and abuse by and on a statistically innumerate population. 
  They tell us very little about the nature of the problem, and don't 
even necessarily suggest that a serious problem exists.  When people 
haven't even figured this much out, it pretty much guarantees bad 
policy will result.

I'm not saying there isn't a problem, I'm saying that it is patently 
obvious that hardly anyone understands the nature of the matter enough 
to be able to know if a problem even exists, which doesn't justify 
trying to skate by on shallow reasoning.


j. andrew rogers



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Aug 20 08:03:33 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 18:03:33 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc><2830E16C-F262-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com><000901c48685$e87d13a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<6FF415E7-F27D-11D8-A551-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <004601c4868c$304bbd70$362c2dcb@homepc>

J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

> On Aug 20, 2004, at 12:18 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> > I think not looking
> > at the statistical data (if there is data available) is another
> > species of
> > stupid.  It seems like you are missing that point.

> I'm not missing that at all.  What is apparent is that the statistics
> you are referring to have little to no relevance to what makes good
> policy.  You are reading all manner of causation from a correlation,
> and in a fashion that patently ignores known causal factors that *are*
> relevant to the discussion.

Ah, I see what's happened. I wasn't referring to any particular statistics -
I think it was Bill who provided some and so perhaps you thought I
was saying that those should be authoritative. I wasn't. I was saying
only IF (and I did put IF in capitals) good stats were available they
should be looked at (by looked at I mean critically looked at).

> Those statistics are fine, but shrewd analysis suggests they are almost
> context free and bring little to the policy table beyond providing a
> prop for use and abuse by and on a statistically innumerate population.

We are apparently in agreement then but are focussing on different
aspects of the same thing. Stupidity.  I want to take the anti-stupidity
campaign into the policy setting and law-making machinery generally
so I am averse to having government and law-making looked at as
though they can't be affected.

You, not unreasonably, were pursing a line more closely matching
just what is in the topic header.

My bad, actually.  I should have forked the thread.

Brett Paatsch





From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Aug 20 08:07:47 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:07:47 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle
In-Reply-To: <027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
	<027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:26:12 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>  
> But still a public road is something that is constructed as part of
> a public policy which requires some sort of legal framework to
> make it work.
> 
> If there has to be some public policy and some minimal set of laws
> or rules to make it work then what could be wrong with considering
> what that public policy (what those laws) should be?
> 

This point raised by Brett seems to be getting at the root of the
discussion.  The SUV supporters seem to be assigning a greater value
to their individual rights than to the good of the public at large
(the commons). This is the traditional contradiction between
individual rights and social responsibility.

One solution might be to move all the SUVs to New Hampshire.  ;)

Here in London, UK, we have the story of the Diana Memorial Fountain
in Hyde Park. It is a large circular granite construction with water
flowing round over little waterfalls and pools. Now what would you
expect to happen when people play around slippery, wet granite, with
water flowing around? Yes, people fall over. And the water gets
polluted by dogs, pigeons, etc.

There was panic among the administrators. Nowadays if anyone falls
over they immediately think about suing someone for millions in
damages.
So now they have set up a control system with rules and regulations to
try and stop idiots from falling over. (And protect the Parks
Department from being sued).

If we can set up regulations to try and protect people from falling
over, surely we are allowed to set laws to stop them killing
themselves and other people?

BillK


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Aug 20 08:08:59 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:38:59 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082001081ee5a951@mail.gmail.com>

Watch it a few times and feel your jaw hit the floor...
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo23.mpg

Hold on, here comes the singularity.

Here's the full article...

Combat robots wow crowds
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996286&lpos=home2

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From alito at organicrobot.com  Fri Aug 20 10:07:59 2004
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:07:59 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04082001081ee5a951@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc04082001081ee5a951@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1092996479.5587.258.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 17:38 +0930, Emlyn wrote:
> Watch it a few times and feel your jaw hit the floor...
> http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo23.mpg
> 
don't forget 
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo25.mpg
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo84.mpg
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo85.mpg

but if you like this kind of stuff, have a look at omnihead's robot (ie
everything at the bottom of http://www.vstone.co.jp/e/rt01e.htm ) and
khr1's robot
(the wow robot version: http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/wow-robot-
khr1-017324.php , not the kaist version (those are amazing as well, but
they are not $2000 toys))  i can't find where i got the videos from.
try looking for them, they are most impressive (some here
http://www.kopropo.co.jp/Movie/2004SHS%20KRSDEMO.wmv 
http://www.wowrobot.co.kr/enter/dEnterWebData/KHR-1/khr1_a.wmv
but there are others)

and if you got more time to kill have a look at everything from:
http://www.teamkiss.com/roboone/robo1videos.html

and if you've got pointers to more r0B07 pr0n, do send me a pointer.
alejandro






From gingell at gnat.com  Fri Aug 20 10:35:29 2004
From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:35:29 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <96EFE3AA-F27A-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com>
	<57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com>
	<96EFE3AA-F27A-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <16677.54257.890417.117941@nile.gnat.com>

J. Andrew Rogers writes:

 > I would define any person who can command vast quantities of capital, 
 > whether from a few wealthy sources or millions of middle-class folks, 
 > as "wealthy".  

 This definition does not match what is is normally meant by "wealthy"
 in a market economy. A bank loan officer might control millions of
 dollars of capital but he isn't necessarily a wealthy person, any
 more than the navigator of a hundred million dollar cruise ship is
 necessarily a wealthy person.

 Think of venture capital and mutual fund managers, arbitrage brokers,
 currency traders, executives of corporations or pension funds, and so
 on. They all control big pools of other peoples money and they all
 try to make the pool bigger by finding interesting things to do with
 it, and none of them are necessarily super-rich people.

 > My original point was more that you can't have vast quantities of 
 > capital under the control of a small number of people without also 
 > having a de facto "wealthy" class.  There are a dozen different 
 > creative ways to dress it up, but the result is roughly equivalent.  

 One of the miracles of capitalism is that this isn't true. Billion
 dollar decisions can be made without anyone actually having to
 possess a billion dollars.

 Your 401K, my savings account, somebody else's stock portfolio, and
 millions of other independent economically rational investments can
 be pooled together to accomplish things none of us could accomplish
 alone. 

 It isn't dressing anything up to distinguish the magnificently
 egalitarian possibilities of markets from Soviet central planning or
 from a world in which nothing happens unless some preposterously
 wealthy aristocrat wants it to, and I don't think it's sophistry to
 point out one of modern capitalism's greatest strengths.

 > All that happens when everyone is nominally in the middle-class is that 
 > the pool of the wealthy (no matter what its guise) becomes very, very 
 > small which is not a fertile economic ecology.
 
 It seems, and perhaps I am misreading you, that you are advocating an
 essentially command economy as an ideal growth environment: You seem
 to envision a system where a small elite controls vast portions of a
 nations capital, where growth is achieved by their centralized
 stewardship of the nation's wealth. Your arguement seems to be that
 it is only by the wise and judicious calculations of a tiny monied
 class, by their analysis of what ventures are to be pursued, that
 growth is possible.

 > And yes, progressive income taxes destroy class mobility by making it 
 > difficult to escape the middle class.  There were a few economics 
 > papers published several years ago that showed a lovely mathematical 
 > correlation between effective income tax rates as a function of income 
 > and the distribution of wealth in a population.  Steeply progressive 
 > rates concentrate control of capital in the hands of a few.  How making 
 > it progressively difficult to convert income into wealth is supposed to 
 > help class mobility is beyond me.  If the tax structure aggressively 
 > limits the conversion of income into wealth, exactly how is that 
 > supposed to help people in the lower economic strata that have income 
 > but little or no wealth?

 Any tax, progressive or otherwise, looks like a bad thing when the
 consequences of its cost are analysied in isolation from the benefits
 of the spending it funds. In reality, progressive taxation pays for
 wealth transfer programs and - whether you or I believe it is a good
 thing - transferring money from the wealthy to the poor manifestly
 increases their social mobility.

 For instance public funding of education, public sector careers in
 the military, subsidized small business loans, employment and
 relocation assistance, a public safety net which socializes some of
 the downside of necessary risk taking, all increase mobility. That
 the people who (in an well implemented system) benefit from such
 programs are not those who pay for them makes the net effect a
 clearly upward contribution to their mobility, and this is true
 regardless of whether it's the way you or I think a country ought to
 be run.

 This is not to mention an entire range of other legitimate state
 functions that have to be funded somehow - national defense, law
 enforcement and the courts, whatever else you might agree is in the
 domain of appropriate public expenditures - the burden of which must
 be distributed on the shoulders of people who have already made it
 and people who are still trying to. It seems obvious to me which way
 you weight it if your goal is to make it easier for more people to
 escape poverty and enter the middle class.

 Matt


From trichrom at optusnet.com.au  Fri Aug 20 11:58:52 2004
From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:58:52 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle 
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <001201c486ad$3568eeb0$f5dc1dd3@turtle>

....except that the car is the most efficiant design to transport a family
unit (that industry makes available), which is the whole point of the
system.

SUV's are specialied vehicles and not best suited to public roads due to the
inefficiancies introduced by the specilisation designed into them. Not to
mention the other issues' of crash safety, reduced visibility on the road
for non-4WD's user's, increased damage to road's, etc, these things clearly
make SUV's vehicles not suited to 'general' use on public roads.

Efficiancy should be the point - and to achieve this, an individual's fear
of survivabillity on the road shouldn't be reason to let the system be
imbalanced. I'd say learn to properly drive the most efficiant vehicle for
the environment, and increase situational awareness and defensive driving
skills.

I think they should be left in the garage unless being driven to of from 4WD
activities offroad/coastal, and if you cannot afford two vehicles, then
perhaps that 'interest' in non efficient system's is draining that extra
money!


Rob KPO

----- Original Message ----- 
From: J. Andrew Rogers
To: ExI chat list
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 7:05 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan versus motorcycle



Let us put this topic another way, because some of the perspectives
being applied are far too narrow:


Should we ban or penalize sedan drivers because they are a clear
asymmetric hazard to motorcyclists?  Most cars never have more than one
person in them and are typically used just to move between two points,
so why not a motorcycle, which gets better gas mileage to boot?  I see
idiots in sedans nearly run into motorcyclists all the time, acting like
they own the road.  And a motorcyle can take a corner at speeds that
would roll a car.  We could clearly do with having far fewer cars on the
road and more motorcycles, and imagine all the parking space that would
free up.

This is no more or less specious an argument than much of the SUV versus
sedan argument.  You can relabel "SUV" to "sedan" and "sedan" to
"motorcycle", and essentially apply the same arguments with similar
validity.

Hopefully this makes the real calculus more apparent; most people seem
to be arguing from personal preference or ideology rather than
addressing the underlying calculus of personal transportation choices.


j. andrew rogers

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



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 20 13:20:39 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e04081913342d890a40@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040820132039.77900.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> (Note the 10% increase in SUV occupants killed).

Sorry, those are gross numbers. Unless you factor in the growth in the
SUV driving population, they are meaningless statistics. What is
important is to calculate the risk of death or injury for any given
driver of a car vs an SUV. THOSE statistics show that SUV drivers and
passengers are safer than those in cars.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 20 13:34:41 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e04081913455cc792ba@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040820133441.52359.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

According to the National Safety Council:

"Nationally, SUVs have a rollover rate of 98 fatalities per million
registered vehicles, compared to 44 fatalities per million for other
light vehicle types, according to NHTSA. But consider this: 1,088 of
the 1,482 SUV-rollover deaths in 1997 involved occupants who didn't use
their safety belts."

So SUV deaths are more than 2/3 by non-seatbelt-wearers, even though
the general population wears seatbelts at a rate of 60%+ in
non-mandatory-seatbelt states, and 90%+ in mandatory states. So it
isn't an issue of car vs. SUV, its seatbelt wearer vs non-wearer.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From etcs.ret at verizon.net  Fri Aug 20 15:37:00 2004
From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:37:00 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian SUV traction enhancement
In-Reply-To: <200408200947.i7K9lQ007693@tick.javien.com>
References: <200408200947.i7K9lQ007693@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <3b6ci05ocpie3j7ag6ujitb4eogc5i86uf@4ax.com>

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 03:47:26 -0600, 
extropy-chat Digest, Vol 11, Issue 23 contained:
>------------------------------
>
> [ ... ]
>
>It is pretty funny watching Atlanta drivers freak out at the little snow and 
>ice we get. Of course, if you can recover from laughing about people buying 
>up all the bread and water at the grocery store.
>
>BAL

Does that really work?   I would guess little chunks of frozen bread would be
much more environmentally friendly than the sand and salt mixture we use up
here in the Berkshires.
Takes all kinds.

stencil sends


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 20 15:56:15 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:56:15 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
Message-ID: <BAY17-F35aDYnME4xOZ000254fa@hotmail.com>

Would you please forward THOSE statistics?

Thanks,
BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>, ExI chat list 
><extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
>Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:20:39 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > (Note the 10% increase in SUV occupants killed).
>
>Sorry, those are gross numbers. Unless you factor in the growth in the
>SUV driving population, they are meaningless statistics. What is
>important is to calculate the risk of death or injury for any given
>driver of a car vs an SUV. THOSE statistics show that SUV drivers and
>passengers are safer than those in cars.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>_______________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
>_______________________________________________
>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  Fri Aug 20 16:18:25 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:18:25 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
Message-ID: <BAY17-F29gMUbugIeue0006c43f@hotmail.com>

Your stat neglects to mention the safety belt effect in non-SUV vehicles so 
it's not as useful as you'd like it to be. Are 2/3s of car rollover deaths 
also the result of not wearing your seatbelt? I don't see why SUV drivers 
would be less likely to wear seatbelts (since no one has brought up the IQ 
to SUV correltation).

BAL

>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>, ExI chat list 
><extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SUV's are killing their drivers.
>Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 06:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
>
>According to the National Safety Council:
>
>"Nationally, SUVs have a rollover rate of 98 fatalities per million
>registered vehicles, compared to 44 fatalities per million for other
>light vehicle types, according to NHTSA. But consider this: 1,088 of
>the 1,482 SUV-rollover deaths in 1997 involved occupants who didn't use
>their safety belts."
>
>So SUV deaths are more than 2/3 by non-seatbelt-wearers, even though
>the general population wears seatbelts at a rate of 60%+ in
>non-mandatory-seatbelt states, and 90%+ in mandatory states. So it
>isn't an issue of car vs. SUV, its seatbelt wearer vs non-wearer.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>_______________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 20 17:13:14 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:13:14 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] BODY: What Strutting Modifications are Transhuman?! 
Message-ID: <254960-220048520171314276@M2W060.mail2web.com>

Musings ...

I have been thinking about body modification and the gothic subculture who
tattoo and pierce their bodies, claiming people like Stelarc as their gurus
(however honestly reluctant Stelarc is to the association.)

Recently in Toronto at the TransVision 2004 Conference, I saw a few
individuals who were hosting tattoos and piercing - which all seemed quite
ordinary and even stylistically un-Versace.  

Tattoos have been painted onto the human skin for eons, and such practice
is neither novel nor unique.  (However, the method of applying tattoos has
come a long way from the hippies who made them a 1900?s fad.)

?Tattoos are no longer just an art form of the elite or associated with
societal deviants. People of all ages and from all walks of life are
finding their own special meaning in tattoos. Once associated only with
gangs, tattoos are done between friends sharing common bonds and by
individuals expressing their own uniqueness. Tattooing is modern in its
form only in the tools and designs used. The concept and art of tattooing
has existed throughout the centuries, beginning as early as Ancient Egypt
around 2000 B.C.?  (PageWise, Inc. 2002,
http://riri.essortment.com/historyoftatto_rjoy.htm )


I wondered if these individuals were at the conference because they were
supportive of transhumanism, or if they were there to see Mann and Stelarc.
As you know, I?m not a big cyborg aficionado, for me the real mavricks of
human/machine interface are the folks who actually need the body parts to
function (although certainly Mann would claim that he does) to or the
engineers who design them.  I think of a woman I saw one day in Los Angeles
by the beach.  She was walking up stairs in a tennis outfit, white T and
shorts.  Her right leg was shinny metal and I thought far more attractive
than her left leg.  She seemed to feel at home with both legs as equally
functioning parts of her body.  I also thought of my dear sweet mother and
her replacement hip, and a close friend and his robotic arm after loosing
his arm in an electrical accident.  They are the ?hippies? of today ?
living quite admirably in their modifications.

Thinking about why a sub-culture of body modifiers would think that they
are exemplary of transhumans is peculiar to me.  Tattoos do not extend
life, or improve it as far as I know.  A piercing, could help with genital
stimulation, but otherwise appears not to have any physiological benefit. 
So, why do body modifiers think that they are transhuman and transhumanists
are out of step?

Because they do not have to contemplate ? to think ? do the research, write
the papers, and come up with the ideas concerning the future. They can
parade modifications with little intellectual muss or fuss.

Speaking of body medications of tattoos ? and the reason I am writing this
is because of a man who would make Body Modification folks cringe in their
tattoos.   He is ?Cat Man.? 
http://et.tv.yahoo.com/tv/2004/08/20/catmanvh1/  The one and only!  He has
been transforming into his favorite feline for 20 years, and has spent over
$200,000 in body modification surgeries, including eyebrow implants,
extensive tattoos, reshaping his ears, a cleft lip, and a relocated septum.

Now don?t laugh.  He is the real thing.  He does not simply put tattoos all
over his flesh, or pierce his hose or chop up his ears, he actually
believes and has become what he thinks he is ? he walks his walk! (Down the
cat walk.)

Natasha

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




From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Fri Aug 20 19:05:13 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:05:13 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
Message-ID: <1093028713.25092@whirlwind.he.net>

>  It seems, and perhaps I am misreading you, that you are advocating an
>  essentially command economy as an ideal growth environment: You seem
>  to envision a system where a small elite controls vast portions of a
>  nations capital, where growth is achieved by their centralized
>  stewardship of the nation's wealth. Your arguement seems to be that
>  it is only by the wise and judicious calculations of a tiny monied
>  class, by their analysis of what ventures are to be pursued, that
>  growth is possible.


You may need to think about that some more.  I think that's the first
time anyone has read what I've written to mean that I am all about
centralization.

My position is that *allowing* the vast accumulation of wealth under
normal market conditions is a very positive things because it is putting
the capital in the hands of those that generate substantial value either
directly or indirectly, and most people will take a shot at accumulating
some modicum of wealth given the chance.  Progressive taxes actively
inhibit the accumulation of resources by those who extracting the most
value out of them.  The cost of doing business shouldn't increase by
fiat the more successful a business is.  People with a track record
given capital are people you want to have capital, preferably something
proportional to past successes.

Generally, this puts wealth in the maximum number of hands possible and
encourages wealth churn even if the overall distribution is relatively
static.  It is still a Pareto distribution but one that greatly diffuses
the power of any small group of individuals.  In a healthy distribution,
at any level of wealth, there is an even larger group of people only a
little less wealthy than you, requiring the cooperation of only a few to
command more capital than those more wealthy than them.  In extremely
progressive taxation environments, the curve is so sharp (high alpha)
that at the upper percentiles of the wealth brackets, it takes a very
large number of people cooperating to have capital parity with a single
individual in the next percentile bracket.

It wasn't I who was suggesting that having a few people control the
wealth is a good thing, but anyone supporting steep progressive taxation
is tacitly supporting such a thing.  We don't get to pick and choose the
consequences of such things.  You will *always* have a Pareto
distribution of some type, and the lower the alpha, the greater the
wealth and benefit to the average person.  Steep progressive tax
functions greatly increase the alpha, thereby increasing the class gap
and further unbalancing the distribution.

The middle class is created in low-alpha environments.  If you are
worried about the loss of the middle class, work on that.  It slays me
when politicians try to "save" the middle-class by making taxes even
more progressive.  Wash, rinse, repeat when the problem becomes even worse.


j. andrew rogers



From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com  Fri Aug 20 19:21:54 2004
From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:21:54 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FEAADAF9@amazemail2.amazeent.com>

J. Andrew Rogers writes:

> Matthew Gingell writes:
> > I would define any person who can command vast quantities of
capital, 
> > whether from a few wealthy sources or millions of middle-class
folks, 
> > as "wealthy".  

> This definition does not match what is is normally meant by "wealthy"
> in a market economy. A bank loan officer might control millions of
> dollars of capital but he isn't necessarily a wealthy person, any
> more than the navigator of a hundred million dollar cruise ship is
> necessarily a wealthy person.

> Think of venture capital and mutual fund managers, arbitrage brokers,
> currency traders, executives of corporations or pension funds, and so
> on. They all control big pools of other peoples money and they all
> try to make the pool bigger by finding interesting things to do with
> it, and none of them are necessarily super-rich people.

The difference between your definitions is the volitional agent.
If it's your volition commanding or controlling the capital, you are
wealthy. If it's someone else's, they are, whether or not you are
actively
managing that capital. So in that sense, wealth is the means of
controlling
capital via one's own volition, whether directly or indirectly.

Acy


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 20 15:35:57 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:35:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac><000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com><57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV24gC81TbdkS000055c0@hotmail.com>

I would like to take a moment to recognize the huge gap in cincome between
the beautiful and the ugly. Attractive people do have higher incomes.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matthew Gingell" <gingell at gnat.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 1:02 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap


> J. Andrew Rogers writes:
>
>  > Class mobility, a function of wealth rather than income, matters at
>  > least as much as the distribution, as this is what provides much of the
>  > motivation to dare great things.
>
>  Social mobility is a function of the ease with which individuals can
>  accumulate wealth - it's the integral of net income with respect to
>  time, plus or minus a constant for what an individual starts off
>  with.
>
>  We can look at income distribution in terms of how many people have
>  been able to achieve great things, that is take it as the end point
>  of the analysis rather than the initial condition. How many
>  opportunities for advancements exist on various points on the
>  distribution: Do we have a society in which most people find it
>  possible to improve their lot somewhat, or do we have a
>  winner-take-all society in which enormous rewards accrue to a few?
>
>  If nothing else, I think it should be pretty clear that our extremely
>  steep income distribution curve suggests something peculiar is going
>  on with our allocation of human capital.
>
>  > Very wealthy people contribute a lot to society by being able to
>  > risk very large sums of capital on things that interest them,
>  > including many things that the government will neither have the
>  > will nor the interest to fund regardless of merit. This money
>  > builds the companies and pays for the research that generates the
>  > majority of the technology we enjoy today.
>
>  A wealthy society with a healthy economy will find useful ways to
>  employ its wealth, regardless of how it's distributed. My pension
>  fund is every bit as interested in a diverse portfolio of risk /
>  reward tradeoffs as is the Rockefeller family fortune.
>
>  > The engine of innovation is powered by private capital, and one
>  > thing history has shown is that in hindsight most government funded
>  > "innovations" were either unnecessary, expensive, or economically
>  > irrelevant.
>
>  I don't see how this assertion relates to the rest of your argument,
>  but it's true as far as it goes. (With lots of qualifiers for the
>  provision of public goods, funding activities with positive
>  externalities, etc.)
>
>  > If you have nothing but a middle class, who provides the capital
>  > required to have a strong economy?
>
>  The market provides the capital. In any economy wealth is going to
>  seek a return, and the banking system and financial markets will find
>  ways to offer it. That's true whether "wealth" is million checking
>  accounts or a single trust fund.
>
>  > The irony is that progressive income taxes destroy class mobility.
>
>  It would indeed be ironic if it were true, but it's difficult to make
>  a sensible case that it is.
>
>  Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Fri Aug 20 22:04:49 2004
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 18:04:49 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
Message-ID: <41267581.1050802@smigrodzki.org>

J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

> It wasn't I who was suggesting that having a few people control the
> wealth is a good thing, but anyone supporting steep progressive taxation
> is tacitly supporting such a thing.  We don't get to pick and choose the
> consequences of such things.  You will *always* have a Pareto
> distribution of some type, and the lower the alpha, the greater the
> wealth and benefit to the average person.  Steep progressive tax
> functions greatly increase the alpha, thereby increasing the class gap
> and further unbalancing the distribution.
>  
>
>

### This is a very interesting issue, and you have induced me to rethink 
some of my beliefs. I absolutely agree that a low-alpha environment 
appears much more attractive than a high-alpha one, which should be 
intuitively obvious for anybody who appreciates the power of the free 
markets, and the importance of having large numbers of independent 
agents for rational decision-making.

There is also no doubt that an income tax is one of the stupidest ways 
of financing public goods. Currently, the  most inept decision-makers 
(i.e. non-profitable businesses and individuals) are rewarded by not 
having to pay taxes, while the successful ones are forced to pay fines 
for their success (euphemistically referred to as income or corporate 
taxes).

However, I wonder what do you think about the idea of progressively 
taxing the size of economic entities, rather than their income. Perhaps 
naively, I expect that a tax applied to any transaction (no matter 
whether an economic gain or loss is claimed) in proportion to the net 
value (market capitalization, real estate market value, total equity 
holdings) of the involved entities (no matter whether persons, 
corporations, non-profits), would serve to lower alpha, by punishing 
size but without  punishing success.

I think that under some favorable cicumstances the state could be 
profitably dispensed with altogether, but for the time being, given 
insufficient economic savvy of the citizenry, it still has a role to 
play, and the least harmful way of paying for it might be the universal 
progressive transaction tax.

Rafal


From benboc at lineone.net  Fri Aug 20 22:26:32 2004
From: benboc at lineone.net (ben)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 23:26:32 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] BODY: What Strutting Modifications are Transhuman?!
In-Reply-To: <200408201800.i7KI08013561@tick.javien.com>
References: <200408201800.i7KI08013561@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <41267A98.2070608@lineone.net>

I don't see that tattoos or piercings are any more significant to 
Transhumanism than cosmetics or high-heels.

Personally, i don't even so much as wear any jewellery, but i am a 
transhumanist. I do wear spectacles, though, and that counts for far 
more, in my opinion, than a piece of decorative metal, no matter where 
it's stuck on, or in. (Not that i'm saying that wearing 'specs makes you 
a transhumanist!)

If somebody came up with a tattoo that was an active display, that could 
for instance show a clock face, and keep time, i'd get one like a shot. 
Not because it's decorative, but because it's useful. I'd love to have 
the time tattooed on the back of a finger. Couldn't forget or lose my 
watch, then!

To answer the question, though, it's not the modifications that are 
'Transhuman' at all, it's your attitude.

ben



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 20 22:36:18 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 15:36:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV24gC81TbdkS000055c0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040820223618.48089.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>

They need it. Think of all the plastic surgery, status symbols (cars,
watches, jewelry, clothing, etc) they need to buy, and the agents they
need to pay for to keep up their life styles...

--- Kevin Freels <megaquark at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I would like to take a moment to recognize the huge gap in cincome
> between
> the beautiful and the ugly. Attractive people do have higher incomes.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Matthew Gingell" <gingell at gnat.com>
> To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 1:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
> 
> 
> > J. Andrew Rogers writes:
> >
> >  > Class mobility, a function of wealth rather than income, matters
> at
> >  > least as much as the distribution, as this is what provides much
> of the
> >  > motivation to dare great things.
> >
> >  Social mobility is a function of the ease with which individuals
> can
> >  accumulate wealth - it's the integral of net income with respect
> to
> >  time, plus or minus a constant for what an individual starts off
> >  with.
> >
> >  We can look at income distribution in terms of how many people
> have
> >  been able to achieve great things, that is take it as the end
> point
> >  of the analysis rather than the initial condition. How many
> >  opportunities for advancements exist on various points on the
> >  distribution: Do we have a society in which most people find it
> >  possible to improve their lot somewhat, or do we have a
> >  winner-take-all society in which enormous rewards accrue to a few?
> >
> >  If nothing else, I think it should be pretty clear that our
> extremely
> >  steep income distribution curve suggests something peculiar is
> going
> >  on with our allocation of human capital.
> >
> >  > Very wealthy people contribute a lot to society by being able to
> >  > risk very large sums of capital on things that interest them,
> >  > including many things that the government will neither have the
> >  > will nor the interest to fund regardless of merit. This money
> >  > builds the companies and pays for the research that generates
> the
> >  > majority of the technology we enjoy today.
> >
> >  A wealthy society with a healthy economy will find useful ways to
> >  employ its wealth, regardless of how it's distributed. My pension
> >  fund is every bit as interested in a diverse portfolio of risk /
> >  reward tradeoffs as is the Rockefeller family fortune.
> >
> >  > The engine of innovation is powered by private capital, and one
> >  > thing history has shown is that in hindsight most government
> funded
> >  > "innovations" were either unnecessary, expensive, or
> economically
> >  > irrelevant.
> >
> >  I don't see how this assertion relates to the rest of your
> argument,
> >  but it's true as far as it goes. (With lots of qualifiers for the
> >  provision of public goods, funding activities with positive
> >  externalities, etc.)
> >
> >  > If you have nothing but a middle class, who provides the capital
> >  > required to have a strong economy?
> >
> >  The market provides the capital. In any economy wealth is going to
> >  seek a return, and the banking system and financial markets will
> find
> >  ways to offer it. That's true whether "wealth" is million checking
> >  accounts or a single trust fund.
> >
> >  > The irony is that progressive income taxes destroy class
> mobility.
> >
> >  It would indeed be ironic if it were true, but it's difficult to
> make
> >  a sensible case that it is.
> >
> >  Matt
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Aug 20 23:54:29 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:24:29 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] P2P software vendors not liable for their user's
	behaviour
Message-ID: <710b78fc040820165444def222@mail.gmail.com>

"A federal appeals court in California ruled that Grokster and
StreamCast, maker of the Morpheus P2P software, are not liable for
copyright infringement when users of their software trade songs, music
and other files online. "In essence, the ruling says file-sharing
software is legal. That sets the stage for a potential showdown before
the U.S. Supreme Court and more lobbying for legislative solutions,"
USA Today explained."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A18302-2004Aug20.html?referrer%3Demail

It requires a login, so here's the whole thing:


---------------------------------------------
Software Doesn't Break Laws...

By Cynthia L. Webb
washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Friday, August 20, 2004; 9:47 AM 

What do file-sharing companies and the National Rifle Association have
in common? A common legal argument, that's what.

The entertainment industry's multi-year legal war to stamp out illegal
online file-sharing was dealt a major blow yesterday when a federal
court said that two major peer-to-peer software firms can't be held
liable for the copyright-infringing activities of their users.

Software doesn't violate copyrights, people do, or so the argument goes... 

A federal appeals court in California ruled that Grokster and
StreamCast, maker of the Morpheus P2P software, are not liable for
copyright infringement when users of their software trade songs, music
and other files online. "In essence, the ruling says file-sharing
software is legal. That sets the stage for a potential showdown before
the U.S. Supreme Court and more lobbying for legislative solutions,"
USA Today explained.
? USA Today: Ruling Sets Back Music Industry's Piracy Battle 
? Ninth Circuit decision: MGM v. Grokster (PDF) 

CNET's News.com said the "ruling means that companies that write and
distribute peer-to-peer software can't be shut down because of the
actions of their customers. It did not say file-trading itself is
legal, and lower courts in the United States have said individual
computer users are breaking the law when they trade copyrighted files
without permission. But the ruling does lift the cloud of potential
liability from defendants Grokster and StreamCast Networks, as well as
from many of their rivals."
? CNET's News.com: Judge's Rule File-Sharing Software Legal 

So does this mean the file-sharers have won once and for all?
According to The Wall Street Journal, not yet: "The ruling yesterday
by three judges for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San
Francisco will almost certainly intensify efforts by movie studios,
music companies and songwriters -- the plaintiffs in the case -- to
curb online piracy through other means. Those efforts are expected to
include lobbying for legislation designed to crack down on makers of
file-sharing programs and lawsuits against individuals who share
pirated files over the Internet. Music companies have already been
filing such lawsuits for about a year, though the Hollywood studios
have not yet followed suit." But the ruling certainly changes the
situation on the battlefield, as the Journal concluded: "Though the
fight over online piracy is far from over, the appeals court ruling
seemed to tilt the years-long battle largely in favor of technology
companies."
? The Wall Street Journal: Green Light For Grokster (Subscription required) 

The Los Angeles Times also noted in its coverage that Capitol Hill
will be the next stop for the file-swapping fight: "The battle over
file sharing is now likely to shift to Washington. Congress is
considering a bill that would crack down on the companies making the
software used by millions to copy music, movies and games over the
Internet. What's more, if the entertainment industry appeals the
decision, the U.S. Supreme Court could revisit its landmark Sony
Betamax ruling, which protects from copyright lawsuits products that
have substantial legitimate uses," reporter Jon Healey wrote.

Ironically, the same court helped kill off the Napster file-sharing
service in a previous ruling. The Los Angeles Times explained why the
new generation file-sharing sites were spared: "The same appeals court
came to a different conclusion about Napster in 2001, holding the
pioneering file-sharing service responsible for its users' illegal
activity because its central computers tracked all the songs available
for downloading. But today's file-sharing networks have no central
computers. The companies behind such 'peer to peer' systems cannot
even monitor users, let alone rein them in, Judge Sidney R. Thomas
noted in his opinion for the appeals panel." More on this from the
Associated Press: "The panel noted that the software companies simply
provided software for individual users to share information over the
Internet, regardless of whether that shared information was
copyrighted."

Thursday's ruling was certainly cheered by P2P site Kazaa, which will
use the decision to its advantage. "The court found that the
file-sharing networks have legitimate uses, allowing the band Wilco,
for instance, to distribute online an album its record label declined
to release. The ruling also will affect the entertainment industry's
pending case in Los Angeles federal court against Sharman Networks,
owner of Kazaa, the world's largest file-sharing network," the San
Jose Mercury News reported.

Expect a version of this logic to be used going forward. BBC News
Online quoted Fred von Lohmann of the Electronic Frontier Foundation,
who represented StreamCast in the case. Lohmann: "The same principle
that people who make crowbars are not responsible for the robberies
that may be committed with those crowbars." Crow bars don't kill
people, people kill people...

No surprise here: the Recording Industry Association of America
doesn't like the ruling. The New York Times picked up on a statement
by RIAA chief Mitch Bainwol, who said the ruling "does not absolve
these businesses from their responsibility as corporate citizens to
address the rampant illegal use of their networks." Indeed, the RIAA
and movie industry can still aim their ammo at individual
file-sharers. The ruling "says the makers of the software can't be
liable," Art Brodsky, communications director of public interest group
Public Knowledge, told the Times. "It doesn't say anything about the
individual users."
-------------------------------

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Aug 21 00:06:02 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:06:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] P2P software vendors not liable 
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040820165444def222@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc040820165444def222@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040820190356.01c19cd0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 09:24 AM 8/21/2004 +0930, Emlyn quoted:

>Crow bars don't kill people, people kill people...

This is obviously a typo.

Crow bars don't kill people, crow bars kill crows.

Damien Broderick
[I haven't drunk in one for years] 




From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 21 00:19:51 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:49:51 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] BODY: What Strutting Modifications are Transhuman?!
In-Reply-To: <41267A98.2070608@lineone.net>
References: <200408201800.i7KI08013561@tick.javien.com>
	<41267A98.2070608@lineone.net>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082017193c34627f@mail.gmail.com>

When are the body modifiers going to work out that no matters how many
tatoos, vampire teeth, and ball bearing implants they get, they'll
still be shallow wankers? Heh heh.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 23:26:32 +0100, ben <benboc at lineone.net> wrote:
> I don't see that tattoos or piercings are any more significant to
> Transhumanism than cosmetics or high-heels.
> 
> Personally, i don't even so much as wear any jewellery, but i am a
> transhumanist. I do wear spectacles, though, and that counts for far
> more, in my opinion, than a piece of decorative metal, no matter where
> it's stuck on, or in. (Not that i'm saying that wearing 'specs makes you
> a transhumanist!)
> 
> If somebody came up with a tattoo that was an active display, that could
> for instance show a clock face, and keep time, i'd get one like a shot.
> Not because it's decorative, but because it's useful. I'd love to have
> the time tattooed on the back of a finger. Couldn't forget or lose my
> watch, then!
> 
> To answer the question, though, it's not the modifications that are
> 'Transhuman' at all, it's your attitude.
> 
> ben
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Aug 21 00:27:32 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] BODY: What Strutting Modifications are Transhuman?!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04082017193c34627f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040821002732.87355.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> When are the body modifiers going to work out that
> no matters how many
> tatoos, vampire teeth, and ball bearing implants
> they get, they'll
> still be shallow wankers? Heh heh.

When truly functional implants become widely
accessible (including affordable)?


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 21 00:29:30 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 09:59:30 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV with gunracks and dash mounted personality upload
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408201729596333c9@mail.gmail.com>

I'm wondering if posting about the combination of SUVs, guns and
personality backups can cause an explosion so large that it'll cause a
chain reaction and destroy the entire universe. Or at least be a kind
of social-engineering DOS attack on the exi-list :-)

On related topics, did you see that the Packbot that the US is using
in Iraq has a shotgun module? Mad buggers!

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 21 00:36:01 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:06:01 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] BODY: What Strutting Modifications are Transhuman?!
In-Reply-To: <20040821002732.87355.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040821002732.87355.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040820173630aeb714@mail.gmail.com>

Implants that do something are a totally different story. But I
suspect there will still be people who choose aesthetic implants/mods
over functional ones in order to enhance sub-culture status. The
status oriented never really have my sympathy even at the best of
times.

The current crop of body modders (excepting the real crazy ones like
Stalking Cat, him I respect) are no different from the people who buy
the most shiny and expensive mobile phone for status, who buy the
status house or drive an urban SUV. It's a lame substitute for a life.

That said, I would love to try some of the more extreme body mod stuff
some time, for the experience. I'd be worried that I'd end up looking
*soooo* turn of the millenium though. I mean, how are you gonna live
down that magnetic foreskin implant in 2050?

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:27:32 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > When are the body modifiers going to work out that
> > no matters how many
> > tatoos, vampire teeth, and ball bearing implants
> > they get, they'll
> > still be shallow wankers? Heh heh.
> 
> When truly functional implants become widely
> accessible (including affordable)?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Aug 21 00:47:07 2004
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:47:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] "Beauty" Gap [was Tax Burden Gap]
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac><000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com><57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com><16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com>
	<BAY9-DAV24gC81TbdkS000055c0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <003501c48718$63c4e730$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Kevin Freels" <megaquark at hotmail.com>

> I would like to take a moment to recognize the huge gap in income between
> the beautiful and the ugly. Attractive people do have higher incomes.

Yes, at least what is currently considered attractive (there have been small
variations throughout the decades).

On the heterosexual front, at least, the practice goes on - attractive women
(even if they are admittedly "thick"-in-the-head) are often able to "sell"
their assets to either: (a) attractive successful men; or (b) not very
attractive succesful men; and (c) world-class ugly successful men (e.g., The
Donald). Sad.  Whatcha' gonna' do?

And taller attractive people (from what I've read - men) tend to have more
success with making money than shorter men.

I've long been intrigued with the idea of separating procreation from
"romantic love."  Now we are starting to see some progress here (and science
and technology promises to bring us more options in the future).

Olga






From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Aug 21 02:17:21 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:17:21 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <41267581.1050802@smigrodzki.org>
Message-ID: <001401c48724$fdfa0590$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Rafal Smigrodzki
> 
> 
> J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
> 
> > It wasn't I who was suggesting that having a few people control the
> > wealth is a good thing, but anyone supporting steep progressive
taxation
> > is tacitly supporting such a thing.
> >
> >
> ### ...I absolutely agree that a low-alpha environment 
> appears much more attractive than a high-alpha one...
> 
> However, I wonder what do you think about the idea of progressively 
> taxing the size of economic entities, rather than their income.
Perhaps 
> naively, I expect that a tax applied to any transaction (no matter 
> whether an economic gain or loss is claimed) in proportion to the net 
> value (market capitalization, real estate market value, total equity 
> holdings) of the involved entities (no matter whether persons, 
> corporations, non-profits), would serve to lower alpha, by punishing 
> size but without  punishing success...
> 
> Rafal...

Oooh, I get so turned on at that kind of talk.

In a very masculine, heterosexual capitalist way of course.

{8^D

spike



From sjvans at ameritech.net  Sat Aug 21 02:41:56 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:41:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV with gunracks and dash mounted personality
	upload
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408201729596333c9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0408201729596333c9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1093056116.1045.50.camel@Renfield>

On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 19:29, Emlyn wrote:

> On related topics, did you see that the Packbot that the US is using
> in Iraq has a shotgun module? Mad buggers!

Err, why is it mad?  They've been making such things for well over a
decade, for remote detonating explosives.  Probably isn't a bomb squad
in the country doesn't have one now, and would come in right handy in
Iraq.



From megaquark at hotmail.com  Fri Aug 20 15:34:16 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 10:34:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
References: <04f301c4841d$b52c3db0$6600a8c0@brainiac><000001c48426$f64a61b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><16674.36604.635250.254028@nile.gnat.com><57A45CA0-F19E-11D8-8850-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com><16677.37893.404416.998067@nile.gnat.com><96EFE3AA-F27A-11D8-8E3A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<16677.54257.890417.117941@nile.gnat.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV29zBscdTfMq00008550@hotmail.com>

I have personally moved approximately $14.5 million this year. I really wish
it were my money! :-)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matthew Gingell" <gingell at gnat.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 5:35 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap


> J. Andrew Rogers writes:
>
>  > I would define any person who can command vast quantities of capital,
>  > whether from a few wealthy sources or millions of middle-class folks,
>  > as "wealthy".
>
>  This definition does not match what is is normally meant by "wealthy"
>  in a market economy. A bank loan officer might control millions of
>  dollars of capital but he isn't necessarily a wealthy person, any
>  more than the navigator of a hundred million dollar cruise ship is
>  necessarily a wealthy person.
>
>  Think of venture capital and mutual fund managers, arbitrage brokers,
>  currency traders, executives of corporations or pension funds, and so
>  on. They all control big pools of other peoples money and they all
>  try to make the pool bigger by finding interesting things to do with
>  it, and none of them are necessarily super-rich people.
>
>  > My original point was more that you can't have vast quantities of
>  > capital under the control of a small number of people without also
>  > having a de facto "wealthy" class.  There are a dozen different
>  > creative ways to dress it up, but the result is roughly equivalent.
>
>  One of the miracles of capitalism is that this isn't true. Billion
>  dollar decisions can be made without anyone actually having to
>  possess a billion dollars.
>
>  Your 401K, my savings account, somebody else's stock portfolio, and
>  millions of other independent economically rational investments can
>  be pooled together to accomplish things none of us could accomplish
>  alone.
>
>  It isn't dressing anything up to distinguish the magnificently
>  egalitarian possibilities of markets from Soviet central planning or
>  from a world in which nothing happens unless some preposterously
>  wealthy aristocrat wants it to, and I don't think it's sophistry to
>  point out one of modern capitalism's greatest strengths.
>
>  > All that happens when everyone is nominally in the middle-class is that
>  > the pool of the wealthy (no matter what its guise) becomes very, very
>  > small which is not a fertile economic ecology.
>
>  It seems, and perhaps I am misreading you, that you are advocating an
>  essentially command economy as an ideal growth environment: You seem
>  to envision a system where a small elite controls vast portions of a
>  nations capital, where growth is achieved by their centralized
>  stewardship of the nation's wealth. Your arguement seems to be that
>  it is only by the wise and judicious calculations of a tiny monied
>  class, by their analysis of what ventures are to be pursued, that
>  growth is possible.
>
>  > And yes, progressive income taxes destroy class mobility by making it
>  > difficult to escape the middle class.  There were a few economics
>  > papers published several years ago that showed a lovely mathematical
>  > correlation between effective income tax rates as a function of income
>  > and the distribution of wealth in a population.  Steeply progressive
>  > rates concentrate control of capital in the hands of a few.  How making
>  > it progressively difficult to convert income into wealth is supposed to
>  > help class mobility is beyond me.  If the tax structure aggressively
>  > limits the conversion of income into wealth, exactly how is that
>  > supposed to help people in the lower economic strata that have income
>  > but little or no wealth?
>
>  Any tax, progressive or otherwise, looks like a bad thing when the
>  consequences of its cost are analysied in isolation from the benefits
>  of the spending it funds. In reality, progressive taxation pays for
>  wealth transfer programs and - whether you or I believe it is a good
>  thing - transferring money from the wealthy to the poor manifestly
>  increases their social mobility.
>
>  For instance public funding of education, public sector careers in
>  the military, subsidized small business loans, employment and
>  relocation assistance, a public safety net which socializes some of
>  the downside of necessary risk taking, all increase mobility. That
>  the people who (in an well implemented system) benefit from such
>  programs are not those who pay for them makes the net effect a
>  clearly upward contribution to their mobility, and this is true
>  regardless of whether it's the way you or I think a country ought to
>  be run.
>
>  This is not to mention an entire range of other legitimate state
>  functions that have to be funded somehow - national defense, law
>  enforcement and the courts, whatever else you might agree is in the
>  domain of appropriate public expenditures - the burden of which must
>  be distributed on the shoulders of people who have already made it
>  and people who are still trying to. It seems obvious to me which way
>  you weight it if your goal is to make it easier for more people to
>  escape poverty and enter the middle class.
>
>  Matt
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 21 04:59:40 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 14:29:40 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV with gunracks and dash mounted personality
	upload
In-Reply-To: <1093056116.1045.50.camel@Renfield>
References: <710b78fc0408201729596333c9@mail.gmail.com>
	<1093056116.1045.50.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082021596b0f19df@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:41:56 -0500, Stephen J. Van Sickle
<sjvans at ameritech.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 19:29, Emlyn wrote:
> 
> > On related topics, did you see that the Packbot that the US is using
> > in Iraq has a shotgun module? Mad buggers!
> 
> Err, why is it mad?  They've been making such things for well over a
> decade, for remote detonating explosives.  Probably isn't a bomb squad
> in the country doesn't have one now, and would come in right handy in
> Iraq.

Sorry, it wasn't meant to be a moral judgement; colloquial. I meant
it's surprising, in a TOTALLY X-TREME!!!! kind of way. And I think the
advent of armed robots (not new but newish, counting armed drone
aircraft, etc) is kinda cool, very sci fi. Experiencing them
secondhand via web reports is vastly preferable to personal
encounters, of course. Would that all our wars were fought between
robots on deserted battlefields. Unfortunately I think they are
currently being used to kill actual real live people, which isn't so
good.

A link for the google-differently-abled:
Robot with attitude: Armed with shotgun, WMD sensor
http://216.26.163.62/2004/ss_military_08_16.html

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sat Aug 21 08:47:25 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 18:17:25 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082101473fea99ac@mail.gmail.com>

People here may have heard of Ricardo Semler and Semco, a $300
megabuck Brazillian company that is organised along lines of
democracy. Not the sickly doppelganger "representative democracy" that
we all live under, rather its a direct democracy that looks a lot more
like anarchy than anything else.

I'm reading "The seven day weekend" at the moment, written by Semler.
It's a jaw dropper. He makes the current corporate leadership of the
world's great companies look like feudal warlords (well, really they
already looked that way). Buy it. Read it.

Here's a good recent interview with Semler.
http://www.conference-board.org/articles/atb_article.cfm?id=255

Has anyone else read any of his work, or had any experience of Semco? Thoughts?

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Aug 21 15:23:55 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 08:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04082101473fea99ac@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040821152355.29666.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> People here may have heard of Ricardo Semler and
> Semco, a $300
> megabuck Brazillian company that is organised along
> lines of
> democracy. Not the sickly doppelganger
> "representative democracy" that
> we all live under, rather its a direct democracy
> that looks a lot more
> like anarchy than anything else.
> 
> I'm reading "The seven day weekend" at the moment,
> written by Semler.
> It's a jaw dropper. He makes the current corporate
> leadership of the
> world's great companies look like feudal warlords
> (well, really they
> already looked that way). Buy it. Read it.
> 
> Here's a good recent interview with Semler.
>
http://www.conference-board.org/articles/atb_article.cfm?id=255
> 
> Has anyone else read any of his work, or had any
> experience of Semco? Thoughts?

I would say that a lot of small businesses in America
are organized the way he envisions, in part because
they have not (yet) attracted large capital, or the
providers of such who want security at the expense of
potential growth.

That said, I see one potential problem, if American
businesses tried to implement his model: slacker
employees.  A lot of the controls he objects to were
put into place to make sure the work gets done; I've
seen failure to enforce these controls result in
employees failing to (arguably becoming inable to)
meet agreed-upon deadlines.  In theory, one could
reduce pay or fire said employees - but one then has
the problem of completing the promised project for
one's customer anyway, and then there are the
lawsuit-happy types who will sue you for improper
termination (or whatever the legal term is).

I'm sure he has a solution to this.  I'm just not sure
that solution would work (or be correctly applied)
elsewhere.


From samantha at objectent.com  Sat Aug 21 18:36:22 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 11:36:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>
	<007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <00022870-F3A1-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 13, 2004, at 9:59 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Samantha wrote:
>
>> I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik. Not
>> because of any overly complicated political calculation
>> though.  Badnarik is simply the only one I have heard
>> speak sensibly (and in large agreement with my own views).
>> Of course I don't expect him to win.
>
> If you expect that either Kerry or Bush will win and consequently
> hold the power of the office for four years why wouldn't you
> vote for whichever of those you dislike the least?

What for?  So I can say that my choice won?   I would rather say that I 
voted for the candidate and party that actually stood for what I 
believe in.    Frankly I think both Kerry and Bush are a disastrous 
choice.   I cannot in good conscience vote for either one of them.

>
> The reason I ask is that I get that neither Bush or Kerry appeal
> and I get that a lot of people think it won't make much difference
> but I can think of two grounds on which I think it will make a
> practical difference.
>
> 1) International law   (or just plain old rule-of-law period)
>
> Kerry does not yet have conspicuous bad form as the head of
> state of a permanent security council member that invaded a
> foreign country.
>

Ah, but he says that even knowing what we know now that he would have 
invaded Iraq!
>
>
> 2) Stem cell research. (When Bush goes so will his screwy council
> on bioethics).
>
>

Don't be so sure.  I can easily imagine a bioethics council determining 
what government provided medical insurance should and should not cover. 
   I can easily imagine government provided healthcare wiping out much 
non-government based healthcare choice.

- samantha



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 21 19:27:45 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 12:27:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SUV with gunracks and dash mounted personality
	upload
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408201729596333c9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040821192745.67265.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm wondering if posting about the combination of SUVs, guns and
> personality backups can cause an explosion so large that it'll cause
> a chain reaction and destroy the entire universe. Or at least be a
kind
> of social-engineering DOS attack on the exi-list :-)
> 
> On related topics, did you see that the Packbot that the US is using
> in Iraq has a shotgun module? Mad buggers!

Ah, yes, iranian insurgents do not wear body armor, and as Massad Ayoob
has said years ago, "double ought buckshot in a shotgun is
ballistically superior to .45 ACP".

But would personalities uploaded to a smart SUV have any more a drive
to accessorize their vehicles than your current day Auto Zone customer?
I'd say the rate at which they accessorize would merely be accelerated.
Therefore, take advantage of the curve and invest in AutoZone, VIP, Pep
Boys, and other purveyors ofe vehicle paraphernalia.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 21 19:50:23 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 12:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <00022870-F3A1-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <20040821195023.91196.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> > 2) Stem cell research. (When Bush goes so will his screwy council
> > on bioethics).
> >
> 
> Don't be so sure.  I can easily imagine a bioethics council
> determining 
> what government provided medical insurance should and should not
> cover. 
>    I can easily imagine government provided healthcare wiping out
> much non-government based healthcare choice.

It is on rare occasion that Samantha and I agree on things. I too will
vote for Badnarik, and I similarly believe that Kerry would be
similarly, if not more, disasterous for this country than Bush has
been. On Bioethics alone, please recall that the radical left, of which
Kerry was once associated, is the preponderance of the luddite
movement. I and  Greg have documented the movements ties to radical
left organizations like the Wobblies, the Merry Pranksters,
International Communism, and anarcho-socialists. It is publicly
documented that Teresa Heinz Kerry has provided funding, laundered
through the Tides Center, for the Merry Pranksters, and SPECIFICALLY
funding to run the Prankster's boot camp for luddite and anti-globalist
saboteurs.

As much as Kerry likes to present himself as Bush-lite, he has backed
and voted for some of the most left wing anti-freedom bills to pass
congress in the last 30 years. Even leaving his Swift Boat detractors
aside, he has far more statist baggage in his closet than Bush ever has.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sun Aug 22 01:04:07 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:34:07 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
In-Reply-To: <20040821152355.29666.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040821152355.29666.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082118046e5de11e@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 08:23:55 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > People here may have heard of Ricardo Semler and
> > Semco, a $300
> > megabuck Brazillian company that is organised along
> > lines of
> > democracy. Not the sickly doppelganger
> > "representative democracy" that
> > we all live under, rather its a direct democracy
> > that looks a lot more
> > like anarchy than anything else.
> >
> > I'm reading "The seven day weekend" at the moment,
> > written by Semler.
> > It's a jaw dropper. He makes the current corporate
> > leadership of the
> > world's great companies look like feudal warlords
> > (well, really they
> > already looked that way). Buy it. Read it.
> >
> > Here's a good recent interview with Semler.
> >
> http://www.conference-board.org/articles/atb_article.cfm?id=255
> >
> > Has anyone else read any of his work, or had any
> > experience of Semco? Thoughts?
> 
> I would say that a lot of small businesses in America
> are organized the way he envisions, in part because
> they have not (yet) attracted large capital, or the
> providers of such who want security at the expense of
> potential growth.
> 
> That said, I see one potential problem, if American
> businesses tried to implement his model: slacker
> employees.  A lot of the controls he objects to were
> put into place to make sure the work gets done; I've
> seen failure to enforce these controls result in
> employees failing to (arguably becoming inable to)
> meet agreed-upon deadlines.  In theory, one could
> reduce pay or fire said employees - but one then has
> the problem of completing the promised project for
> one's customer anyway, and then there are the
> lawsuit-happy types who will sue you for improper
> termination (or whatever the legal term is).
> 
> I'm sure he has a solution to this.  I'm just not sure
> that solution would work (or be correctly applied)
> elsewhere.

It must be that Brazillians are so infused with the work ethic. :-)

Seriously, he talks about this quite a bit; his big point is that
responsibility and power are linked. I think people get fired, *by
their collegues*, when they fail to perform.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 22 01:52:56 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:52:56 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY><0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com><007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<00022870-F3A1-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <00fc01c487ea$beecbf20$362c2dcb@homepc>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

> On Aug 13, 2004, at 9:59 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> > If you expect that either Kerry or Bush will win and 
> > consequently hold the power of the office for four years
> > why wouldn't you vote for whichever of those you dislike
> > the least?
> 
> What for?  So I can say that my choice won?   I would rather say
> that I voted for the candidate and party that actually stood for what
> I believe in.    Frankly I think both Kerry and Bush are a disastrous 
> choice.   I cannot in good conscience vote for either one of them.

No, to minimise the damage, where damage is damage or harm as 
*you* see it. Harm to *you* and to the principles or values that 
*you* support whatever they are.

If Badarnik can't win the presidency this time around (in your opinion)
then you must know that someone else will win it this time around. 

And you must know that you and everyone else will live with the
consequences for four years. 

> > The reason I ask is that I get that neither Bush or Kerry appeal
> > and I get that a lot of people think it won't make much difference
> > but I can think of two grounds on which I think it will make a
> > practical difference.
> >
> > 1) International law   (or just plain old rule-of-law period)
> >
> > Kerry does not yet have conspicuous bad form as the head of
> > state of a permanent security council member that invaded a
> > foreign country.
> 
> Ah, but he says that even knowing what we know now that he
> would have invaded Iraq!

I haven't read or heard him say that directly but I accept that what you
are saying is likely to be the case. And it would be a decisive point
against Kerry in my opinion were Bush not saying the same thing. 

It would be a decisive point for me because I see the maintainence
and development of international law especially in the area of peace
and security as the highest priority. Without it free trade isn't free
trade is something muddleheaded or underhanded.

But this is where politics gets tricky. It could be that neither Kerry
nor Bush give a damn about international law or even that both do 
but think that the average voter doesn't (and they may be right).
That its too esoteric.  

Politically it is likely (to say the least) that Bush can't say he regrets
invading Iraq over WMD's in hindsight (there is still a war on!) and 
Kerry is in the same situation (ie. there will still be a war on and 
Kerry will still have voted "for it" in simple speak - though I'm not 
sure its quite that simple - its not the same for Congress to vote to 
empower the President with a full range of options - including the
military one as it is for the President to mistakenly go with the
military one - which is what I think actually happened). 

To get elected Kerry may be making himself seem like Bush-lite
(to use Mike's term) on issues that won't matter to the majority 
of voters. I think Mike is likely right in that he won't be quite so
Bush-lite the other side of the election. That is what makes it hard.
He'll probably be more like a traditional democrat and drift to the
left after the election and were I a tax paying American living within
the fortress and looking for relief as my number one issue that might
influence me more than it does as an Australian.  I like both major
electable parties close to the middle on the left-right dimension so 
I'd not want a left drift but far more important to me I don't want
him to be anything like Bush in terms of his diplomatic skills. I want
him to be a whole lot better and he may be only a little bit better
(I can't imagine that he'd be worse than Bush diplomatically  - in
diplomatic terms I think Bush might as well be completely crazy). 

To me Bush has had a chance as a diplomat and ought not under
any circumstances be given another. It would be dire for 
international peace and security as the message that's going out
currently is pure 'might makes right'. Kerry hasn't had a chance 
so diplomatically he is still something of a "clean skin".  

> > 2) Stem cell research. (When Bush goes so will his screwy 
> > council  on bioethics).
> 
> Don't be so sure.  I can easily imagine a bioethics council 
> determining what government provided medical insurance should 
> and should not cover. I can easily imagine government provided
> healthcare wiping  out much non-government based healthcare
> choice.

How sure should I be? :-)

Do you imagine that Kerry will keep the President's Council on
Bioethics in the same form as it is now?

With stem cells the problem is that uncertainty about government
policy is making it difficult for the private sector to do what the
private sector does.  The private sector is not a homogenous
sector its a bunch of competitors. It represents a risk for any particular
firm in the private sector to go into basic research that won't pay 
dividends for far longer than a presidential term. If policy changes
they may not be able to pay back the investors who invested in
basic research. 

You have to have the basic research. Its the basic research
(or the amount of it) that is being hit now.  Bush's *ethical*
stance on stem cells has caused a go slow globally.  That will
translate into longer times taken to develop treatments based
on understanding. The understanding is taking longer than it
needs too as too few researchers are financially able to get into
it.  

Before the goods of stem cell research are commercialised 
they must be developed and before that the biology of human
stem cells must be understood. Politics is slowing down the
rate at which we are understanding because its keeping 
researchers away from the enabling basic research. 

The above is over simplified - but this post is already too long.

Brett
 




From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Sun Aug 22 12:46:36 2004
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:46:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04082118046e5de11e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20040821152355.29666.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>
	<710b78fc04082118046e5de11e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <412895AC.60209@optusnet.com.au>

Emlyn wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 08:23:55 -0700 (PDT), 
> 
> Seriously, he talks about this quite a bit; his big point is that
> responsibility and power are linked. I think people get fired, *by
> their collegues*, when they fail to perform.
> 

This is a very powerful motivator to perform.

One's colleagues are far more likely to know how valuable your output is 
than some supervisor who  wanders past now and again. I would say that 
people being fired by their colleagues is probably relatively uncommon.
The peer pressure not to slack off would be sufficient.

I have worked in an environment where team output was what counted, not 
individual results, and the pressure that team members placed on each 
other could be quite brutal if someone was consistantly not carrying 
their fair share. However, if someone had a reason for not performing 
well then they generally got far more support than they do in 
traditional environments too.

- David.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 22 04:52:27 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 21:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
Message-ID: <20040822045227.58930.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

David wrote:
> However, if someone had a reason for not performing
> well then they generally got far more support than
> they do in traditional environments too.

A thought for consideration:

"I can fix that person."
versus
"I can fix myself."

The former seems more popular.  I'm not sure what all
the reasons are, but at least part of it is that some
people never consider the latter - and a small portion
of one's thoughts is more than a zero portion.
Indeed, merely considering the latter - for wide
values of "fix" - seems to be one thing that
transhumanists do, that sets them apart from most
other people.  (This applies to both the action of
thinking this thought itself, and the consequences.)


From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 05:32:20 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 22:32:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why not vote for Liberty?
Message-ID: <A3556C2E-F3FC-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

Isn't it time that we who understand the value of liberty actually 
voted for a Presidential candidate who honestly and completely supports 
it?  Yeah a lot of people will say we are throwing away our vote.   A 
lot of people will say that the Libertarians can't win.   I agree it is 
highly improbable.   But what would happen if the people who are tired 
of pointless war, the people who are fed up with the nation spending 
itself into bankruptcy, the people who do not want war without end 
against evil per se, the people who do not want socialized medicine and 
an even larger government, the people who are utterly and complete fed 
up with the "war on drugs" and all the tired, cynical, jaded lovers of 
freedom who never hear a candidate really talk about it - what if all 
of these folks voted for a candidate that did talk about freedom, who 
talked about ending the insane war on drugs, talked of bring the troops 
home now, talked of never supporting a draft, talked of doing away with 
the 16th Amendment, talked of tightly limited government?   Can't win?  
  No it is not impossible - not if all of these could be reached.    It 
is unlikely that enough people will even hear there is a choice much 
less have time to believe there can be a viable choice.

What will we who truly and deeply value liberty do?  Will we vote once 
again for a candidate who is opposed to several issues deeply dear to 
liberty?   Will we chose the lesser of two evils each of which wishes 
to continue the war in Iraq, reinstate the draft, continue the war on 
drugs, continue to run huge federal deficits, continue to assume they 
are the elite fit to run our lives?    Or will we begin to actually act 
in support of liberty?

Yes it is terrible to waste your vote.  Make sure yours is cast for 
what you really believe in.

- samantha



From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Sun Aug 22 14:46:42 2004
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:46:42 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
In-Reply-To: <20040822045227.58930.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040822045227.58930.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4128B1D2.6090609@optusnet.com.au>

Adrian Tymes wrote:
> David wrote:
> 
>>However, if someone had a reason for not performing
>>well then they generally got far more support than
>>they do in traditional environments too.
> 
> 
> A thought for consideration:
> 
> "I can fix that person."
> versus
> "I can fix myself."
> 
> The former seems more popular.  I'm not sure what all
> the reasons are, but at least part of it is that some
> people never consider the latter - and a small portion
> of one's thoughts is more than a zero portion.
> Indeed, merely considering the latter - for wide
> values of "fix" - seems to be one thing that
> transhumanists do, that sets them apart from most
> other people.  (This applies to both the action of
> thinking this thought itself, and the consequences.)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 

I agree with you that the former thought is more popular, and I think it 
is probably because most people don't like to acknowledge faults in 
themselves. It is easier to see faults in others.

However, I was originally referring to temporary losses of performance 
being supported by team-mates, whereas in most other environments 
support consists of warnings to "look busy 'cause the boss is coming".

Hmm. Another thought about fixing others - it may be that many things 
that need "fixing" are not necessarily broken, but may be just 
incompatibilities.
 From an objective point of view, neither solution may be preferable but 
one or the other is necessary. Both points of view could be in the right 
IF the other person would change to fit in.




From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Aug 22 06:40:35 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:40:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <20040821195023.91196.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00be01c48812$f4642850$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Mike Lorrey
 
> --- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
 
> >    I can easily imagine government provided healthcare wiping out
> > much non-government based healthcare choice.
> 
> It is on rare occasion that Samantha and I agree on things. I too will
> vote for Badnarik...
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey

Oy, hell hath frozen solid.  I simultaneously agree with
both Samantha and Mike on a political issue.  I three will
vote for Badnarik.

spike

ps: Badnarik who?  Does she have a first name?  A website?





From bjk at imminst.org  Sun Aug 22 06:55:14 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 01:55:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update
Message-ID: <41284352.7090802@imminst.org>

ImmInst Update - Film, Book, Chat: Bradbury

BOOK PROJECT 

ImmInst's first book -- The Scientific Conquest of Death -- is nearing 
completion -- Oct 2004. See author biographies and essay excerpts:
http://www.imminst.org/book1 

Essays are now being accepted for the second book: 
http://www.imminst.org/book 


FILM PROJECT 

Over the next four month, Bruce Klein (ImmInst Chair) will travel across 
the US filming individuals who are working to advance the life extension
movement. To be included in the film, contact Bruce: 
http://www.imminst.org/film 


CHAT - Sun. Aug 22 @ 8 PM Eastern 

Robert J. Bradbury -- Founder of Aeiveos Corporation, an "education, research 
and investment company dedicated to understanding the causes of aging", 
Robert joins ImmInst to discuss life extension and other topics. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=3990 


ARTICLES 

Transhumanists, Still Human A Report On Transvision 2004 - by Kip Werking http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=4127 

Who Wants To Live Forever? - by Nick Bostom 
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=4121 


ABOUT IMMINST 

The Immortality Institute (ImmInst) is a 501(c)3 non-profit with the mission to 
"end the blight of involuntary death." As of August 2004, ImmInst is supported 
by more than 1,600 members and 99 full members. 
http://www.imminst.org/fullmembers 



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 22 08:36:42 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:36:42 +1000
Subject: Rights again   (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>

BillK wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:26:12 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> >  
> > But still a public road is something that is constructed as
> > part of a public policy which requires some sort of legal
> > framework to make it work.
> > 
> > If there has to be some public policy and some minimal 
> > set of laws or rules to make it work then what could be
> > wrong with considering what that public policy (what 
> > those laws) should be?

[BillK] 
> This ... seems to be getting at the root of  the discussion.
> The SUV supporters seem to be assigning a greater value
> to their individual rights than to the good of the public at
> large (the commons). This is the traditional contradiction
> between individual rights and social responsibility.

I think what is missing to ground this stuff sensibly is a notion of
rights, what secular non-mystical rights are, where they derive
and how they work.  

I'll offer the following as a first attempt.

1) The rights one assumes for oneself are meaningless as rights.
Any creature can pursue its own interests any way it likes and
for so long as it can get away with it. A creature operating alone
is one operating more basically and outside the sphere of rights
and responsibility. Rights only arise in a social context. An individual
without a group has infinite "freedom-to" and zero "freedom-from"

2) Rights arise only in conjunction with two other associated 
concepts, the concept of group membership and the concept
of responsibility. Where others in ones group don't accept
responsibility one does not have an actual right. Rights and
responsibilities must balance. Group membership is where
individuals forgo some "freedom-to"s in exchange for some
"freedom-froms". 

3) The only rights a group member has are those that the group
can underwrite for its members by drawing on the reservoir of
member responsibility. The books must balance: rights cannot
exist where responsibility for underwriting them and the
resource to do it don't exist. 

4) Laws are the means by which groups manage the balance 
between rights and responsibility but only for their members
(citizens). 

5) Groups (families, tribes, nations) can and will compete and
conflict unless they can pool their members and align their rights
and responsibilities. 

There are no mystical rights - the mystics are trying to re-allocate
real world resources when they talk of such rights - and to the 
extent that they do they diminsh the resource pool to underwrite
responsibilities such as duty of care to group members. 

The above is quick and crude but maybe a beginning. 

Brett Paatsch




From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sun Aug 22 09:15:31 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 05:15:31 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why not vote for Liberty?
In-Reply-To: <A3556C2E-F3FC-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
References: <A3556C2E-F3FC-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0408220514210.-262733@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


I'm voting for Badnarik - and my son is running on the Libertarian
party ticket here, locally. :)

I agree, I cannot any longer vote for "the lesser of two evils". I
hated going out of the voting booth feeling dirty and dishonest. At
least this time I'll vote honestly.

Regards,
MB


On Sat, 21 Aug 2004, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> Isn't it time that we who understand the value of liberty actually
> voted for a Presidential candidate who honestly and completely supports
> it?  Yeah a lot of people will say we are throwing away our vote.   A
> lot of people will say that the Libertarians can't win.   I agree it is
> highly improbable.   But what would happen if the people who are tired
> of pointless war, the people who are fed up with the nation spending
> itself into bankruptcy, the people who do not want war without end
> against evil per se, the people who do not want socialized medicine and
> an even larger government, the people who are utterly and complete fed
> up with the "war on drugs" and all the tired, cynical, jaded lovers of
> freedom who never hear a candidate really talk about it - what if all
> of these folks voted for a candidate that did talk about freedom, who
> talked about ending the insane war on drugs, talked of bring the troops
> home now, talked of never supporting a draft, talked of doing away with
> the 16th Amendment, talked of tightly limited government?   Can't win?
>   No it is not impossible - not if all of these could be reached.    It
> is unlikely that enough people will even hear there is a choice much
> less have time to believe there can be a viable choice.
>
> What will we who truly and deeply value liberty do?  Will we vote once
> again for a candidate who is opposed to several issues deeply dear to
> liberty?   Will we chose the lesser of two evils each of which wishes
> to continue the war in Iraq, reinstate the draft, continue the war on
> drugs, continue to run huge federal deficits, continue to assume they
> are the elite fit to run our lives?    Or will we begin to actually act
> in support of liberty?
>
> Yes it is terrible to waste your vote.  Make sure yours is cast for
> what you really believe in.
>
> - samantha
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 22 14:10:16 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Rights again (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
Message-ID: <20040822141016.79188.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

while rights confer responsibility, it is stil only resp for ones self,
and to others in that one does not violate the life liberty or property
of another. putting another at risk is not a violation of rights, and
even todays courts still recognise this. no harm equls no foul.
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
wrote:
> BillK wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:26:12 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> > >  
> > > But still a public road is something that is constructed as
> > > part of a public policy which requires some sort of legal
> > > framework to make it work.
> > > 
> > > If there has to be some public policy and some minimal 
> > > set of laws or rules to make it work then what could be
> > > wrong with considering what that public policy (what 
> > > those laws) should be?
> 
> [BillK] 
> > This ... seems to be getting at the root of  the discussion.
> > The SUV supporters seem to be assigning a greater value
> > to their individual rights than to the good of the public at
> > large (the commons). This is the traditional contradiction
> > between individual rights and social responsibility.
> 
> I think what is missing to ground this stuff sensibly is a notion of
> rights, what secular non-mystical rights are, where they derive
> and how they work.  
> 
> I'll offer the following as a first attempt.
> 
> 1) The rights one assumes for oneself are meaningless as rights.
> Any creature can pursue its own interests any way it likes and
> for so long as it can get away with it. A creature operating alone
> is one operating more basically and outside the sphere of rights
> and responsibility. Rights only arise in a social context. An
individual
> without a group has infinite "freedom-to" and zero "freedom-from"
> 
> 2) Rights arise only in conjunction with two other associated 
> concepts, the concept of group membership and the concept
> of responsibility. Where others in ones group don't accept
> responsibility one does not have an actual right. Rights and
> responsibilities must balance. Group membership is where
> individuals forgo some "freedom-to"s in exchange for some
> "freedom-froms". 
> 
> 3) The only rights a group member has are those that the group
> can underwrite for its members by drawing on the reservoir of
> member responsibility. The books must balance: rights cannot
> exist where responsibility for underwriting them and the
> resource to do it don't exist. 
> 
> 4) Laws are the means by which groups manage the balance 
> between rights and responsibility but only for their members
> (citizens). 
> 
> 5) Groups (families, tribes, nations) can and will compete and
> conflict unless they can pool their members and align their rights
> and responsibilities. 
> 
> There are no mystical rights - the mystics are trying to re-allocate
> real world resources when they talk of such rights - and to the 
> extent that they do they diminsh the resource pool to underwrite
> responsibilities such as duty of care to group members. 
> 
> The above is quick and crude but maybe a beginning. 
> 
> Brett Paatsch
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 22 14:18:15 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:18:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
Message-ID: <20040822141815.9100.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>

Michael Badnarik, of Texas, is the LP candidate. go to
http://www.lp.org for details. 

I spent some time getting to know him last nov when he gave his weekend
course on the constitution. He is great fellow.
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > Mike Lorrey
>  
> > --- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
>  
> > >    I can easily imagine government provided healthcare wiping out
> > > much non-government based healthcare choice.
> > 
> > It is on rare occasion that Samantha and I agree on things. I too
will
> > vote for Badnarik...
> > 
> > =====
> > Mike Lorrey
> 
> Oy, hell hath frozen solid.  I simultaneously agree with
> both Samantha and Mike on a political issue.  I three will
> vote for Badnarik.
> 
> spike
> 
> ps: Badnarik who?  Does she have a first name?  A website?
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From sentience at pobox.com  Sun Aug 22 14:24:25 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 10:24:25 -0400
Subject: Rights again   (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
In-Reply-To: <01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>	<ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com>
	<01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <4128AC99.9090503@pobox.com>

Brett Paatsch wrote:
> 
> 1) The rights one assumes for oneself are meaningless as rights.
> Any creature can pursue its own interests any way it likes and
> for so long as it can get away with it. A creature operating alone
> is one operating more basically and outside the sphere of rights
> and responsibility. Rights only arise in a social context. An individual
> without a group has infinite "freedom-to" and zero "freedom-from"

An individual of a species that has existed for evolutionary time in a 
regime that includes social groups may have a cognitive concept of rights 
that is internalized, intrinsic to the individual.  Even though that 
psychology would never have evolved without a group context, it now exists 
as an adaptation, independent of the ancestral conditions that rendered it 
adaptive.

I don't think it's a contradiction in terms to say that some of the things 
I choose to do myself, what a literally minded philosopher of selfishness 
would define as "my interests" (e.g., saving the world and not being a jerk 
in doing so), arise from my psychological perception of the rights of others.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence


From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Aug 22 15:46:18 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:46:18 +0100
Subject: Rights again (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
In-Reply-To: <20040822141016.79188.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040822141016.79188.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e040822084664b4a679@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 07:10:16 -0700 (PDT), Mike Lorrey wrote:
> while rights confer responsibility, it is stil only resp for ones self,
> and to others in that one does not violate the life liberty or property
> of another. putting another at risk is not a violation of rights, and
> even todays courts still recognise this. no harm equls no foul.

I hesitate to wade into a 'rights' discussion as they all tend to end
up neck-deep in the swamp fighting alligators, but Mike's brief
comment seemed to indicate support for the old 'Do no harm' system of
morality. I thought that it had been well demonstrated that acts of
omission can cause just as much harm as harmful acts committed.
Although humans do seem to have an inbuilt preference that acts of
omission are less reprehensible.

BillK


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 22 16:41:18 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:41:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
In-Reply-To: <4128B1D2.6090609@optusnet.com.au>
Message-ID: <20040822164118.52945.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- David <deimtee at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> However, I was originally referring to temporary
> losses of performance 
> being supported by team-mates, whereas in most other
> environments 
> support consists of warnings to "look busy 'cause
> the boss is coming".

Ah.  Although, would not permanent deficits - like
the honest lack of knowledge as to how to do a task -
also be supported?  "You don't know how to do this,
yet you must or we'll all suffer.  So let's all figure
out how your task can be done."

> Hmm. Another thought about fixing others - it may be
> that many things 
> that need "fixing" are not necessarily broken, but
> may be just 
> incompatibilities.

Many, certainly, but I wonder if this is or is not
the majority - as opposed to cases where things truly
are "broken", in this case defined as a condition
where the same or a similar problem would be faced no
matter who the "broken" person worked with (aside from
extreme cases, like those who would simply do that
person's job in order to negate the "malfunction").

The anecdotal evidence of my own career suggests that
most of the time, when difficulties erupt, it is
because people truly are "broken" in that manner,
although usually this can be taken care of through training.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Aug 22 18:08:31 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Electability of minor party candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040822141815.9100.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040822180831.73868.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Michael Badnarik, of Texas, is the LP candidate. go
> to
> http://www.lp.org for details. 
> 
> I spent some time getting to know him last nov when
> he gave his weekend
> course on the constitution. He is great fellow.

But even if it weren't for issues of ballot and media
access, et al (which, to be fair, I think he has a
valid point on, but that's another story), he sadly
wouldn't be electable even if he were the Democratic
or Republican nominee.  A few quotes from his site,
and attributed to him by articles:

> If I have a "hot button" issue, this is definitely
> it.
(Appeals to emotion aside, this strength of emotion
will gain some support from those you agree with, but
alienate all those who oppose you on the issue.  It
also invites attacks; see Kerry's relatively muted
promotion of his military service, and the reaction
thereto.)

> The Bush administration plans to re-institute the
> draft after the election
(suspected and hinted at, but not proven)

> If I concede that the government can stop you from
> having an F-16, I'm conceding the right of
> government to regulate
(Many people can see the potential for private armies
poised to overthrow the legitimate government.  Label
them "terrorists" for added impact...)

And then there's the silence on major items that
Democrats and Republicans pick up on as campaign
topics.  For instance, stem cell research.  One can
reasonably infer that, while he'd be against federal
funding of stem cell research because it's federal
funding, he would be for the continued legality of
private reseach into theraputic uses, and perhaps even
of reproductive cloning once that becomes viable.  But
nowhere on his site does he mention it.  Both of the
major parties were apparently taken a bit by surprise
by stem cells' growing in importance as a political
issue, but both of the major party candidates now have
defined positions on the issue (though Bush only
needed to reaffirm and clarify his existing position).

Even if one disagrees with the major parties, one can
still study their tactics and imitate the successful
ones (at least, the ones one has money for).  Failure
to do that is not the fault of anyone else, but it
does contribute to the minor parties' minor standings.


From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 18:30:40 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:30:40 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408132255ecc7765@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0408132255ecc7765@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5EE90D8E-F469-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 13, 2004, at 10:55 PM, Emlyn wrote:

> I'll expound shortly on a half baked software development methodology
> that I've got brewing in my head, tentatively tagged "disposable
> code". The axioms are "assume you start with a few spectacular coders,
> genius hackers, who can kind of work together, are individually
> irreplaceable, and most of whom don't like working with each other.
> What can you do?". It's a reaction to the regular methodologies
> (standard big system & agile) which assume that you want to work with
> endless fields of stupified code grinders, and that the brilliant
> cowboys in the corner are a liability...
>

Perhaps I missed it but I saw nothing in a quick exploration of agile 
methodologies that implies that brilliant hackers are a liability.    
Please point out what you mean.  Perhaps this perception is more of a 
question of management considering these folks liabilities than the 
methodology considering them thus.


> I think it will combines with an idea I blogged in July called "Object
> Bus" (dumb name), which is that you create a layer above messaging and
> databases onto which you can put objects, from which you can retrieve
> objects, including message sending style behaviour and database style
> behaviour. The "space" of objects is above the machine level (many
> machines can be involved, transparently). This way you can write lots
> of little programs that just do a bit of something, interacting only
> with the "object bus" and not with each other directly. From what
> little I know of Java, this is a bit like Java spaces, but the
> difference is that it is non language specific, meant to be dead easy
> to use, and applicable to desktop apps as well as big enterprise
> craziness. I wonder if a P2P approach under the covers could work
> here? This goes on and on, see the July archive in my blog for more
> detail.

Sounds something like the "cloud of objects" notion from the 80s.  
There was a lot of rich thinking about OO systems, languages and 
methodologies back then that has mainly been ignored in the "real 
world" since.  I've coded things roughly like this many times.   Mostly 
management and most coders and most software business models don't get 
it.  It is usually an uphill fight.   Often you end up needing to nail 
down something to build the object cloud on top of.  Like there usually 
is an underlying persistent model that has many alternate mappings to 
different kinds of database implementation.  There is an underlying 
rock-bottom set of messaging assumptions that there may be different 
implementations of.  Usually there is a lowest level communication 
method  with which to coordinate the rest.

> - samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 18:49:23 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:49:23 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040815213172c33801@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20040816033243.26292.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
	<710b78fc040815213172c33801@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FC1FFE0E-F46B-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 15, 2004, at 9:31 PM, Emlyn wrote:
>
> I'm going to be inconsistent now and say that I think communication is
> strongly necessary in a development team. But it doesn't have to be
> done entirely by the coders themselves, especially if they aren't
> people people. Better to get rid of the idea of team leader and go for
> a communcation facilitator, someone who runs around (b&m or
> virtually), talks to everyone, keeps an idea of how things are going,
> and helps those people who need to talk to actually talk. For the most
> part, when two bits of system written by two seperate people need to
> talk, they don't really need rigorous API definitions imposed from
> above, they just need to communicate, with help if necessary. Two
> smart coders can work that stuff out between them.
>

Yes, but it is a minimal requirement that someone does work out the API 
for the parts to inter-communicate reasonably early.   If N bits need 
to talk then someone needs to put together a workable bit of 
inter-communication infrastructure that the team agrees to use to tie 
the bits together.  It can't just be thrown together and grudgingly 
accepted for each hacker to get own with his/her bit.   It is 
effectively a joint context within which the rest will be done.    Get 
it wrong and it won't matter how brilliant the bits are.  Many large 
systems bite at this level.

Also, not all genius hackers are created equal.  Some of them are great 
on the "bits".  The rarer ones are good software architects/system 
designers.   Good design esthetics is a rare commodity even among 
brilliant hackers.     This stuff is even harder to get management to 
recognize.
>
>>
>>> and
>>> distributed systems
>>> composed almost solely of loosely coupled small
>>> pieces, so that the
>>> overall central control of the api is less
>>> necessary,
>>
>> You don't directly need central control of the API.
>> You do need a central document source,
>
> Yes, I agree with this. Top level stuff is most important; which bits
> talk to which other bits and why (how is also good, but less
> important).

Language determines thought to a seldom appreciated degree.  The how is 
language.  Get it wrong and the system becomes clumsy and limited.

>
>
>>  For
>> large groups, this can be done semi-autonomously - if
>> (and only if) the involved parties can agree to it.
>
> I guess I've addressed this above, I agree. It depends on the task
> too; an interface between two components is easier to negotiate ad-hoc
> than an interface used by half of the teams in an organisation.
>

Yep.

>> But as you said, this is for a project where the
>> independent coders don't talk to each other very well,
>> thus the need for central control: to facilitate
>> communication and make sure some agreement is reached.
>
> I never like this, because people are too likely to let the api be set
> in stone and kludge around it rather than changing it when necessary.
> A good principle to keep in mind is the ability to extend your api
> without breaking old stuff, covers a lot of the ground of adapting
> your api.
>
> My alternative to central control is yet again to have someone who
> primarily facilitates (subtly forces :-)) communication. You can call
> this person team lead, or head chat monkey, it matters not. But the
> role is kind of coach/mentor/facilitator, and requires a really good
> communicator (who is also technically competent if not excellent).
>

Communication alone is not enough.  You have to recognize that some 
people are good at system wide architecture and others are not.  You 
have to have the former create the weave the rest use to connect their 
modules and work within.  There really does need to be an overall 
architect that does the deep thinking about the whole beast not only in 
relation to current requirement but in relation to its ease of 
maintenance including possible future evolution and entanglement with 
other systems.    Very few think at this level.  Even fewer 
organizations both understand and support this level of thinking and 
design.

It is not enough to have everyone just talk to each other.  Not by a 
long shot.

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 18:56:42 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:56:42 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <000b01c48369$a6b8cc30$852c2dcb@homepc>
References: <r02010200-1035-80B312C8EE7011D89D08000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
	<000b01c48369$a6b8cc30$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <01CB5A5B-F46D-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 16, 2004, at 1:18 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Brent Neal wrote:
>
>> ..  voting on the principle of least incompetence.
>
> If only it would catch on.
>
>> http://www.reason.com/0408/fe.bd.john.shtm
>
> Good article.  Maybe some will read excerpts that won't read
> 16 pages.
>
> " ..by virtue of our abdication, a very authoritarian, assertive
> form of government has taken over. And oddly enough, it is
> doing so in the guise of libertarianism to a certain extent. Most
> of the people in the think tanks behind the Bush administration?s
> current policies are libertarians, or certainly free marketeers.

I am sorry but the current government-corporate love-in has nothing to 
do with free markets.  With the exception of Cato, none of the major 
think tanks remotely qualify as or claim to be libertarian AFAIK.   
This is a gross insult to libertarians by those who haven't the 
foggiest idea what libertarianism or free markets are about.


> We?ve got two distinct strains of libertarianism, and the
> hippie-mystic strain is not engaging in politics, and the Ayn
> Rand strain is basically dismantling government in a way that
> is giving complete open field running to multinational
> corporatism."
>

OK, this is sloppy far beyond any need to deal with it further.


> -s


From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 19:05:03 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:05:03 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Some ideas... dumped
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F12yLkblXzikS00044c45@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY17-F12yLkblXzikS00044c45@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <2C18688C-F46E-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 16, 2004, at 7:50 AM, Brian Lee wrote:

>
> I reflect back on projects I've worked on: successful and unsuccessful 
> and it seems like vision is the most important piece. I've been on 6 
> month projects with 4 people and no management. We had no 
> documentation, no project plan, and we generated a full product that 
> made millions its first year. Then I saw that same project add 40 
> people, multiple levels of management, project managers, product 
> managers, qa, qt, etc etc and it took forever to get a new module out. 
> The key difference was that in the beginning the four of us had a 
> vision of what we were creating and worked toward the common goal.

Yes, the "vision" thing is a very important key.  Also, I've noticed 
that 4 person (or so) software  teams gell much more easily into 
something greater than the sum of the individual talents and energy 
where larger more complex teams almost never do.   I think this says 
something important about the type of thinking and synergy software 
requires and the overhead of inter-person communication.

>
> Later, no one really knew what they had to do and were just sort of 
> "going through the motions".
>
> My preferred method of development is a very small, talented team with 
> no management at first. There should be at least 1-2 "businessy" progs 
> who can speak with investors and other business units to convey the 
> message, but still able to generate clean code. Then the other 1-3 
> should just be hard core developers who can all understand (in theory) 
> what the other developers are working on so they know what to code 
> next.

Yes.  I usually tell managers (when they will listen) that there 
highest level functions are to keep the lights on and as much as 
possible to keep the rest of the company off the backs of the team so 
they can do the work.   Micro-management kills individual 
responsibility and innovation dead.  Failure to create a stable bubble 
insulating the team from company froth greatly harms and slows down the 
work.

>
> Of course, it's virtually impossible to find a small team of mad 
> genius coders with a unified vision so I'm still waiting :/
>
>

I have had the joy of working with one.  But our insulation got rotted 
away and one by one we lost people.

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 19:07:27 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:07:27 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
In-Reply-To: <10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com>
	<7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
	<007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <81FC820A-F46E-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

I found it rather depressing.   I forget how many people just haven't a  
clue.

-s

On Aug 16, 2004, at 11:14 AM, Bret Kulakovich wrote:

>
>
> Since yesterday there has been back-and-forth on Slashdot.org about  
> the Singularity.
>
> Some nice points are made, but from a Sociological standpoint it an  
> interesting slice of humanity to observe the reaction of.
> Just thought ppl might want to catch it. Slow news day, as they say.
>
> http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/15/ 
> 1642243&tid=214&tid=192&tid=14&tid=6
>
> ]3
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 19:23:35 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:23:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C347D830-F470-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

Mike,

	Please show your argument.  I doubt very much that anything remotely 
approaching 50% of the taxpayers pay no taxes due to income tax credit. 
  I doubt 50% of taxpayers even consider using this or, if they do 
consider it, can get any benefit out of it.

- samantha

On Aug 17, 2004, at 6:30 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>> /APWires/headlines/D84GNDMG1.html
>
> Of course, the expansion of the earned income tax credit to help the
> bottom 50% pay no income taxes at all had nothing to do with the
> increased tax burden for the middle class...
>
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> Chairman, Free Town Land Development
> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
> Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
> 		
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 19:25:16 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:25:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <FF6A0390-F470-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

Where would you draw the line before someone is among the "wealthiest". 
   The way some people draw it most professionals making over $100K are 
among the "wealthiest".   That would endanger a great number of people 
I know.

- samantha

On Aug 17, 2004, at 9:42 AM, Kevin Freels wrote:

>
>
>>> New government data also shows that President Bush's tax cuts have
>>> shifted
>>> the overall tax burden to the middle class from the wealthiest
>>> Americans.:
>
> It's always been my impression that the wealthiest Americans represent 
> such
> a small portion of the nation that the middle class has always carried 
> the
> burden. EVen with a flat tax, the wealthiest Americans would be paying 
> more
> in dollars than the average Joe.  Why is it that people think they 
> should
> also pay a higher percentage even though it has minimal impact on the
> overall revenues? I am so glad I'm not wealthy because I would be
> perpetually pissed about everyone always expecting me to pay an ever
> increasing "fair share".
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 19:26:33 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:26:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tax Burden Gap
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20040817133039.28579.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<BAY9-DAV11nkTlhkQLv0000e3b4@hotmail.com>
	<6.1.1.1.0.20040817125552.01d2eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <2D331401-F471-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

Please clarify a bit.  What are we including as "wealth" in the 
statements below?  Is it a static model of "wealth"?

- samantha

On Aug 17, 2004, at 10:58 AM, Damien Broderick wrote:

> At 11:42 AM 8/17/2004 -0500, Kevin wrote:
>
>> It's always been my impression that the wealthiest Americans 
>> represent such
>> a small portion of the nation that the middle class has always 
>> carried the
>> burden.
>
> Look at some data.
>
> http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html
>
> < In the United States, the richest 1 percent of households owns 38 
> percent of all wealth. >
>
>
> <MM: What portion of the wealth is owned by the upper groups?
>
> Wolff: The top 5 percent own more than half of all wealth.
>
> In 1998, they owned 59 percent of all wealth. Or to put it another 
> way, the top 5 percent had more wealth than the remaining 95 percent 
> of the population, collectively.
>
> The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it 
> owned 83 percent of all wealth.
>
> This is a very concentrated distribution. >
>
> Whether this is a good or bad thing is another matter.
>
> Damien Broderick
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From etcs.ret at verizon.net  Sun Aug 22 20:12:21 2004
From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:12:21 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] The "wasted" Libertarian vote
In-Reply-To: <200408221800.i7MI0D001733@tick.javien.com>
References: <200408221800.i7MI0D001733@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <t8shi0heefev60f5ahb4ll0h3t8p7sjpno@4ax.com>

The rule by which your State instructs its electors 

http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/problems.htm

has a lot to do with personal voting strategies.

If you know your State's electors all will go to Kerry (as in Massachusetts)
you have greater incentive to vote Libertarian than if you're voting in a
releatively close contest.  You cannot affect the *outcome* of the race, but
there is a greater likelihood that both parties will respond to the off-axis
vector of your minority, in planning for the midterm elections.  

If you really can't predict the outcome, and you perceive any difference at
all between Bulganin and Kruschchev,  you take the lesser,  lest your swing
vote give the State to the wrong weasel.

Unless, of course, you really are committed to the Party of Principle.

stencil sends


From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Aug 22 21:11:39 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:11:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Spike wrote:

>
> Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
> western civilization of an attack by some sort of
> weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.

Sure since the west is insisting on throwing its weight behind 
blatantly irrational and oppressive acts.

> We
> are developing antimissile tech, but seems to me
> another parallel defense would be to encourage
> urban sprawl.  An enormous smeared out suburbs
> would be far less vulnerable to attack than an
> enormous highly concentrated city, would it not?
> The argument is made that urban sprawl is bad for
> wildlife, but the alternative may encourage an
> attack which would be bad for both humans and
> wildlife.  Perhaps cities have outlived their
> usefulness.
>

Solves the wrong problem.  Being more peaceable and civilized with 
others would reduce the risk a lot faster.    And no, changing our 
behavior does not mean "the terrorists won".  It means we decided to 
act according to our own supposed standards and take some 
responsibility.   Rebuilding our cities, yanking our freedoms, treating 
everyone as a suspect terrorist, even citizens, just so we can "show 
em" that we are untouchable and can and will do whatever we please and 
there isn't a thing "they" can do about it is insanity.

- samantha



From sjvans at ameritech.net  Sun Aug 22 23:40:03 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:40:03 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield>

On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 16:11, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> Sure since the west is insisting on throwing its weight behind 
> blatantly irrational and oppressive acts.

I know I'm going to regret asking, but *what* blatantly irrational and
oppressive acts?



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 23 00:04:34 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:04:34 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Science's babies - An article on therapeutic cloning
	in Britain
Message-ID: <020501c488a4$c5cc2140$362c2dcb@homepc>

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/08/22/1093113048325.html

"In Britain, a group of scientists is about to start cloning human  embryos to develop new treatments for diseases such as diabetes.  Ian Sample explains what happens next."    

...


'Rather than therapeutic cloning becoming a therapy in its own right, it is its usefulness as a tool for studying disease, as demonstrated by Jaenisch, that will really have an impact, says Irving Weissman, a developmental biologist at Stanford University.
"For me, the greatest and most important thing that'll come from this is a whole new platform to understand human genetic diseases," Weissman says. "For the first time ever, you can have the authentic human disease to work on, right there in cells in front of you." Irving says the technique will allow scientists to study some of the best-known genetic diseases, from diabetes to early-onset heart disease, find out precisely what genetic fault is responsible, and from that develop ways of treating them.

Irving is one of the optimists.

"Anyone who says therapeutic cloning won't happen based on where we are today is naive. It's wrong to hype it as something that will happen in the next five years, but it will happen," he says.'

-------

Brett Paatsch

 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040823/26240ba5/attachment.html>

From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 23 02:02:06 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:32:06 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <1092996479.5587.258.camel@alito.homeip.net>
References: <710b78fc04082001081ee5a951@mail.gmail.com>
	<1092996479.5587.258.camel@alito.homeip.net>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040822190240a8fc04@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:07:59 +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky
<alito at organicrobot.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-08-20 at 17:38 +0930, Emlyn wrote:
> > Watch it a few times and feel your jaw hit the floor...
> > http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo23.mpg
> > 
> don't forget
> http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo25.mpg
> http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo84.mpg
> http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2004/0810/robo85.mpg
> 
> but if you like this kind of stuff, have a look at omnihead's robot (ie
> everything at the bottom of http://www.vstone.co.jp/e/rt01e.htm ) and
> khr1's robot
> (the wow robot version: http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/wow-robot-
> khr1-017324.php , not the kaist version (those are amazing as well, but
> they are not $2000 toys))  i can't find where i got the videos from.
> try looking for them, they are most impressive (some here
> http://www.kopropo.co.jp/Movie/2004SHS%20KRSDEMO.wmv

... apparently humanoid robots can do backflips and cartwheels. I had
trouble believing my eyes. Incredible (and cool as f*?k).
-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 23 02:36:40 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040822190240a8fc04@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040823023640.32867.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> ... apparently humanoid robots can do backflips and
> cartwheels. I had
> trouble believing my eyes. Incredible (and cool as
> f*?k).

A chain of thought I've been having, which this
reinforces:

Take basic robotics research, as applied to humanoid
frames.  Follow it on its current path until, for
whatever purpose (entertainment, military, etc.),
human-sized, human-shaped robots with
human-equivalent manipulation ability become
available.  The hardware is what's important here; the
software would, say, allow it to perform
pre-programmed dance steps or walk along a path as a
"human drone" for military training, but it would be
no more creative or free willed than today's robots.
Is there any logical doubt, given these toys being
available today, that this is likely within the next
20 years?  (Being conservative here - less than 10
might be more accurate.)

If not, then this frame will likely have some cargo
capacity somewhere within its body - probably its head
and/or torso.  And some extra power capacity, enough
to power the life support unit for a brain, and wire
it up to the sensors and motors, and possible hormone
synthesizers to replicate the missing organs (as part
of life support).  If there's a lot of cargo capacity,
more of the body can be encapsulated as a preliminary
measure, while researching how to support just the
brain (primarily, figuring out the hormone balance and
neuron wiring).  Is there any logical doubt that this
would be likely within 20 years of the above?  (Again,
being conservative.)

Once that happens, there exists a powerful symbol for
taking the last step, which is likely to focus and
drive AI research into uploads.  Which therefore makes
this seem the most likely "default" path to SIs, if
nothing is done to force another path before then.  As
nasty as human beings can be towards one another, few
- and none that are likely to gather the resources to
be among the first uploads - are as sociopathic as
"pure" AIs, which would have no pre-AI socialization,
are feared by some to be.  (One might take it a bit
further and wonder if research into "pure" AIs thus
makes anti-Friendly AIs actually more likely, but at
this early stage, that's way too difficult to
determine to be worth any action, or even much serious
thought...again, at this time.)


From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 23 02:47:11 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:47:11 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <00dd01c488bb$7d4bd480$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Samantha Atkins
> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 2:12 PM

> On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Spike wrote:
> 
> > Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
> > western civilization of an attack by some sort of
> > weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.
> 
> Sure since the west...

The west?

> ...is insisting on throwing its weight behind 
> blatantly irrational...

As blatantly irrational as murdering 3000 innocent
internationals who did nothing more evil than to
work in a really tall office building?

> ...and oppressive acts...

As oppressive as the way the Taliban and Al Qaida
treats its women and non-muslims?

> Solves the wrong problem.  Being more peaceable and civilized with 
> others would reduce the risk a lot faster...

So why not do both?  Estimate the probability that the
west will change its behavior.  Estimate the probability
that civilization will soon realize that technology now
allows us to spread out.  Cities have outlived most of 
their usefulness, but not their desireability as terrorist
targets.  spike




From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 23 03:11:13 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:41:13 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823023640.32867.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040823023640.32867.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408222011386224e6@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 19:36:40 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > ... apparently humanoid robots can do backflips and
> > cartwheels. I had
> > trouble believing my eyes. Incredible (and cool as
> > f*?k).
> 
> A chain of thought I've been having, which this
> reinforces:
> 
> Take basic robotics research, as applied to humanoid
> frames.  Follow it on its current path until, for
> whatever purpose (entertainment, military, etc.),
> human-sized, human-shaped robots with
> human-equivalent manipulation ability become
> available.  The hardware is what's important here; the
> software would, say, allow it to perform
> pre-programmed dance steps or walk along a path as a
> "human drone" for military training, but it would be
> no more creative or free willed than today's robots.
> Is there any logical doubt, given these toys being
> available today, that this is likely within the next
> 20 years?  (Being conservative here - less than 10
> might be more accurate.)
> 
> If not, then this frame will likely have some cargo
> capacity somewhere within its body - probably its head
> and/or torso.  And some extra power capacity, enough
> to power the life support unit for a brain, and wire
> it up to the sensors and motors, and possible hormone
> synthesizers to replicate the missing organs (as part
> of life support).  If there's a lot of cargo capacity,
> more of the body can be encapsulated as a preliminary
> measure, while researching how to support just the
> brain (primarily, figuring out the hormone balance and
> neuron wiring).  Is there any logical doubt that this
> would be likely within 20 years of the above?  (Again,
> being conservative.)
> 
> Once that happens, there exists a powerful symbol for
> taking the last step, which is likely to focus and
> drive AI research into uploads.  Which therefore makes
> this seem the most likely "default" path to SIs, if
> nothing is done to force another path before then.  As
> nasty as human beings can be towards one another, few
> - and none that are likely to gather the resources to
> be among the first uploads - are as sociopathic as
> "pure" AIs, which would have no pre-AI socialization,
> are feared by some to be.  (One might take it a bit
> further and wonder if research into "pure" AIs thus
> makes anti-Friendly AIs actually more likely, but at
> this early stage, that's way too difficult to
> determine to be worth any action, or even much serious
> thought...again, at this time.)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 

I'd like to see how far this stuff ("toy" humanoid robots) is
informing the area of medical prostheses for the disabled. If I were a
quadriplegic or similar, I'd be looking at these 'bots and rubbing my
hands together (urr) with glee. And the timeframes that Adrian
mentions seem realistic; I'd be thinking I could be mobile again
within a decade.

We'll know we're moving in the right direction when we see the ads for
the televised grudge match... "This Saturday Night on MechWars...
Reeve vs Hawking! See them slug it out 'bot style, in the Beauty vs
Brains contest of the millenium!"

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 23 03:42:23 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:42:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408222011386224e6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040823034223.16891.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to see how far this stuff ("toy" humanoid
> robots) is
> informing the area of medical prostheses for the
> disabled. If I were a
> quadriplegic or similar, I'd be looking at these
> 'bots and rubbing my
> hands together (urr) with glee. And the timeframes
> that Adrian
> mentions seem realistic; I'd be thinking I could be
> mobile again
> within a decade.

So far?  Not much.  Robots that can walk are
relatively new, and the human brain can already
handle the software needs.  I'd say the other way
around is more likely at this time: good arms and legs
have been developed for prostheses; these can also be
used, with some programming, for androids.

When the entire shell is ready, then we may see some
wonder if quadriplegics could make use of "walking
wheelchairs".

> We'll know we're moving in the right direction when
> we see the ads for
> the televised grudge match... "This Saturday Night
> on MechWars...
> Reeve vs Hawking! See them slug it out 'bot style,
> in the Beauty vs
> Brains contest of the millenium!"

Better: when field trials begin for remote-controlled
androids to replace infantry, which have been the core
of Western armed forces from before their formal
classification as "infantry" right up to the present.
(Tanks may rule the field, planes the sky, and ships
the sea...but by themselves, they all suck at taking
cities, which is usually the ultimate objective.)

Or when you can buy an anthropomorphic robot for
conducting high-dexterity tasks in high-hazard areas
(where the main reason not to send a human is that the
human might get injured or killed, but either the task
is known to be too complex for simple robots, or the
task is not known and requires a highly adaptable
tool...and humans have all kinds of practice adapting
their bodies to various tasks).


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 23 03:49:12 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:19:12 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823034223.16891.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040823034223.16891.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc040822204913c37ddb@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:42:23 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd like to see how far this stuff ("toy" humanoid
> > robots) is
> > informing the area of medical prostheses for the
> > disabled. If I were a
> > quadriplegic or similar, I'd be looking at these
> > 'bots and rubbing my
> > hands together (urr) with glee. And the timeframes
> > that Adrian
> > mentions seem realistic; I'd be thinking I could be
> > mobile again
> > within a decade.
> 
> So far?  Not much.  Robots that can walk are
> relatively new, and the human brain can already
> handle the software needs.  I'd say the other way
> around is more likely at this time: good arms and legs
> have been developed for prostheses; these can also be
> used, with some programming, for androids.
> 
> When the entire shell is ready, then we may see some
> wonder if quadriplegics could make use of "walking
> wheelchairs".
> 
> > We'll know we're moving in the right direction when
> > we see the ads for
> > the televised grudge match... "This Saturday Night
> > on MechWars...
> > Reeve vs Hawking! See them slug it out 'bot style,
> > in the Beauty vs
> > Brains contest of the millenium!"
> 
> Better: when field trials begin for remote-controlled
> androids to replace infantry, which have been the core
> of Western armed forces from before their formal
> classification as "infantry" right up to the present.
> (Tanks may rule the field, planes the sky, and ships
> the sea...but by themselves, they all suck at taking
> cities, which is usually the ultimate objective.)
> 
> Or when you can buy an anthropomorphic robot for
> conducting high-dexterity tasks in high-hazard areas
> (where the main reason not to send a human is that the
> human might get injured or killed, but either the task
> is known to be too complex for simple robots, or the
> task is not known and requires a highly adaptable
> tool...and humans have all kinds of practice adapting
> their bodies to various tasks).
> 

A dumb question... all of this work (or the great majority) seems to
be happening in Japan. Does that sound right? I know they want
humanoid robots to care for their aging population, and they seem to
be well on track. Is anyone else bothering to make these things?

Regarding the Japanese efforts, I get the impression that the money
coming from the top to build a robot based service industry is being
met with engineering excellence at the bottom, coming out of a very
pro-robot popular culture. It seems like a combination of manga and
xenophobia may well have produced the leading edge in robotics.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 23 04:15:52 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:15:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040822204913c37ddb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040823041552.98361.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> A dumb question... all of this work (or the great
> majority) seems to
> be happening in Japan. Does that sound right?

The robots themselves?  Yes.  My impression was that
America does more of the prosthetics work.

> I know
> they want
> humanoid robots to care for their aging population,
> and they seem to
> be well on track. Is anyone else bothering to make
> these things?

There are a handful of exoskeleton projects, mostly
for military use, mostly in America.  I'm thinking one
of these projects, or its successors, might think
along these lines.

> Regarding the Japanese efforts, I get the impression
> that the money
> coming from the top to build a robot based service
> industry is being
> met with engineering excellence at the bottom,
> coming out of a very
> pro-robot popular culture. It seems like a
> combination of manga and
> xenophobia may well have produced the leading edge
> in robotics.

Manga and xenophobia have played their roles, but
they are hardly responsible for even a majority of
this.  Having to focus on making good use of what one
can import, rather than being able to simply extract
resources from the ground directly, has also played a
role.  So has an ability to play to the Asian markets
as an industrialized nation without being part of "the
West" (North America, South America, Europe, and to
some extent Australia) while the West viewed them as a
good ally.  (Quick question: which one does not make
Bushco worry - China, Korea, or Japan?)

I'd say the thing most responsible is an aging
population, and the perception that Japan must take
care of its elderly - especially those elderly who
have the money to invest in making their own future
better.  (You think the AARP's got a lot of political
weight?  They dream of having Japan-grade pull.)  If a
lot of Americans thought it likely that they would
live to be past 100, but that this would be a decrepit
old age *unless* they took action now to reverse that
decrepity, you might see the same sort of investment
in personal futures in America, too.  (And possibly in
the environment: not messing up the planet because
it'd spoil future generations' enjoyment is one thing;
not messing up the planet because it'd spoil your own
future enjoyment is another.)


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 23 04:21:18 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:51:18 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823041552.98361.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040823041552.98361.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408222121132facee@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:15:52 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
<snip>
> I'd say the thing most responsible is an aging
> population, and the perception that Japan must take
> care of its elderly - especially those elderly who
> have the money to invest in making their own future
> better.  (You think the AARP's got a lot of political
> weight?  They dream of having Japan-grade pull.)  If a
> lot of Americans thought it likely that they would
> live to be past 100, but that this would be a decrepit
> old age *unless* they took action now to reverse that
> decrepity, you might see the same sort of investment
> in personal futures in America, too.  (And possibly in
> the environment: not messing up the planet because
> it'd spoil future generations' enjoyment is one thing;
> not messing up the planet because it'd spoil your own
> future enjoyment is another.)
> 

This is what I was refering to when I said "xenophobia". After all,
the problem of the aging population in western countries would be
easily solved by letting in all the abled bodied people from poor
countries who want in. In a world chock-full of people, deciding to
build robots to perform the tasks people usually do is a really weird
choice. Not that I'm complaining, those robots are cool, but come on,
is that country being run by Bob the Angry Flower??

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Aug 23 04:50:54 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:50:54 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fahrenheit 911 - objective review?
In-Reply-To: <00fc01c487ea$beecbf20$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <000001c4814c$43b5ebf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<0A04A08B-EDA2-11D8-B3DD-000A95B1AFDE@mac.com>
	<007701c481bb$89e12e40$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<00022870-F3A1-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<00fc01c487ea$beecbf20$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <03EA8148-F4C0-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 21, 2004, at 6:52 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
>> On Aug 13, 2004, at 9:59 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>
>>> If you expect that either Kerry or Bush will win and
>>> consequently hold the power of the office for four years
>>> why wouldn't you vote for whichever of those you dislike
>>> the least?
>>
>> What for?  So I can say that my choice won?   I would rather say
>> that I voted for the candidate and party that actually stood for what
>> I believe in.    Frankly I think both Kerry and Bush are a disastrous
>> choice.   I cannot in good conscience vote for either one of them.
>
> No, to minimise the damage, where damage is damage or harm as
> *you* see it. Harm to *you* and to the principles or values that
> *you* support whatever they are.
>

What do you mean "no"?  I support liberty.  Neither of the major 
candidate seem particularly concerned with that.  I support lowering 
the federal budget (balanced is only a beginning.  Both major 
candidates will impoverish the country more.  I support stopping the 
rule by terror that we inflict on ourselves.  Both of the major 
candidates will increase it.  I support the immediate end of the Iraq 
travesty.  Both of the major candidates would send more troops.  I 
support less federal intrusion in most areas of our lives.  Both 
candidates support more intrusion.   Why would I vote for so much that 
I oppose?   The lesser of two evils is still EVIL.

> If Badarnik can't win the presidency this time around (in your opinion)
> then you must know that someone else will win it this time around.
>

It is quite improbable he will win.  But how does this make him or the 
Libertarians any less the proper choice for me?    If he doesn't win 
then of course I know someone else will.  DUH.  What are you getting at 
here?

> And you must know that you and everyone else will live with the
> consequences for four years.
>

Yes.   We will most likely live with the consequences of Bush or Kerry 
as a president.  I think the next four years will be hell with either 
choice.  I don't endorse metaphorical death by strangling or death by 
burning.   I choose what I consider on the side of life and liberty.  
That it has very little chance this time does not make it any less the 
moral choice.


>>> The reason I ask is that I get that neither Bush or Kerry appeal
>>> and I get that a lot of people think it won't make much difference
>>> but I can think of two grounds on which I think it will make a
>>> practical difference.
>>>
>>> 1) International law   (or just plain old rule-of-law period)
>>>
>>> Kerry does not yet have conspicuous bad form as the head of
>>> state of a permanent security council member that invaded a
>>> foreign country.
>>
>> Ah, but he says that even knowing what we know now that he
>> would have invaded Iraq!
>
> I haven't read or heard him say that directly but I accept that what 
> you
> are saying is likely to be the case. And it would be a decisive point
> against Kerry in my opinion were Bush not saying the same thing.

So the fact that they are both damn fools or worse makes it more 
palatable to vote for either of them?  <scratches head>

>
> It would be a decisive point for me because I see the maintainence
> and development of international law especially in the area of peace
> and security as the highest priority. Without it free trade isn't free
> trade is something muddleheaded or underhanded.
>

I agree with you about "free trade" as practiced under WTO not being 
really about free trade at all.

> But this is where politics gets tricky. It could be that neither Kerry
> nor Bush give a damn about international law or even that both do
> but think that the average voter doesn't (and they may be right).
> That its too esoteric.
>

Personally I demand that who I vote for at least gives a damn about 
justice.  What we are doing in Iraq is not just.   What passes for 
criminal justice in the US is not justice. The "war on drugs is not 
just.

The Iraq War is draining us economically, in the eyes of the world and 
harming or own morale.  The Patriot and other unseemly acts are 
undercutting the very freedom America is supposed to stand for.  Going 
to war was based on supposition and lies.   I cannot in good conscience 
vote for anyone who would say that it was the right thing to do even 
knowing everything we know now.   How could anyone trust someone like 
that?

> Politically it is likely (to say the least) that Bush can't say he 
> regrets
> invading Iraq over WMD's in hindsight (there is still a war on!) and

There is a misguided atrocious war in Iraq  that he insisted on 
starting.  If he is not man enough to own up to the mistake then we 
need someone who is.  It looks like that isn't Kerry.

> Kerry is in the same situation (ie. there will still be a war on and
> Kerry will still have voted "for it" in simple speak - though I'm not
> sure its quite that simple - its not the same for Congress to vote to
> empower the President with a full range of options - including the
> military one as it is for the President to mistakenly go with the
> military one - which is what I think actually happened).
>

So if you do something stupid and horrific and you are running for 
office you have to pretend that it was a good idea and swear you would 
do it again?

> To get elected Kerry may be making himself seem like Bush-lite
> (to use Mike's term) on issues that won't matter to the majority
> of voters.

Have we become such a cynical and empty people that one must lie and 
hide one's values to be elected leader of the mess?


>  I think Mike is likely right in that he won't be quite so
> Bush-lite the other side of the election. That is what makes it hard.
> He'll probably be more like a traditional democrat and drift to the
> left after the election and were I a tax paying American living within
> the fortress and looking for relief as my number one issue that might
> influence me more than it does as an Australian.

My main issue is freedom.  A secondary issue is stripping government 
bloat and intrusion into our lives.  Actually that is tied with not 
stripping me of my own life and energy to spend it on policies and 
practices that I consider an utter abomination.   A tertiary issue is 
getting the religious right out of high office but not at the price of 
further socializing the country starting with medicine.    I am a 
minarchist libertarian.  I wish to see the government constrained to 
the limits imposed by the Constitution.   I recognize it can't be done 
overnight.  So we had best get started.

> I like both major
> electable parties close to the middle on the left-right dimension so
> I'd not want a left drift but far more important to me I don't want
> him to be anything like Bush in terms of his diplomatic skills. I want
> him to be a whole lot better and he may be only a little bit better
> (I can't imagine that he'd be worse than Bush diplomatically  - in
> diplomatic terms I think Bush might as well be completely crazy).
>
> To me Bush has had a chance as a diplomat and ought not under
> any circumstances be given another. It would be dire for
> international peace and security as the message that's going out
> currently is pure 'might makes right'. Kerry hasn't had a chance
> so diplomatically he is still something of a "clean skin".

The indications are that he would extend many of the current policies 
but with more of a "coalition" behind the actions.

>
>
>>> 2) Stem cell research. (When Bush goes so will his screwy
>>> council  on bioethics).
>>
>> Don't be so sure.  I can easily imagine a bioethics council
>> determining what government provided medical insurance should
>> and should not cover. I can easily imagine government provided
>> healthcare wiping  out much non-government based healthcare
>> choice.
>
> How sure should I be? :-)
>
> Do you imagine that Kerry will keep the President's Council on
> Bioethics in the same form as it is now?
>

Perhaps not in the same form.  But it is simple economics that his 
universal health insurance will be limited in what is covered.  Using 
bioethical arguments is a very likely way to go about this.  That the 
arguments may be less couched in religious terms (maybe) doesn't make 
it less dangerous.   And yes, I believe he will keep nearly the same 
"President's Council" though the membership will shift.

- samantha



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 23 04:56:44 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 21:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408222121132facee@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040823045644.29648.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is what I was refering to when I said
> "xenophobia". After all,
> the problem of the aging population in western
> countries would be
> easily solved by letting in all the abled bodied
> people from poor
> countries who want in. In a world chock-full of
> people, deciding to
> build robots to perform the tasks people usually do
> is a really weird
> choice. Not that I'm complaining, those robots are
> cool, but come on,
> is that country being run by Bob the Angry Flower??

The availability of immigrants does diminish the need
for robotic labor in America, but even here, robots
are being developed for elderly service.  They're
loyal 24/7, and (once built) they work for the cost of
electricity and maintenance.

That said, you are correct...but Japan is hardly alone
in its stance.  Most nations in North and South
America were founded by immigrants, and remain open to
immigration to this day.  Most nations that were
"pre-existing" before the modern concept of a nation
came around (circa 1700s/1800s, I think) have,
instead, a "we've always been here" mentality built
into them, which automatically excludes those who
weren't.  Even the USA, over 200 years old now, is
starting to show signs of this.

One could do an interesting exercise in theoretical
nation-building, to try to devise a state that would
remain immigrant-friendly even when, eventually, the
great majority of the population were native-born.
Does one destroy the land or otherwise force
emigration?  Impractical to the extreme - and even
then, people might stick together in their travels,
once again excluding outsiders.  Any legislative fix
could eventually be overruled by the natives.  And so
forth.  But that's another topic.


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 23 05:44:11 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:44:11 +1000
Subject: Rights again   (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>	<ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com><01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<4128AC99.9090503@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <024701c488d4$373b1640$362c2dcb@homepc>

Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Brett Paatsch wrote:
> >
> > 1) The rights one assumes for oneself are meaningless as rights.
> > Any creature can pursue its own interests any way it likes and
> > for so long as it can get away with it. A creature operating alone
> > is one operating more basically and outside the sphere of rights
> > and responsibility. Rights only arise in a social context. An individual
> > without a group has infinite "freedom-to" and zero "freedom-from"
>
> An individual of a species that has existed for evolutionary time in
> a regime that includes social groups may have a cognitive concept
> of rights that is internalized, intrinsic to the individual.

Agreed, the individual may.

> Even though that psychology would never have evolved without a
> group context, it now exists as an adaptation, independent of the
> ancestral conditions that rendered it adaptive.

Agreed again.

> I don't think it's a contradiction in terms to say that some of the
> things I choose to do myself, what a literally minded philosopher
> of selfishness would define as "my interests" (e.g., saving the world
> and not being a jerk in doing so), arise from my psychological
> perception of the rights of others.

Perhaps not but I am not sure that we are conversing yet though.

Have you stepped into my concept of rights to see if it works for
you, is consistent and is perhaps useful, or are you using one of
your own without stating what you mean by rights?

>From where do you perceive that the rights or others derive? I
outlined a sketch of where I think they derive that involved the
concept of groups and responsibility.

I'm arguing that there are no rights as rights other than those
which a person (if we stick with our own species) has because
they are a member of some group that will underwrite those rights
with a group-backed assumption of aggregated other individual
accepted responsibility.

I would argue for instance that as a US citizen that you have no
right to endless life (your fellow citizens cannot at present underwrite
such a right for you as they do not have the wherewithal to prevent
you from dying - even if they wanted to) rather you do have a right
not to be murdered so long as  your fellow citizens (group members)
will collectively accept the responsibility for preventing your being
murdered and for penalising anyone in or outside your group that
murders you.

I think this is an important topic and I'd be interested in pursuing
it with you (you are worth disagreeing with or agreeing with) but I
want to make sure that we are not talking past each other by
using words like rights imprecisely.

Regards,
Brett Paatsch






From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Aug 23 05:56:56 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:56:56 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <00dd01c488bb$7d4bd480$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <00dd01c488bb$7d4bd480$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <3D9E1B0F-F4C9-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 22, 2004, at 7:47 PM, Spike wrote:

>> Samantha Atkins
>> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 2:12 PM
>
>> On Aug 18, 2004, at 10:07 PM, Spike wrote:
>>
>>> Most would agree that there is a growing threat to
>>> western civilization of an attack by some sort of
>>> weapons of mass destruction: bio, gas or nuke.
>>
>> Sure since the west...
>
> The west?

OK, restrict to US for now.

>
>> ...is insisting on throwing its weight behind
>> blatantly irrational...
>
> As blatantly irrational as murdering 3000 innocent
> internationals who did nothing more evil than to
> work in a really tall office building?
>

Yes, the war in Iraq is as blatantly irrational.    What about all the 
innocents we killed when we invaded?  What about all those that tied in 
between the two Iraq wars that we accepted large responsibility for?

>> ...and oppressive acts...
>
> As oppressive as the way the Taliban and Al Qaida
> treats its women and non-muslims?
>

You bet.  We even helped prop up the Taliban in earlier times.  Hell we 
helped Saddam come to power.  We won't even get into what evils we have 
supported in Israel.

>> Solves the wrong problem.  Being more peaceable and civilized with
>> others would reduce the risk a lot faster...
>
> So why not do both?  Estimate the probability that the
> west will change its behavior.  Estimate the probability
> that civilization will soon realize that technology now
> allows us to spread out.  Cities have outlived most of
> their usefulness, but not their desireability as terrorist
> targets.  spike
>

Doing both sounds good.  I don't agree cities have outlived their 
usefulness though.  At least I still enjoy a good metropolis now and 
again.

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Aug 23 06:09:42 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:09:42 -0700
Subject: Rights again   (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
In-Reply-To: <024701c488d4$373b1640$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
	<027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com>
	<01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<4128AC99.9090503@pobox.com>
	<024701c488d4$373b1640$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <05CED995-F4CB-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 22, 2004, at 10:44 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

>
> I'm arguing that there are no rights as rights other than those
> which a person (if we stick with our own species) has because
> they are a member of some group that will underwrite those rights
> with a group-backed assumption of aggregated other individual
> accepted responsibility.
>

I have heard this before.  So you believe that if say, sharia law 
became universal on earth, that humans would have no rights whatsoever 
to oppose it?  Or that they can oppose it but not on the grounds that 
it is a violation of their rights?   You believe in short that rights 
are the gift of the state.   Doesn't the nature of human beings imply 
some common requirements for their well being?  Couldn't you derive 
rights from that common nature?

> I would argue for instance that as a US citizen that you have no
> right to endless life (your fellow citizens cannot at present 
> underwrite
> such a right for you as they do not have the wherewithal to prevent
> you from dying - even if they wanted to)

Of course I don't have the right to demand anyone else undertake to 
support my life against their will for one moment, much less endlessly. 
  But this does not mean that I do not have every right to seek to 
prolong my life indefinitely.   You are confusing a right to attempt 
something, a negative right (freedom from coercion), from a positive 
right (a right to something to be provided by others).   
Non-contradictory notions of rights are largely negative rights (in a 
word, freedom).


> rather you do have a right
> not to be murdered so long as  your fellow citizens (group members)
> will collectively accept the responsibility for preventing your being
> murdered and for penalising anyone in or outside your group that
> murders you.

So if your fellow citizens decide they hate your guts and that you 
aren't worth protecting that it is quite alright for them to kill you?

- samantha



From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Aug 23 06:22:38 2004
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:22:38 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <00dd01c488bb$7d4bd480$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <00dd01c488bb$7d4bd480$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <41298D2E.5000407@mail.tele.dk>

Spike wrote:

>>...is insisting on throwing its weight behind 
>>blatantly irrational...
> 
> As blatantly irrational as murdering 3000 innocent
> internationals who did nothing more evil than to
> work in a really tall office building?


Spike, if you really are interrested in this subject, you should read 
some Noam Chumsky, or at least see some of his videos.

He has some pretty strong examples on the above.

-- 

hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark

http://www.mxm.dk/
IT's Mad Science


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Aug 23 07:32:52 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:32:52 +1000
Subject: Rights again   (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net><027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc><ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com><01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc><4128AC99.9090503@pobox.com><024701c488d4$373b1640$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<05CED995-F4CB-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <026d01c488e3$66413640$362c2dcb@homepc>

Samantha:

> I have heard this before.  So you believe that if say, sharia law 
> became universal on earth, that humans would have no rights whatsoever 
> to oppose it?  Or that they can oppose it but not on the grounds that 
> it is a violation of their rights?   You believe in short that rights 
> are the gift of the state.   Doesn't the nature of human beings imply 
> some common requirements for their well being?  Couldn't you derive 
> rights from that common nature?

You'd have to read *all* of the thread Samantha or you will just get
your wires crossed. 

Brett Paatsch

PS: I don't beLIEve anything. I know I have covered that before. 



From scerir at libero.it  Mon Aug 23 08:11:34 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:11:34 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <001001c488e8$cefe77b0$3cba1b97@administxl09yj>

From: "Spike" 

> An enormous smeared out suburbsb would be far less 
> vulnerable to attack than an enormous highly 
> concentrated city, would it not?

Supposed Italian targets are: Assisi (town of San 
Francesco), Perugia (international university), Vatican
City, Rome (the Colosseo!), Milan (the Duomo of -), 
Berlusconi's (prime minister) villas in Sardinia,
Florence (museums), Venice (perhaps). That sort
of places.

If - as services say - these are the targets,
in Italy, now, it means that they (wish to) attack 
"symbols", "icons", not people.

s.




From dwish at indco.net  Mon Aug 23 13:24:02 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:24:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823045644.29648.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200408231232.i7NCWPS9004562@br549.indconet.com>


I thought I should chime in on this thread.  If the financial rate at which
a human could own the robot was at the same or less than that of an
immigrant worker or at best a little higher then I see this not being an
issue at all. (i.e. ROI). It is all about money. If you can justify the cost
you can justify the expense of the purchase. Just ask any IT dept. head
about that.

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 11:57 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is what I was refering to when I said
> "xenophobia". After all,
> the problem of the aging population in western
> countries would be
> easily solved by letting in all the abled bodied
> people from poor
> countries who want in. In a world chock-full of
> people, deciding to
> build robots to perform the tasks people usually do
> is a really weird
> choice. Not that I'm complaining, those robots are
> cool, but come on,
> is that country being run by Bob the Angry Flower??

The availability of immigrants does diminish the need
for robotic labor in America, but even here, robots
are being developed for elderly service.  They're
loyal 24/7, and (once built) they work for the cost of
electricity and maintenance.

That said, you are correct...but Japan is hardly alone
in its stance.  Most nations in North and South
America were founded by immigrants, and remain open to
immigration to this day.  Most nations that were
"pre-existing" before the modern concept of a nation
came around (circa 1700s/1800s, I think) have,
instead, a "we've always been here" mentality built
into them, which automatically excludes those who
weren't.  Even the USA, over 200 years old now, is
starting to show signs of this.

One could do an interesting exercise in theoretical
nation-building, to try to devise a state that would
remain immigrant-friendly even when, eventually, the
great majority of the population were native-born.
Does one destroy the land or otherwise force
emigration?  Impractical to the extreme - and even
then, people might stick together in their travels,
once again excluding outsiders.  Any legislative fix
could eventually be overruled by the natives.  And so
forth.  But that's another topic.
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004
 

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004
 



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 13:25:50 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 06:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <01CB5A5B-F46D-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <20040823132550.64218.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:

> 
> On Aug 16, 2004, at 1:18 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> >
> > " ..by virtue of our abdication, a very authoritarian, assertive
> > form of government has taken over. And oddly enough, it is
> > doing so in the guise of libertarianism to a certain extent. Most
> > of the people in the think tanks behind the Bush administration?s
> > current policies are libertarians, or certainly free marketeers.
> 
> I am sorry but the current government-corporate love-in has nothing
> to 
> do with free markets.  With the exception of Cato, none of the major 
> think tanks remotely qualify as or claim to be libertarian AFAIK.   
> This is a gross insult to libertarians by those who haven't the 
> foggiest idea what libertarianism or free markets are about.

Well then, you don't know. Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform
is very influential in that they've proposed all of the tax cuts that
Bush has instigated, Norquist is a common face in the White House, and
his Wednesday luncheons at his HQ are a must-attend event for
conservo-libertarian movers and shakers.

In the 1970's Norquist co-authored a book on taxes with Tim Condon, who
is currently director of participant services at the Free State
Project.

Norquist has been pioneering, according to knowledgable sources, in
melding industry money with conservative/libertarian causes and
politicians. He annoys many social conservatives like Tucker Carlson,
who refers to him as "a little creep".

> > We?ve got two distinct strains of libertarianism, and the
> > hippie-mystic strain is not engaging in politics, and the Ayn
> > Rand strain is basically dismantling government in a way that
> > is giving complete open field running to multinational
> > corporatism."
> >
> 
> OK, this is sloppy far beyond any need to deal with it further.

I'd say it's pretty accurate. There are of course also the L Neil
Smith, 10x10, big L libertarians who are allergic to anything but
absolutely perfect Libertarian thought, and refuse to support anything
which is a step on the way. There are a few other minor strains, but
the hippie/mystic Georgists and the Randroid dismantlers make up the
bulk of things in the *active* legions.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 13:32:41 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 06:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <41298D2E.5000407@mail.tele.dk>
Message-ID: <20040823133241.65670.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:

> Spike wrote:
> 
> >>...is insisting on throwing its weight behind 
> >>blatantly irrational...
> > 
> > As blatantly irrational as murdering 3000 innocent
> > internationals who did nothing more evil than to
> > work in a really tall office building?
> 
> 
> Spike, if you really are interrested in this subject, you should read
> some Noam Chumsky, or at least see some of his videos.
> 
> He has some pretty strong examples on the above.

Oh Ghu, Chumpsky? The admitted apologist for anyone, so long as they
hate America? I've seen far too much from the nutty georgist left-libs
trying to slap together immensely improbable conspiracies from a sheaf
of the thinnest of circumstantial events. They could give the neo-nazis
lessons on the subject.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 13:46:07 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 06:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The "wasted" Libertarian vote
In-Reply-To: <t8shi0heefev60f5ahb4ll0h3t8p7sjpno@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20040823134607.67421.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- stencil <etcs.ret at verizon.net> wrote:

> The rule by which your State instructs its electors 
> 
> http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/problems.htm
> 
> has a lot to do with personal voting strategies.
snip
> If you really can't predict the outcome, and you perceive any
> difference at
> all between Bulganin and Kruschchev,  you take the lesser,  lest your
> swing vote give the State to the wrong weasel.

Well there is the counterintuitive method, given you know of the
existence of the FSP, and you want it to reach 20k members to trigger
the migration officially, you want to vote in a way that is going to
ensure that those other 14,000 people get pissed off enough where they
are that the finally decide to bite the bullet and move to NH. You want
someone who will either pass Patriot Acts II, III, IV, and V, or pass
the National Gun Confiscation Act, the National Mandatory Health Care
And Total Confiscation of Wealth Act, and the American Rural To Urban
Migration To "Save" The Environment Act. 

How likely either future is, and how bad you think a particular
candidate can make things for libertarians you want to move to NH in
reaction, can have an influence on your voting in this election.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 13:50:43 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 06:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The "wasted" Libertarian vote
In-Reply-To: <t8shi0heefev60f5ahb4ll0h3t8p7sjpno@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <20040823135043.76727.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- stencil <etcs.ret at verizon.net> wrote:

> The rule by which your State instructs its electors 
> 
> http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/problems.htm
> 
> has a lot to do with personal voting strategies.
snip
> If you really can't predict the outcome, and you perceive any
> difference at
> all between Bulganin and Kruschchev,  you take the lesser,  lest your
> swing vote give the State to the wrong weasel.

Well there is the counterintuitive method, given you know of the
existence of the FSP, and you want it to reach 20k members to trigger
the migration officially, you want to vote in a way that is going to
ensure that those other 14,000 people get pissed off enough where they
are that the finally decide to bite the bullet and move to NH. You want
someone who will either pass Patriot Acts II, III, IV, and V, or pass
the National Gun Confiscation Act, the National Mandatory Health Care
And Total Confiscation of Wealth Act, and the American Rural To Urban
Migration To "Save" The Environment Act. 

How likely either future is, and how bad you think a particular
candidate can make things for libertarians you want to move to NH in
reaction, can have an influence on your voting in this election.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 23 13:22:34 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Alexander Lee)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:22:34 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
References: <1092945380.3442@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <BAY17-DAV17XBSmO2pe000108b4@hotmail.com>

Look, generally speaking there are more things inherently unsafe about SUVs
than sedans. I'm aware that there are unsafe things about everything in our
universe, but one of my personal goals is to reduce these risks. So when it
comes time to purchase a vehicle a rational decision factor is "What is the
safety record of this vehicle and class?" and "What are the safety features
of this vehicle and class?".

BAL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2004 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs


> > There are things inherently unsafe about many SUVs. They have a higher
> > tendency to roll over (not just due to driver ignorance). They also
> make the
> > road less safe for non-SUV owners by obstructing their view.
>
>
> There are many things inherently unsafe about EVERY type of vehicle --
> engineering is about trade-offs.  To reverse your assertion above, small
> sedans are inherently less safe because they give poor visibility.  All
> you are saying is that $VEHICLE is the safest of all vehicles iff the
> entire universe is engineered to be optimal for the design of $VEHICLE.
>  Welcome to the real world.
>
>
> > So it is a little more than just "use wisely". If you take an excellent
> > driver and have them drive a sedan and an SUV, they will have more
> > roll-overs and be more unsafe in the SUV even though their driving
> skill is
> > excellent.
>
>
> You take your Prius on a gravel highway up in the mountains and I'll
> take the unused Bronco sitting in my driveway.  The Prius is inherently
> less safe even if you never see another vehicle.  Which would you rather
> be in if you hit a moose or cattle or got stuck in a rainstorm on that
road?
>
> There is a hell of a lot more to safety than a moderately higher
> probability of rollovers, which are a tiny portion of the bigger
> calculus.  For a skilled driver who understands the parameters of an
> SUV, a rollover is not a major concern.  Of the rollovers I've seen
> around here (more than half of which were sedans), the SUVs generally
> appeared to be the aforementioned soccer moms that like to play Pole
> Position while yapping on the phone and putting on make-up.  Their
> number was coming up anyway (in terms of having an accident), the choice
> of an SUV just helped parameterize the mode.
>
>
> j. andrew rogers
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From amara at amara.com  Mon Aug 23 14:56:21 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:56:21 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] recap of Perseids: July 23 - August 22;
	Peak: August 12
Message-ID: <p05100300bd4fb1d01cd4@[150.146.134.133]>

Did any of you go out and observe the Perseid meteor shower? I was at
Lake Shasta, California, and was delighted to introduce 'shooting
stars' to a few members of my family who had never seen them before.
With the exception of a couple of nights of haze and smoke from two
large fires in the area, the sky there was  so clear and dark, that
the Milky Way was visible 15 minutes after sunset. My family spent
evenings "sky watching" on our vacation houseboat before bedtime, with
a few  members staying on top and sleeping on the deck, so then, lulled
to  sleep by the brilliant jewels. I relearned my way through the summer
constellations, too, a path which had become a little rusty in the
last two decades.

The US was not in the best viewing position for the narrow Perseid
maximum peak, though, but Europe was:


"About one per minute.."
Perseid Meteor Shower Dazzles Skywatchers
http://www.space.com/spacewatch/perseids_dazzled_040812.html

A nice summary:
http://www.hohmanntransfer.com/mn/0408/20.htm

Detailed Data and Prediction here:
http://www.amsmeteors.org/imo-mirror/news/news.html

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/
***********************************************************************
"There's only one thing more beautiful than a beautiful dream, and
that's a beautiful reality."        --Ashleigh Brilliant


From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Mon Aug 23 23:49:25 2004
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:49:25 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Semco
In-Reply-To: <20040822164118.52945.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040822164118.52945.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <412A8285.3010202@optusnet.com.au>

Adrian Tymes wrote:
> --- David <deimtee at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> 
>>However, I was originally referring to temporary
>>losses of performance 
>>being supported by team-mates, whereas in most other
>>environments 
>>support consists of warnings to "look busy 'cause
>>the boss is coming".
> 
> 
> Ah.  Although, would not permanent deficits - like
> the honest lack of knowledge as to how to do a task -
> also be supported?  "You don't know how to do this,
> yet you must or we'll all suffer.  So let's all figure
> out how your task can be done."

Certainly, if a deficit can be remedied by training or
by adjusting the way the work is done it will be. From my
own relatively limited experience in these environments
I think that the people involved differentiate between
"can't do the job due to inherent inability (mental or
physical)" - in which case training/support/re-adjustment
are applied to work around the  problem - and "won't do
the job properly  because he/she is a lazy arsehole"
- in which case the co-workers will actually drive them
out of the company.

> 
> 
>>Hmm. Another thought about fixing others - it may be
>>that many things 
>>that need "fixing" are not necessarily broken, but
>>may be just 
>>incompatibilities.
> 
> 
> Many, certainly, but I wonder if this is or is not
> the majority - as opposed to cases where things truly
> are "broken", in this case defined as a condition
> where the same or a similar problem would be faced no
> matter who the "broken" person worked with (aside from
> extreme cases, like those who would simply do that
> person's job in order to negate the "malfunction").
> 
> The anecdotal evidence of my own career suggests that
> most of the time, when difficulties erupt, it is
> because people truly are "broken" in that manner,
> although usually this can be taken care of through training.

I too have only anecdotal evidence  :-)

I have at times worked where there have been people
who could only have been described as actively malicious.
For some reason they seem to be able to play the system
so as to discredit others, while sucking up to the bosses
to the extent that management considers them a valuable
asset.  These arseholes are the ones who don't survive
in the team environment.  And by getting rid of them I
would say that you would get not only an increase in
productivity, which is a marginal gain, but also a
decrease in "spoilt work" which is actually much more
beneficial to the company.


From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Aug 23 15:12:50 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:12:50 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <20040823133241.65670.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00f501c48923$a83a7300$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> --- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:
> 
> > Spike wrote:
> > 
> > >>...is insisting on throwing its weight behind 
> > >>blatantly irrational...
> > > 
> > > As blatantly irrational as murdering 3000 innocent
> > > internationals who did nothing more evil than to
> > > work in a really tall office building?
> > 
> > 
> > Spike, if you really are interrested in this subject, you 
> > should read some Noam Chumsky, or at least see some of his videos...


I sampled his work.  There are those whose attitude seems
to be "My country, right or wrong."  Chumsky comes across
with the attitude "My country, wrong."  My own take is
more like "Noam Chomsky, wrong."

spike





From megaquark at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 23 15:24:46 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:24:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
References: <20040815040324.82855.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com><5.1.0.14.2.20040815222925.054dbb28@unreasonable.com><7FA9BF90-EF8A-11D8-BE3F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com><007501c4839a$31b675a0$852c2dcb@homepc><10F50CBF-EFB0-11D8-B246-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com>
	<81FC820A-F46E-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV8dU5N3FwtFR000104e5@hotmail.com>

I was just reading an article in my newspaper that said that roughly 47% of
US citizens can;t correctly point out England on a world map. It was in an
article titled "Are people too ignorant to vote?"


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Samantha Atkins" <samantha at objectent.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...


> I found it rather depressing.   I forget how many people just haven't a
> clue.
>
> -s
>
> On Aug 16, 2004, at 11:14 AM, Bret Kulakovich wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Since yesterday there has been back-and-forth on Slashdot.org about
> > the Singularity.
> >
> > Some nice points are made, but from a Sociological standpoint it an
> > interesting slice of humanity to observe the reaction of.
> > Just thought ppl might want to catch it. Slow news day, as they say.
> >
> > http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/15/
> > 1642243&tid=214&tid=192&tid=14&tid=6
> >
> > ]3
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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 maxm at mail.tele.dk  Mon Aug 23 15:41:14 2004
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:41:14 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <00f501c48923$a83a7300$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <00f501c48923$a83a7300$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <412A101A.5080907@mail.tele.dk>

Spike wrote:

>>--- Max M <maxm at mail.tele.dk> wrote:
>>>Spike, if you really are interrested in this subject, you 
>>>should read some Noam Chumsky, or at least see some of his videos...
> 
> I sampled his work.  There are those whose attitude seems
> to be "My country, right or wrong."  Chumsky comes across
> with the attitude "My country, wrong."  My own take is
> more like "Noam Chomsky, wrong."


There are several important omissions in Chomskys Critique.

But the official version of history is just as wrong, with at least, 
just as bad omissions.

So I think that it's important to study both POWs to get a more balanced 
view.


-- 

hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark

http://www.mxm.dk/
IT's Mad Science


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 16:16:02 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-DAV17XBSmO2pe000108b4@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040823161602.75213.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Alexander Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Look, generally speaking there are more things inherently unsafe
> about SUVs
> than sedans. I'm aware that there are unsafe things about everything
> in our
> universe, but one of my personal goals is to reduce these risks. So
> when it
> comes time to purchase a vehicle a rational decision factor is "What
> is the
> safety record of this vehicle and class?" and "What are the safety
> features
> of this vehicle and class?".

It may be more conducive to look at the demographics of accident
victims in SUVs. Just as hybrid vehicles driven by leadfooted drivers
don't get nearly the MPG that others do, SUVs driven by inexperienced
drivers, such as teens, may suffer the same phenomenon of self
perpetuated increased risk.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Aug 23 17:06:00 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:06:00 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] recap of Perseids: July 23 - August 22;
	Peak: August 12
Message-ID: <19860-220048123176023@M2W041.mail2web.com>


From: Amara Graps 

>Did any of you go out and observe the Perseid meteor shower? 

Got up at 2:30 a.m. and went outside on the deck to enjoy the showers.
Unfortunatley I was facing East instead of West, but the sky was overcast
anyway and only saw 2 little sparks of light when I turned to face the
right direction.

(I miss going with friends to star gaze. :-(   Haha - just thinking of
dragging friends out of bed or driving to a far location half asleep.  It's
really about location, location, location.)


Natasha



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




From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 23 17:24:52 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:24:52 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
Message-ID: <BAY17-F34b288ySffC900079250@hotmail.com>

I try to stick to objective data. Objective data shows more injuries and 
deaths in SUVs. Your persona, subjective anecdotes that you feel SUVs are 
driven by poor drivers does little to convince me. Show me some real data or 
study that proves your belief that the true cause of accidents is dumb-ass 
drivers and I'll change my mind. Until that point, I'll stick with the only 
objective numbers I can find.

It's funny how rational extropians start abandoning all scientific reasoning 
when it comes to their own experience and beliefs.

Thanks,
BAL


>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
>Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- Brian Alexander Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Look, generally speaking there are more things inherently unsafe
> > about SUVs
> > than sedans. I'm aware that there are unsafe things about everything
> > in our
> > universe, but one of my personal goals is to reduce these risks. So
> > when it
> > comes time to purchase a vehicle a rational decision factor is "What
> > is the
> > safety record of this vehicle and class?" and "What are the safety
> > features
> > of this vehicle and class?".
>
>It may be more conducive to look at the demographics of accident
>victims in SUVs. Just as hybrid vehicles driven by leadfooted drivers
>don't get nearly the MPG that others do, SUVs driven by inexperienced
>drivers, such as teens, may suffer the same phenomenon of self
>perpetuated increased risk.
>
>=====
>Mike Lorrey
>Chairman, Free Town Land Development
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                          -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From emerson at singinst.org  Mon Aug 23 18:42:44 2004
From: emerson at singinst.org (Tyler Emerson)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:42:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity Institute's The SIAI Voice - August 2004
Message-ID: <200408231842.i7NIgl030991@tick.javien.com>

The Singularity Institute's new eBulletin is now online:

http://www.singinst.org/siai-voice/2004.2/

Contents:

  * 2004 $10,000 Challenge Grant 
  * 3 Laws Unsafe 
  * Rational Philanthropy for 35 Cents a Day 
  * Singularity Institute Overview 
  * Featured Content: Why Work Toward the Singularity? 
  * Executive Director Update 
  * In Kind Contributions 
  * New At Our Website 
  * Monthly Volunteer Meeting 
  * Volunteer Opportunities 
  * Advocacy Director Michael Anissimov's New Writings 
  * Singularity Survey 
  * Singularity Statement from Simon Smith 
  * Singularity Quote from Nick Bostrom 
  * Event - 1st Conference on Advanced Nanotechnology 
  * Event - Accelerating Change 2004 
  * Around the Web 

To receive the bulletin by email:

http://www.singinst.org/news/subscribe.html
 
--
Tyler Emerson
Executive Director
Singularity Institute
http://www.singinst.org/
Suite 106 PMB #12
4290 Bells Ferry Road
Kennesaw, GA 30144
emerson at singinst.org
aim: tylerremerson
417.840.5968



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 21:10:36 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <200408231232.i7NCWPS9004562@br549.indconet.com>
Message-ID: <20040823211036.22867.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>

      Because I am a fan of the
Battle-tech/Mechwarrior line of video games, the
videos of the fighting robots made me realize that the
Japanese are not too far off from the technology
neccesary to make battle-mechs. For those of you who
are uninitiated, the concept of a battle-mech is
similar to exoskeleton type powered armor but scaled
way up. These 30 ton plus humanoid robots are operated
by on-board specially trained elite pilots. These
mechs are highly reinforced weapons platforms often
carrying autocannons, missiles, and other ordinance.
These mechs are supposed to represent a technological
improvement over existing military hardware presumably
because they are more maneuverable, versatile, and
have a more imposing presence on the battlefield than
tanks etc. I was just curious what you all thought
about this and whether you think the Japanese or
someone else will take this technology in just such a
direction? FYI the fictional mechs are powered by
fusion powerplants so for real world applications we
probably do not have a suitable means to power them.  
   

=====
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!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Aug 23 21:35:05 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823211036.22867.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040823213505.57178.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>
wrote:
> FYI the fictional mechs are powered by
> fusion powerplants so for real world applications we
> probably do not have a suitable means to power them.

I've been following the development of this tech, and
power sources seems to be the primary thing keeping
them from viability.  That's the problem that all
developers of exoskeletons (basically suits of armor
with motors, to amplify the wearer's strength) are
running into; the only viable solution I've seen
plugged into building power.

Some say that giant (2-4x human height) mechs are
impractical for military use, mainly since they're a
big artillery target.  However, they would seem to be
of use wherever cover is available, like in forests
or cities (or mountains, or even underwater near the
coast: imagine a submarine against a mech that could
swim at least as fast, could shoot down incoming
torpedoes, and could close in to grapple - maybe even
capture, simply by lifting a ship or sub out of the
water).

As it happens, I recently wrote a short parody of this
genre, if anyone's interested:
http://archives.eyrie.org/anime/Miscellaneous/Original/orig.from-the-journal-of-marcus-reaver.gz


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 23 22:35:27 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:35:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823211036.22867.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040823223527.1553.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> direction? FYI the fictional mechs are powered by
> fusion powerplants so for real world applications we
> probably do not have a suitable means to power them. 

No reason they can't run on a turbine engine or fuel cell powerplant.
AFAICR, the MI-A1 Abrams has a range of 100 miles on one tank of fuel
with its turbine engine. Fuel cells were generating 100kw/ft^3 a decade
ago. Have no idea what the energy density is today. 100kw is 75 hp.

Fusion is fanciful, but unnecessary. A battle mech should be able to
function with 1000 hp powering hydraulics (better for EMP protection),
thus requiring a 10-13 ft^3 fuel cell powerplant, electric powered
hydraulic pumps with at least 20 gps capacity.

The problem with these battle mechs is the actuation system. These
devices are very vulnerable to damage without serious armorplating
which generally adds so much weight that mobility is hindered.

Tanks are a much saner option. A tank with a blown track is still
upright and capable of firing at the enemy. A mech with a blown leg is
sitting on its head flailing.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Mon Aug 23 13:33:00 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Alexander Lee)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:33:00 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] The "wasted" Libertarian vote
References: <200408221800.i7MI0D001733@tick.javien.com>
	<t8shi0heefev60f5ahb4ll0h3t8p7sjpno@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <BAY17-DAV2gSAK8Erbi000045ed@hotmail.com>

I know that I cast my vote for a 3rd party each election to show support for
3rd party politics in what is effectively a single-state system (since Dems
and Repubs are effectively the same when it comes to important policy-
trade, environment, defense, etc).

BAL
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "stencil" <etcs.ret at verizon.net>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 4:12 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] The "wasted" Libertarian vote


> The rule by which your State instructs its electors
>
> http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/problems.htm
>
> has a lot to do with personal voting strategies.
>
> If you know your State's electors all will go to Kerry (as in
Massachusetts)
> you have greater incentive to vote Libertarian than if you're voting in a
> releatively close contest.  You cannot affect the *outcome* of the race,
but
> there is a greater likelihood that both parties will respond to the
off-axis
> vector of your minority, in planning for the midterm elections.
>
> If you really can't predict the outcome, and you perceive any difference
at
> all between Bulganin and Kruschchev,  you take the lesser,  lest your
swing
> vote give the State to the wrong weasel.
>
> Unless, of course, you really are committed to the Party of Principle.
>
> stencil sends
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Aug 23 23:23:42 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:23:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] exercise pill
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040823182216.01d88148@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=6048637&section=news


"It is a pill that, in part, mimics exercise. It mimics the metabolic 
activity associated with exercise," Howard Hughes Medical Institute 
investigator Ronald Evans of The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, who 
led the study, said in a telephone interview.

Evans and a team of researchers were looking at a gene called PPAR-delta -- 
a master regulator of different genes.

Revving up PPAR-delta had been shown to help raise metabolism and 
fat-burning, Evans said. "Part of our goal is the development of treatments 
for metabolic disease, diabetes and obesity," he said.

Writing in the journal Public Library of Science Biology, Evans and 
colleagues said they tweaked the PPAR-delta gene to stay in a permanently 
"on" position and then genetically engineered mice with it.

They expected to see changes in metabolism but were surprised at how 
extensive they were.

The genetically engineered mice could run for an hour longer than normal 
mice, "which translates to nearly a kilometer (half a mile) further," the 
researchers wrote.

And when fed a high-fat diet, the normal mice became fat while the 
genetically altered mice gained no weight. Tests showed they were burning 
off the fat even when they did not exercise, Evans said.




From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 24 02:36:43 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:36:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV8dU5N3FwtFR000104e5@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <011701c48983$31777550$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Kevin Freels

> I was just reading an article in my newspaper that said that 
> roughly 47% of US citizens can;t correctly point out England on a
world map. 
> It was in an article titled "Are people too ignorant to vote?"

Yes, most humans are far too ignorant to vote, and yes 
it is intentional, for the mainstream news media are 
misleading the proletariat, not just in the US but
everywhere news media exist.  This thing about finding
England on a map is not a good argument however.  Regardless
of where you go on this planet, you still hafta go to the 
same airport.  Any nation can trade with or make war on
any other country anywhere on the globe.  It makes no
where it is.  Secondly, they don't let US citizens vote
in England's elections anyway.  Thats how the war started
in the first place (the one that happened 230 yrs ago).

Point well taken however.  I am astounded daily at how
profoundly dumb our species is or is becoming.

spike




From natasha at natasha.cc  Tue Aug 24 04:49:33 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:49:33 -0700
Subject: Dymaxion Car (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
In-Reply-To: <026d01c488e3$66413640$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
	<027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com>
	<01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<4128AC99.9090503@pobox.com>
	<024701c488d4$373b1640$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<05CED995-F4CB-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040823214623.031c3970@mail.earthlink.net>

How about The Dymaxion Car instead?

"(1933)--Inventor R. Buckminster Fuller's car was long and awkward-looking, 
but, man, could it go. Because of its streamlined shape and light 
aluminum-clad body, the Dymaxion car could travel 120 mph powered by a 
relatively puny 90-horsepower, air-cooled Ford V8 engine. The car of the 
future had three wheels able to turn at 90-degree angles, allowing it to 
pop in and out of tight parking spaces."

But with better balance (it was like the Suzuki early version of the 
SUV/Jeep style that was in a major class action suit because it frequently 
rolled over) so that it would not tumble over so easily.

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/20040823/3f3e64bf/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 24 03:31:49 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:31:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823211036.22867.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <012c01c4898a$e45c1a70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> The Avantguardian
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
> 
> ...the videos of the fighting robots made me realize that the
> Japanese are not too far off from the technology
> neccesary to make battle-mechs...
> =====
> The Avantguardian

I think you hit right on it, Avant.  Every nation must invent
its own defense if it intends to stay an independent nation.
In the aftermath of the Great War, the surrender treaty 
forbade Germany from developing long range guns.  So they
developed rocketry instead.  Guns or rockets, which is
most important now?

Treaty forbade Japan from developing offensive weapons,
so perhaps their military brains are thinking of robots
as future weaponry.  One way or another, North Korea and
China are coming.  It would be national suicide to sit 
by and do nothing.

Bots will make great soldiers!  If captured they will not
talk, if destroyed no mothers will weep, if victorious
they will not pretend to cast away their ribbons nor shame
their countrymachines.  A meme could be spread among the 
religious fanatics that if they perish fighting a robot, 
they would get 72 mechanical virgins.  You know they 
would flee in terror at such a prospect.  War is too
dangerous for humans.  

spike





From fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Aug 24 04:39:07 2004
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:39:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Ethics - Brought to You by the Bush Brothers
Message-ID: <13e901c48994$4b043ab0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

Ooooh, this distresses me:

"...Ms. Hood, handpicked by Governor Bush to succeed the notorious Katherine
Harris as secretary of state, was forced to admit that the felons list was a
mess. She said the problems were unintentional. What clearly was intentional
was the desire of Ms. Hood and Governor Bush to keep the list secret. It was
disclosed only as a result of lawsuits filed under Florida's admirable
sunshine law."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/opinion/23herbert.html

Olga




From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 24 06:08:31 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:08:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Ethics - Brought to You by the Bush Brothers
In-Reply-To: <13e901c48994$4b043ab0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <015401c489a0$ce43d0a0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Olga Bourlin
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Ethics - Brought to You by the Bush Brothers
>  
> Ooooh, this distresses me:
> 
> "...Ms. Hood, handpicked by Governor Bush to succeed the 
> notorious Katherine Harris as secretary of state, was forced to admit
that the 
> felons list was a mess. She said the problems were unintentional...

Partially believable.  Some states allow felons to vote
after they have served their sentences.  What if the
felons serve their time, then move to Florida?  What if
the felon is in the federal witness protection program?
What if the felons are convicted and serve in Florida, 
then move to another state?  The way the law 
is written is contradictory and confusing.

> What clearly was intentional
> was the desire of Ms. Hood and Governor Bush to keep the list
secret...

Are post-release felons entitled to privacy?  Being an 
openness advocate, I would suggest the contrary, however
an argument could be made either way.  I can certainly see why
the felons would want to cover their tracks.

> It was disclosed only as a result of lawsuits filed under Florida's
admirable
> sunshine law."
> 
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/opinion/23herbert.html

Olga

This is shaping up to a replay of 2000.  I wouldn't be surprised
if pretty much all the same states went to the same parties,
and once again Florida, with the deciding wad of electoral college
delegates, is once again was too close to call.  Weeks of 
bitter acrimony could follow, with disputed undervotes and
overvotes, ambiguous write-ins, etc.  I saw a poll showing
Florida voters at 48% W, 46% whats-his-name, 3% Ralph, and 3%
all others combined (including still undecided), with a +/-2% 
uncertainty factor.  Here we go again.  {8-|  I notice the IFX 
ideas futures exchange has been selling republicans for 51 cents 
and democrats for 50 cents for the past 4 months with scarcely 
any change.

As a dynamic optimist, I see some good that comes of all this:
it makes people realize that it really does matter if one
bothers to vote.  {8-]

spike 




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 06:26:48 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:26:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
Message-ID: <20040824062648.78234.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

as john taylor gatto says, the ignorance is intentionally wrought.
serfs need no knowledge beyond their shire. why have your own opinion
when the media- industrial complex can produce one for you?
--- extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Kevin Freels
> 
> > I was just reading an article in my newspaper that said that 
> > roughly 47% of US citizens can;t correctly point out England on a
> world map. 
> > It was in an article titled "Are people too ignorant to vote?"
> 
> Yes, most humans are far too ignorant to vote, and yes 
> it is intentional, for the mainstream news media are 
> misleading the proletariat, not just in the US but
> everywhere news media exist.  This thing about finding
> England on a map is not a good argument however.  Regardless
> of where you go on this planet, you still hafta go to the 
> same airport.  Any nation can trade with or make war on
> any other country anywhere on the globe.  It makes no
> where it is.  Secondly, they don't let US citizens vote
> in England's elections anyway.  Thats how the war started
> in the first place (the one that happened 230 yrs ago).
> 
> Point well taken however.  I am astounded daily at how
> profoundly dumb our species is or is becoming.
> 
> spike
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Aug 24 06:53:37 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:53:37 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

I have mentioned a few already.  Beyond that I don't think an honest 
look can fail to supply you with as many examples as you have the 
stomach for.

-s

On Aug 22, 2004, at 4:40 PM, Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:

> On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 16:11, Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
>> Sure since the west is insisting on throwing its weight behind
>> blatantly irrational and oppressive acts.
>
> I know I'm going to regret asking, but *what* blatantly irrational and
> oppressive acts?
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Aug 24 06:57:22 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 23:57:22 -0700
Subject: Rights again   (was Re: [extropy-chat] SUV versus sedan etc)
In-Reply-To: <026d01c488e3$66413640$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1092949548.26796@whirlwind.he.net>
	<027a01c48643$ea8a00a0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<ee50357e040820010776ff04ab@mail.gmail.com>
	<01ae01c48823$267521e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<4128AC99.9090503@pobox.com>
	<024701c488d4$373b1640$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<05CED995-F4CB-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<026d01c488e3$66413640$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <D94AD6FE-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

Since I assume later posts in a thread are summations or conclusions I 
don't see why I have to re-chew the entire thread that was hopefully 
sufficiently masticated by that point in order to meaningfully comment.

On Aug 23, 2004, at 12:32 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Samantha:
>
>> I have heard this before.  So you believe that if say, sharia law
>> became universal on earth, that humans would have no rights whatsoever
>> to oppose it?  Or that they can oppose it but not on the grounds that
>> it is a violation of their rights?   You believe in short that rights
>> are the gift of the state.   Doesn't the nature of human beings imply
>> some common requirements for their well being?  Couldn't you derive
>> rights from that common nature?
>
> You'd have to read *all* of the thread Samantha or you will just get
> your wires crossed.
>
> Brett Paatsch
>
> PS: I don't beLIEve anything. I know I have covered that before.
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Aug 24 07:08:45 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:08:45 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit 911
	-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <20040823132550.64218.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040823132550.64218.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <703ED512-F59C-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 23, 2004, at 6:25 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
> --- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 16, 2004, at 1:18 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>>>
>>> " ..by virtue of our abdication, a very authoritarian, assertive
>>> form of government has taken over. And oddly enough, it is
>>> doing so in the guise of libertarianism to a certain extent. Most
>>> of the people in the think tanks behind the Bush administration?s
>>> current policies are libertarians, or certainly free marketeers.
>>
>> I am sorry but the current government-corporate love-in has nothing
>> to
>> do with free markets.  With the exception of Cato, none of the major
>> think tanks remotely qualify as or claim to be libertarian AFAIK.
>> This is a gross insult to libertarians by those who haven't the
>> foggiest idea what libertarianism or free markets are about.

>
> Well then, you don't know. Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform
> is very influential in that they've proposed all of the tax cuts that
> Bush has instigated, Norquist is a common face in the White House, and
> his Wednesday luncheons at his HQ are a must-attend event for
> conservo-libertarian movers and shakers.

Americans for tax reform is a think tank?  Norquist is a Republican 
right-winger out to unfund all those liberal groups he hates.

>

That the are for tax cuts and keeping the tax bill down  hardly makes 
said group or person libertarian or even shows that most of the 
proposals are remotely consistent with libertarian ideals.

> In the 1970's Norquist co-authored a book on taxes with Tim Condon, who
> is currently director of participant services at the Free State
> Project.
>

Cool, so?

> Norquist has been pioneering, according to knowledgable sources, in
> melding industry money with conservative/libertarian causes and
> politicians. He annoys many social conservatives like Tucker Carlson,
> who refers to him as "a little creep".
>

So?


>>> We?ve got two distinct strains of libertarianism, and the
>>> hippie-mystic strain is not engaging in politics, and the Ayn
>>> Rand strain is basically dismantling government in a way that
>>> is giving complete open field running to multinational
>>> corporatism."
>>>
>>
>> OK, this is sloppy far beyond any need to deal with it further.
>
> I'd say it's pretty accurate. There are of course also the L Neil
> Smith, 10x10, big L libertarians who are allergic to anything but
> absolutely perfect Libertarian thought, and refuse to support anything
> which is a step on the way. There are a few other minor strains, but
> the hippie/mystic Georgists and the Randroid dismantlers make up the
> bulk of things in the *active* legions.
>


I don't take many of your opinions as accurate on the subject of 
Libertarianism.   I guess it is may be mutual.   Where exactly is the 
evidence that anyone is successfully "dismantling government"?   It 
looks like a very fat fascist state in the making to me.

-samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Tue Aug 24 07:18:02 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:18:02 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Singularity shoot-out on Slashdot...
In-Reply-To: <011701c48983$31777550$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <011701c48983$31777550$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <BC7DA940-F59D-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Aug 23, 2004, at 7:36 PM, Spike wrote:

>> Kevin Freels
>
>> I was just reading an article in my newspaper that said that
>> roughly 47% of US citizens can;t correctly point out England on a
> world map.
>> It was in an article titled "Are people too ignorant to vote?"
>
> Yes, most humans are far too ignorant to vote, and yes
> it is intentional, for the mainstream news media are
> misleading the proletariat, not just in the US but
> everywhere news media exist.

Before the media could tell 'em what to think the public school system 
had to turn young minds to mush incapable of critical thought.  I am at 
least thankful the school system's methods are not 100% successful.

- samantha



From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Tue Aug 24 09:59:27 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:59:27 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040823223527.1553.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040823223527.1553.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0408241155530.27921@zeus>

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>No reason they can't run on a turbine engine or fuel cell powerplant.
>AFAICR, the MI-A1 Abrams has a range of 100 miles on one tank of fuel
>with its turbine engine. Fuel cells were generating 100kw/ft^3 a decade
>ago. Have no idea what the energy density is today. 100kw is 75 hp.

The other way around. 100kw is 134hp, so the goal of 1000 hp is reachable
with only 7.5 ft^3.

Now where are the protonic missiles and the antimatter rays? Any giant
mech without those isn't worth it.

Alfio


From scerir at libero.it  Tue Aug 24 10:09:57 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:09:57 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] summer time
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040823182216.01d88148@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <002801c489c2$82c70bc0$86c61b97@administxl09yj>

"summer time, and the living is easy"

ftl communicator idea (at Oak Ridge)
http://accelconf.web.cern.ch/AccelConf/p01/PAPERS/TPPH041.PDF

alien space-ship
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/08/10/tunguska.shtml

super-plastics
http://members.fcc.net/workgroup5/music/starlite-bk2.jpg





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 13:25:47 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 06:25:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0408241155530.27921@zeus>
Message-ID: <20040824132547.52336.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >No reason they can't run on a turbine engine or fuel cell
> powerplant.
> >AFAICR, the MI-A1 Abrams has a range of 100 miles on one tank of
> fuel
> >with its turbine engine. Fuel cells were generating 100kw/ft^3 a
> decade
> >ago. Have no idea what the energy density is today. 100kw is 75 hp.
> 
> The other way around. 100kw is 134hp, so the goal of 1000 hp is
> reachable with only 7.5 ft^3.
> 
> Now where are the protonic missiles and the antimatter rays? Any
> giant mech without those isn't worth it.

A herf gun? You'd like that? We can do that. How about a metal plasma
pulse rifle? We can do that too. The issue is that you're dumping a LOT
of power into these things with little in return on damage. Chemical
explosives still pack a higher energy density, and flying lead and
steel and spent uranium carry energy a longer distance with less fuss
and muss in a sea level atmosphere.

Ever heard of the KISS principle?

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Tue Aug 24 14:07:08 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:07:08 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Video of Fighting Humanoid Robots!
In-Reply-To: <20040824132547.52336.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040824132547.52336.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0408241605170.27921@zeus>

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>>
>> >No reason they can't run on a turbine engine or fuel cell
>> powerplant.
>> >AFAICR, the MI-A1 Abrams has a range of 100 miles on one tank of
>> fuel
>> >with its turbine engine. Fuel cells were generating 100kw/ft^3 a
>> decade
>> >ago. Have no idea what the energy density is today. 100kw is 75 hp.
>>
>> The other way around. 100kw is 134hp, so the goal of 1000 hp is
>> reachable with only 7.5 ft^3.
>>
>> Now where are the protonic missiles and the antimatter rays? Any
>> giant mech without those isn't worth it.
>
>A herf gun? You'd like that? We can do that. How about a metal plasma
>pulse rifle? We can do that too. The issue is that you're dumping a LOT
>of power into these things with little in return on damage. Chemical
>explosives still pack a higher energy density, and flying lead and
>steel and spent uranium carry energy a longer distance with less fuss
>and muss in a sea level atmosphere.
>
>Ever heard of the KISS principle?

It was only a joke, because every cartoon from japan about giant mechs
have some impressive-sounding weapons that are of course pure fantasy. The
"protonic missile" is, somehow, always mentioned in every cartoon, maybe
because it sounds as so big and important.

Alfio


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 14:23:02 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Ethics - Brought to You by the Bush Brothers
In-Reply-To: <015401c489a0$ce43d0a0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040824142302.11044.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> 
> > Olga Bourlin
> > Subject: [extropy-chat] Ethics - Brought to You by the Bush
> Brothers
> >  
> > Ooooh, this distresses me:
> > 
> > "...Ms. Hood, handpicked by Governor Bush to succeed the 
> > notorious Katherine Harris as secretary of state, was forced to
> admit
> that the 
> > felons list was a mess. She said the problems were unintentional...
> 
> Partially believable.  Some states allow felons to vote
> after they have served their sentences.  What if the
> felons serve their time, then move to Florida?  What if
> the felon is in the federal witness protection program?
> What if the felons are convicted and serve in Florida, 
> then move to another state?  The way the law 
> is written is contradictory and confusing.

Well, yes, this was one of the bones of contention in 2000. Harris had
all felons purged. Now, another states policy toward felons really only
applies if the felon is voting in that state.

A felon who has gone through the process of petitioning the court for
relief of civil disability is a different story from one who simply has
finished their probation.

> 
> > What clearly was intentional
> > was the desire of Ms. Hood and Governor Bush to keep the list
> secret...
> 
> Are post-release felons entitled to privacy?  Being an 
> openness advocate, I would suggest the contrary, however
> an argument could be made either way.  I can certainly see why
> the felons would want to cover their tracks.

Yeah, felonies are public records, no buts about it. Privacy Act
doesn't cover it because criminal acts are acts against The People, who
therefore have an interest in knowing the records regarding those acts.

> 
> > It was disclosed only as a result of lawsuits filed under Florida's
> admirable
> > sunshine law."
> > 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/opinion/23herbert.html
> 
> Olga
> 
> This is shaping up to a replay of 2000.  I wouldn't be surprised
> if pretty much all the same states went to the same parties,
> and once again Florida, with the deciding wad of electoral college
> delegates, is once again was too close to call.  Weeks of 
> bitter acrimony could follow, with disputed undervotes and
> overvotes, ambiguous write-ins, etc.  I saw a poll showing
> Florida voters at 48% W, 46% whats-his-name, 3% Ralph, and 3%
> all others combined (including still undecided), with a +/-2% 
> uncertainty factor.  Here we go again.  {8-|  I notice the IFX 
> ideas futures exchange has been selling republicans for 51 cents 
> and democrats for 50 cents for the past 4 months with scarcely 
> any change.

Yeah, and Banarik has polled as high as 5% in New Mexico and is doing
well in a number of other states. Nationally he could pull 3%
nationally
if the vote were today, the best LP showing ever. LP momentum is
rising.

I think a few states will flip. California may flip thanks to the
Guvernator, Pennsylvania may flip, and both went to Gore before.
California alone could throw the election.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Aug 24 14:47:15 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 07:47:15 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit
	911-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <703ED512-F59C-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <015c01c489e9$3f7c9110$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Samantha Atkins:
> 
> That the are for tax cuts and keeping the tax bill down  hardly makes 
> said group or person libertarian or even shows that most of the 
> proposals are remotely consistent with libertarian ideals. -samantha


Oh, but that is always a great start.  A government that
hasn't much money will of necessity focus on the essentials:
common defense and road building.  Beyond that, I don't
see it as all that useful.  spike





From sjvans at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 24 15:32:29 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:32:29 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield>
	<5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield>

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 01:53, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> I have mentioned a few already.  Beyond that I don't think an honest 
> look can fail to supply you with as many examples as you have the 
> stomach for.

That's a cop out.  You made the claim, now refuse to back it up.  Just a
few words would do.

I can't find *any* examples of "irrational and oppressive" acts that the
"west is throwing its weight behind".  Does that mean I am being
dishonest, as you imply?

I wouldn't be terribly surprised if there were some, which is why I
wanted examples.  I can find "oppressive" actions, but that is the
nature of both government and war.  Shooting someone is a pretty
oppressive act.  I don't think we are doing away with either government
or war in the near future.  

But I really can't find anything at all, rational, irrational,
oppressive, liberating, indifferent, *anything* that the "west throws
its weight behind".  Furthermore, I can't find anything (yet) that I
would consider "irrational" (even the almost inexplicable actions of
Saddam Hussein have their own reasoning, if you dig deep enough).  Just
because you don't agree with a reason does not automatically make it
irrational.

I find this all very distressing, since I think a strong opposition is
essential to civil society.  Yet much of what I see from the opposition
these days amount to personal attacks ("irrational", "honest", "Bush is
dumb") and a refusal to debate the facts and issues.  It is ultimately
self-defeating.  It is not like there aren't a great many sound
arguments against the course of action being taken.  




From amara at amara.com  Tue Aug 24 17:11:41 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:11:41 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] recap of Perseids: July 23 - August 22;
	Peak: August 12
Message-ID: <p05100300bd51204a15a9@[150.146.134.133]>

Natasha:
>Got up at 2:30 a.m. and went outside on the deck to enjoy the showers.
>Unfortunatley I was facing East instead of West, but the sky was overcast
>anyway and only saw 2 little sparks of light when I turned to face the
>right direction.


The radiants of the Perseids generally point to the North-East:

http://www.space.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=040806_perseid_radiant_2004_02.jpg&cap=Perseid+meteors+emanate+from+the+constellation+Perseus%2C+which+rises+above+the+horizon+in+late+evening+this+time+of+year+%28shown+on+this+map%29+and+is+high+overhead+during+the+predawn+hours.+The+meteors+can+began+anywhere+in+the+sky%2C+but+a+line+along+their+path+will+trace+back+to+Perseus.

but my family and I saw 'shooting stars' in other places in the sky,
pointing to different directions too. We saw about one every 5-10
minutes on the evenings before and after the maximum (the maximum was
smoked out with the nearby fire, and California was off the track of
the narrow maximum peak anyway). My family learned how to distinguish
between planes and satellites, and I saw my first Iridium flash from
the dark skies at Lake Shasta as well.

My last (serious) starwatching was when I took my Orange Coast College
borrowed Cave 8 inch, f8 Newtonian reflector to the desert at Joshua
Tree National Park frequently in ...  ~1979-1980 !

---> http://www.amara.com/VWTelescope_b.jpg   (A *very* old washed out photo.
Imagine the looks from the other car drivers as I drove my 'scope on the
SoCal freeways.)

My trip two weeks ago to Lake Shasta was great fun to get reacquainted
with the summer sky constellations.

(for Northern Hemisphere viewers)
If there are high mountains around, the first trick is to find exactly
where is West (i.e. where the sun actually went down), then with the
help of Polaris, the rest of the constellations fall into place. My
dad even recognized quite a few constellations from his navigation
classes decades ago.

>(I miss going with friends to star gaze. :-(   Haha - just thinking of
>dragging friends out of bed or driving to a far location half asleep.  It's
>really about location, location, location.)

If the location is not ideal for star watching (Rome is terrible), at
least most of the planets and Moon are visible. A good pair of
binoculars can see a fair amount of detail.


Amara
(hoping she can convince the American University of Rome to
buy a portable Celestron/Meade 'scope for her to use in her
classes....)
-- 

***********************************************************************
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/
***********************************************************************
"If you gaze for long into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into
you."  - -Nietzsche


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 16:27:38 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 09:27:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] electing ideas [was Re:Fahrenheit
	911-objectivereview?]
In-Reply-To: <015c01c489e9$3f7c9110$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040824162738.22532.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

>  
> > Samantha Atkins:
> > 
> > That the are for tax cuts and keeping the tax bill down  hardly
> makes 
> > said group or person libertarian or even shows that most of the 
> > proposals are remotely consistent with libertarian ideals.
> -samantha
> 
> 
> Oh, but that is always a great start.  A government that
> hasn't much money will of necessity focus on the essentials:
> common defense and road building.  Beyond that, I don't
> see it as all that useful.  
 
Yeah, and Gover did write for a libertarian magazine in college. That
the social conservatives don't like him is a plus to me, and should be
to libertarians. No, he isn't 'pure', and I'd doubt he'd pass a litmus
test, but frankly such standards are useless in practical politics.
It's easiest to ride the freedom train as far as others are willing to
take it, then slog your own way from there with whoever else is
willing. Don't pass up a free or easier ride just cause you think the
conductor has a bad attitude.

Nor is ATR a shill for republicans. It is ripping on Ahnuld in Kali
because he hasn't been focusing on lowering taxes and spending.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 16:31:35 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 09:31:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <20040824163135.69730.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Stephen J. Van Sickle" <sjvans at ameritech.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 01:53, Samantha Atkins wrote:
> 
> > I have mentioned a few already.  Beyond that I don't think an
> honest 
> > look can fail to supply you with as many examples as you have the 
> > stomach for.
> 
> That's a cop out.  You made the claim, now refuse to back it up. 
> Just a few words would do.

Don't worry, she had claimed that the Iraqi invasion would take 100,000
lives. The occupation hasn't even taken a tenth of that.

> 
> I wouldn't be terribly surprised if there were some, which is why I
> wanted examples.  I can find "oppressive" actions, but that is the
> nature of both government and war.  Shooting someone is a pretty
> oppressive act.  I don't think we are doing away with either
> government or war in the near future.  

Government being oppressive is a very rational behavior. Being rational
does not mean being ethical, moral, good, right, or honorable.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From sjvans at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 24 16:52:20 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:52:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <20040824163135.69730.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040824163135.69730.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1093366340.1036.57.camel@Renfield>

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 11:31, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Don't worry, she had claimed that the Iraqi invasion would take 100,000
> lives. The occupation hasn't even taken a tenth of that.

To be fair, that was not an unreasonable prediction, had Hussein used
chemical weapons and deliberately targeted his own people in an attempt
to scare off the Americans, a scenario I don't find altogether
improbable.  A variation of the Blazing Saddles strategy.

A sound argument against the war before it started. 

> Government being oppressive is a very rational behavior. Being rational
> does not mean being ethical, moral, good, right, or honorable.

Exactly.  There are many good arguments other than "irrational". 
Instead, I just hear "Bush is dumb", "it's the oil", "conspiracy", etc. 
Why doesn't the opposition get to the meat of the issue?



From amara at amara.com  Tue Aug 24 17:59:50 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:59:50 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] George F. Kennan (politics)
Message-ID: <p05100300bd5131581e30@[150.146.134.133]>

Recommended to me from an old JPL friend at our Cassini VIMS
meeting in Denver last week. Here is some interesting reading
that has a lot of relevance to the political situation today.


"Mr. X Speaks: An Interview with George Kennan" (PDF)
http://www.afsa.org/fsj/feb04/guldin.pdf


George F. Kennan on the Web

from:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2496/future/kennan.html

Portrait of Kennan by Ned Seidler Russil Wvong / History, politics,
and the future / George F. Kennan

{begin quote}
George F. Kennan (b. 1904), a distinguished US diplomat and historian,
was one of the primary architects of US strategy during the Truman
Administration. He's Professor Emeritus at the Institute for Advanced
Study in Princeton, New Jersey.

Kennan is one of the most thoughtful and eloquent writers I've ever
come across, not just on history, international politics, and
US-Russian relations, but on American society, questions of personal
and political philosophy, and contemporary problems such as nuclear
weapons, the environment, population growth, and urbanization. For
such a distinguished man, he's also remarkably humble.

The role that Kennan played in shaping US postwar strategy-along with
his colleagues, including George Marshall, Dean Acheson, Charles
Bohlen, Loy Henderson, and John Paton Davies Jr.-makes his writings
particularly fascinating. Before World War II, the US had the foreign
policy of a "small, neutral nation." After World War II, with the
collapse of the European powers, the US found itself confronting the
Soviet Union, which set up puppet governments in occupied Eastern
Europe and appeared to be threatening a shattered Western Europe as
well. Kennan articulated the strategy of patient, long-term
"containment" of the Soviet Union, and in particular, the
re-establishing of a stable balance of power by rebuilding Western
Europe and Japan. As first director of the State Department's Policy
Planning Staff from 1947 to 1950, under Marshall and Acheson, Kennan
was responsible for long-term planning. He played a major role in both
the Marshall Plan and the rebuilding of Japan, as well as overall US
strategy towards the Soviet Union. Less laudably, Kennan also played a
significant role in launching the CIA's covert operations, which he
later described as "the greatest mistake I ever made." He didn't have
much to say about policy towards the Third World, where he thought
that in any case, the US could not do much to help; he advocated
restraint, particularly in the case of China. (Wilson Miscamble's
George F. Kennan and the Making of American Foreign Policy, 1947-1950
provides a detailed analysis of Kennan's influence on US policy
decisions.)

Over time, Kennan became increasingly pessimistic about the ability of
the US to follow a realistic, sensitive, and discriminating foreign
policy, and to maintain the basic health of US society. In Kennan's
view, US foreign policy suffers to a deplorable degree from confusion,
ignorance, narcissism, escapism, and irresponsibility. He left the
State Department in the early 1950s and joined the Institute for
Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, hoping to educate the US
public and US policymakers by illuminating the history of US-Soviet
relations. He also spoke frequently on contemporary problems,
particularly the nuclear arms race. Now that the Cold War has,
astonishingly, ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kennan
argues (e.g. in Around the Cragged Hill) that the US ought to limit
its foreign policy to maintaining its alliances with Western Europe
and Japan, and ought to focus on addressing its pressing domestic
problems.

This page provides links to writings by and about George Kennan that
are available on the Internet. Some articles (notably those provided
by the New York Times and the New York Review of Books) require
registration or subscription.

{end quote}

--------------

Take a look at the section: "2. Reports, articles, lectures, interviews"
in particular,

* the famous: 'X Paper'

The political personality of Soviet power as we know it today is the
product of ideology and circumstances: ideology inherited by the
present Soviet leaders from the movement in which they had their
political origin, and circumstances of the power which they now have
exercised for nearly three decades in Russia. There can be few tasks
of psychological analysis more difficult than to try to trace the
interaction of these two forces and the relative role of each in the
determination of official Soviet conduct, yet the attempt must be made
if that conduct is to be understood and effectively countered.

http://www.historyguide.org/europe/kennan.html

and

* the 'Long Telegram'

February 22, 1946. Published in Foreign Relations of the United
States, 1946, vol. VI. US policymakers had been hoping to continue
their partnership with the Soviet Union after World War II, and were
puzzled as to why the Soviet Union was being so uncooperative, even
hostile. Kennan's Long Telegram from the Moscow Embassy explained the
Soviet view of the world. It struck a chord and was widely distributed
within the Truman Administration.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/documents/episode-1/kennan.htm

-- 

********************************************************************
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/
********************************************************************
"It's not the pace of life I mind. It's the sudden stop at the end."
--Calvin


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 24 18:34:04 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:34:04 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] recap of Perseids: July 23 - August 22;
	Peak: August 12
Message-ID: <82130-22004822418344401@M2W060.mail2web.com>

Amara wrote:

Natasha:
>Got up at 2:30 a.m. and went outside on the deck to enjoy the showers.
>Unfortunatley I was facing East instead of West, but the sky was overcast
>anyway and only saw 2 little sparks of light when I turned to face the
>right direction.


>My last (serious) starwatching was when I took my Orange Coast College
>borrowed Cave 8 inch, f8 Newtonian reflector to the desert at Joshua
>Tree National Park frequently in ...  ~1979-1980 !

I have five favorites:

1.  On our honeymoon we were skiing in the Big Bear Mountains.  It was
during the time of the comet in the late 1970s.  Fabulous.

2.  At Talaquez Rock east of Los Angeles - we (along with two friends) lay
down on blankets to warch the sky's performance. Fantastic. mid 1970s

3.  In Arizona with Chris and Pam Heward and children.  Chris woke us all
up in the wee hours and we went outside bundles in blankets - (Chris and
the kids were reclining on the large trampoline.)  Delightful. late 1990s

4.  At Mountain High Mountains in California - Went with one of my best
friends who is an astronomer and was the Director of Education at the
Science and Space Museum - we climbed up on large boudlers and drank hot
chocklate.  Amazing. late 1980s

5.  At sea - sailing from Puerto Rico to Brazil - it was so unbelievable -
out in the middle of the ocean - no land in sight - sailing for three
months ...  1970s


Natasha

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




From benboc at lineone.net  Tue Aug 24 20:52:13 2004
From: benboc at lineone.net (ben)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:52:13 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fighting Robots
In-Reply-To: <200408241800.i7OI0m010752@tick.javien.com>
References: <200408241800.i7OI0m010752@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <412BAA7D.8010204@lineone.net>

*Humanoid* robots (for fighting) sounds daft to me.
Too easy to trip up, surely, and if one leg gets damaged, it can't move 
(i doubt a hopping robot soldier would be very menacing).

So, how about this: Insectoid fighting robots.

I'm thinking of something along the lines of the insect soldiers in the 
'Starship Troopers' movie, or the 'shadows' in Bablylon 5.

Plenty of redundant legs (six legs are easier to control than two, 
anyway, and static stability is a plus in a robot with limited energy), 
and then there's the psychological aspect; Well, what would make you run 
away screaming, a giant metal man with a big gun, or a bloody great 
spiky-legged cockroach/spider/worst nightmare thing, with clacking jaws 
and a big gun?

Just building the things would be scary enough, never mind having one 
scuttling after you at 50mph.

If you're going to build robot soldiers, you might as well take 
advantage of human psychology, and build *terrifying* robot soldiers.

Of course, if they are going up against other robots rather than humans, 
the psychology angle doesn't apply, but the other things still do.

ben


From sentience at pobox.com  Tue Aug 24 21:08:38 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:08:38 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fighting Robots
In-Reply-To: <412BAA7D.8010204@lineone.net>
References: <200408241800.i7OI0m010752@tick.javien.com>
	<412BAA7D.8010204@lineone.net>
Message-ID: <412BAE56.9090504@pobox.com>

ben wrote:
> 
> Plenty of redundant legs (six legs are easier to control than two, 
> anyway, and static stability is a plus in a robot with limited energy), 
> and then there's the psychological aspect; Well, what would make you run 
> away screaming, a giant metal man with a big gun, or a bloody great 
> spiky-legged cockroach/spider/worst nightmare thing, with clacking jaws 
> and a big gun?
> 
> Just building the things would be scary enough, never mind having one 
> scuttling after you at 50mph.
> 
> If you're going to build robot soldiers, you might as well take 
> advantage of human psychology, and build *terrifying* robot soldiers.

What a notion!  Oh, what a beautiful notion!  It's just what we've all been 
waiting for, the perfect military excuse to build giant killer spiders that 
scream in the night, and hideous oozing blobs that hide in enemy closets 
and then leap out and engulf people!  We wouldn't've lost if our brave 
soldiers had been armed with *those* in Vietnam!  Someone phone the DOD: 
The War on Terror needs a War *with* Terror.

The time has come to unleash Yog-Sothoth, Eater of Terrorists!  Fear death 
by slime monster!

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 24 22:02:11 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <1093366340.1036.57.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <20040824220211.27292.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "Stephen J. Van Sickle" <sjvans at ameritech.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 11:31, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Don't worry, she had claimed that the Iraqi invasion would take
> 100,000
> > lives. The occupation hasn't even taken a tenth of that.
> 
> To be fair, that was not an unreasonable prediction, had Hussein used
> chemical weapons and deliberately targeted his own people in an
> attempt to scare off the Americans, a scenario I don't find
altogether
> improbable.  A variation of the Blazing Saddles strategy.
> 
> A sound argument against the war before it started. 

Well, yes, it would have been a sound argument IF Samantha had also
thought that Hussein actually had WMD.... she didn't....

> 
> > Government being oppressive is a very rational behavior. Being
> rational
> > does not mean being ethical, moral, good, right, or honorable.
> 
> Exactly.  There are many good arguments other than "irrational". 
> Instead, I just hear "Bush is dumb", "it's the oil", "conspiracy",
> etc. Why doesn't the opposition get to the meat of the issue?

Cause they can't? Cause most people don't think there is any meat on
that side...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Aug 24 22:10:39 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fighting Robots
In-Reply-To: <412BAA7D.8010204@lineone.net>
Message-ID: <20040824221039.74016.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- ben <benboc at lineone.net> wrote:
> *Humanoid* robots (for fighting) sounds daft to me.
> Too easy to trip up, surely, and if one leg gets
> damaged, it can't move 
> (i doubt a hopping robot soldier would be very
> menacing).
> 
> So, how about this: Insectoid fighting robots.

Two-legged robots have their advantages...although
most of those (like greater agility - which comes as
a direct cost to static stability) might need a lot
of development to win out.  Insectoids might make
sense for early iterations.

> If you're going to build robot soldiers, you might
> as well take 
> advantage of human psychology, and build
> *terrifying* robot soldiers.
> 
> Of course, if they are going up against other robots
> rather than humans, 
> the psychology angle doesn't apply, but the other
> things still do.

Unless they're going up against other robots that are
remotely piloted by humans, who in turn have to look
at their targets.  The impact might be diminished
since they're looking through a camera, but in many
cases, even a moment's hesitation can decide a fight.


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Aug 24 23:18:26 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:18:26 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY><DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield><5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>

Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:

> I find this all very distressing, since I think a strong opposition is
> essential to civil society.  Yet much of what I see from the opposition
> these days amount to personal attacks ("irrational", "honest", "Bush is
> dumb") and a refusal to debate the facts and issues.  It is ultimately
> self-defeating.  It is not like there aren't a great many sound
> arguments against the course of action being taken.  

I agree that its unpleasant to see only bad or spurious reasons
given for opposing things, but unfortunately, unless you are referring
to what's good for an email list, rather than what is good for an
electoral outcome, it isn't self defeating. 

In a two person contest like the US Presidential election only one
will win and one will loose. The system doesn't differentiate whether
a vote is cast for a candidate or against the other candidate. Two 
dummies voting the opposite way to you cancel your vote and exceed
it by exactly one. Little wonder the messages are pitched at lowest
common denominators.

The power that resides in the US Presidency is such that who is in the
role matters not just for US citizens but for the west and for the world.

Intelligence (or the lack of dumbness) matters in potential President's 
like a capacity to fly planes matters in pilots. I don't care whether 
there is a republican or a democrat in the whitehouse but I do care
that the guy (and it will be a guy) has a sufficient grasp of all the tools
at his disposal, which includes or should include diplomatic skill as
well as military might. A commander in chief will and must rely on 
intelligence agencies of course but the intelligence between his/her
own ears is always going to a decisively limiting factor regardless of
the quality of his/her advice.  

When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting resolution 
1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that he
alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the UN 
Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization 
(a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of the
US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a timetable 
and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and 
invade. 

Brett Paatsch






 








From sjvans at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 24 23:36:44 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:36:44 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <20040824220211.27292.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040824220211.27292.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1093390603.1036.77.camel@Renfield>

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 17:02, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Well, yes, it would have been a sound argument IF Samantha had also
> thought that Hussein actually had WMD.... she didn't....

Well, then, yes, not very convincing.

> Cause they can't? Cause most people don't think there is any meat on
> that side...

Oh, I think there is some.  For instance, real isolationism...letting
the world sink or swim on its own, more or less closing the borders,
mass deportations, etc., is probably a valid alternate strategy.  I
personally think that it would do more harm than good for the US, but I
can see where reasonable people might differ.  But no one offers real
solutions, just platitudes like "working with our allies" (like
Australia and the UK aren't allies).



From sjvans at ameritech.net  Tue Aug 24 23:43:45 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:43:45 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield>
	<5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield>
	<03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield>

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 18:18, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> I agree that its unpleasant to see only bad or spurious reasons
> given for opposing things, but unfortunately, unless you are referring
> to what's good for an email list, rather than what is good for an
> electoral outcome, it isn't self defeating. 

Well, we'll see what is or isn't self defeating in November, the only
real test.

> When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting resolution 
> 1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that he
> alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the UN 
> Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization 
> (a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
> better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of the
> US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a timetable 
> and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and 
> invade. 

How would a more capable President have handled the situation?  The only
alternative I can see was standing down the troops and letting the
sanctions collapse.  And how, exactly, was the invasion in violation of
1441 and the Charter?  Although, that is really beside the point. 
Arguing fine points of international law is silly when no one else seems
to feel a need to be bound by them.



From paatschb at optusnet.com.au  Wed Aug 25 00:45:36 2004
From: paatschb at optusnet.com.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:45:36 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY><DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield><5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield><03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <03f801c48a3c$d63f73d0$362c2dcb@homepc>

Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 18:18, Brett Paatsch wrote:
>
> > I agree that its unpleasant to see only bad or spurious reasons
> > given for opposing things, but unfortunately, unless you are referring
> > to what's good for an email list, rather than what is good for an
> > electoral outcome, it isn't self defeating.
>
> Well, we'll see what is or isn't self defeating in November, the only
> real test.

I don't think we will actually. The fact of a Bush or Kerry victory won't
tell us how or why voters voted as they did.

> > When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting resolution
> > 1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that he
> > alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the UN
> > Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization
> > (a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
> > better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of the
> > US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a timetable
> > and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and
> > invade.
>
> How would a more capable President have handled the situation?
> The only alternative I can see was standing down the troops and letting
> the sanctions collapse.  And how, exactly, was the invasion in violation
> of 1441 and the Charter?  Although, that is really beside the point.

Damn, this is frustrating. On one hand you ask some excellent questions
(above) but no sooner do you do so then you say ...

> Arguing fine points of international law is silly when no one else seems
> to feel a need to be bound by them.

This sentence takes away almost the motivation I could have for taking
the time and effort of trying to pursuade you intellectually by providing
links and letting you see for yourself  because you *seem* to be
forewarning me that for you international law is *silly*.  So where's the
payoff for me?

Can't you see that without international law there can be no international
peace ever? How could there be when nations would inevitably war for
the simple reason that the strong wants what the weak has and the weak
have no alternative but to meet force with force.

Do you want all the innovators and industries of the future to dedicate
themselves to war technologies rather than to life-extension technologies?

Is "terrorism" for you just what the other guy does to you and yours
regardless of what you do to them and theirs, or is it rather a breach
of some standard by which third parties can look in and be outraged
too?

September 11 was a terrorist act in my book because civilians we're
attacked without warning and against international law. The attackers
were not US citizens. The standard they broke was not a US-only
standard.  Now the question is almost was it EVEN a US standard.

Can't you see that only the strongest countries and the brightest minds
can make the peace because the weakest are too much on the defensive
and too much in fear of the strongest?

What a person thinks is silly can define their limitations to other people.

What a democratic nation of voters think its silly may just define their
durability as a great nation.

Brett Paatsch









From sjvans at ameritech.net  Wed Aug 25 01:22:14 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 20:22:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <03f801c48a3c$d63f73d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield>
	<5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
	<1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield><03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield>
	<03f801c48a3c$d63f73d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <1093396934.1036.111.camel@Renfield>

On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 19:45, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Damn, this is frustrating. On one hand you ask some excellent questions
> (above) but no sooner do you do so then you say ...

My apologies, I was being snarky.  I can fully understand why you would
find my comment frustrating.  I agree that international law is a
prerequisite for world peace and prosperity.  What I do think is that it
is dangerous to consider international law as highly evolved and well
developed as, say, US commercial law.  Therefore, splitting hairs the
way that a contract lawyer might is counterproductive, *at this time*,
to the purpose of international law, which is (or should be), peace,
freedom, and prosperity.

Furthermore, what use is law without enforcement?  There *are* no
international police.  The current situation with international law is
similar to the situation prior to the development of police forces, i.e.
enforcement was primarily a private matter, with the law picking up the
pieces and deciding who is right after the fact.

I am more concerned with the way things are, rather than the way they
ought to be.  If international law is to have any meaning, Saddam should
have been in prison 20 years ago, and Pol Pot would not have died in bed
of old age.  

How do we get from here to there?  I don't know, but I'm pretty sure
that it's not by giving murderous dictators a pass while hamstringing
liberal democracies.  

Still, I *am* interested in the way international law is, and how it is
developing, and would be interested in what parts of international law,
UN resolutions, and the laws and customs of warfare you think the US has
violated.  If you don't wish to play, though, I understand.





From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 25 04:59:42 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:29:42 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reaction Speed Test
Message-ID: <710b78fc040824215920f5bf6f@mail.gmail.com>

http://gmail.google.com/gmail/a-edbabfb773-0a783fd610-1c7ea9969b

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Aug 25 05:11:34 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reaction Speed Test
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc040824215920f5bf6f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040825051134.13645.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
http://gmail.google.com/gmail/a-edbabfb773-0a783fd610-1c7ea9969b

*slaps buzzer* ;)

...though I'll pass, thanks.


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 25 05:14:18 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:44:18 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reaction Speed Test
In-Reply-To: <20040825051134.13645.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040825051134.13645.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0408242214b030ef1@mail.gmail.com>

Good effort!

Next?

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:11:34 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
<wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> http://gmail.google.com/gmail/a-edbabfb773-0a783fd610-1c7ea9969b
> 
> *slaps buzzer* ;)
> 
> ....though I'll pass, thanks.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Wed Aug 25 06:36:10 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:06:10 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reaction Speed Test
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0408242214b030ef1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20040825051134.13645.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
	<710b78fc0408242214b030ef1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082423362756ae3e@mail.gmail.com>

I just received notification that this has been grabbed. Better luck
next time, everyone else!

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *



On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:44:18 +0930, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Good effort!
> 
> Next?
> 
> --
> Emlyn
> 
> http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 22:11:34 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes
> <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > --- Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > http://gmail.google.com/gmail/a-edbabfb773-0a783fd610-1c7ea9969b
> >
> > *slaps buzzer* ;)
> >
> > ....though I'll pass, thanks.
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From maxm at mail.tele.dk  Wed Aug 25 09:41:43 2004
From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:41:43 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fighting Robots
In-Reply-To: <412BAA7D.8010204@lineone.net>
References: <200408241800.i7OI0m010752@tick.javien.com>
	<412BAA7D.8010204@lineone.net>
Message-ID: <412C5ED7.8080500@mail.tele.dk>

ben wrote:

> So, how about this: Insectoid fighting robots.
> 
> I'm thinking of something along the lines of the insect soldiers in the 
> 'Starship Troopers' movie, or the 'shadows' in Bablylon 5.

Wasp sized flying robots with strong poison would probably be more 
efficient.

-- 

hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark

http://www.mxm.dk/
IT's Mad Science


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 25 13:18:38 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 06:18:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040825131838.91499.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:
> 
> > I find this all very distressing, since I think a strong opposition
> is
> > essential to civil society.  Yet much of what I see from the
> opposition
> > these days amount to personal attacks ("irrational", "honest",
> "Bush is
> > dumb") and a refusal to debate the facts and issues.  It is
> ultimately
> > self-defeating.  It is not like there aren't a great many sound
> > arguments against the course of action being taken.  
> 
> I agree that its unpleasant to see only bad or spurious reasons
> given for opposing things, but unfortunately, unless you are
> referring
> to what's good for an email list, rather than what is good for an
> electoral outcome, it isn't self defeating. 
> 
> In a two person contest like the US Presidential election only one
> will win and one will loose. The system doesn't differentiate whether
> a vote is cast for a candidate or against the other candidate. Two 
> dummies voting the opposite way to you cancel your vote and exceed
> it by exactly one. Little wonder the messages are pitched at lowest
> common denominators.

Actually, Michael Badnarik had something to say about the myth of the
'wasted vote' at the LP Convention in Atlanta. "If you were on death
row, and you had a 50% chance of being executed by lethal injection,
and a 45% chance of getting the electric chair, and only a 5% chance of
escaping, would you vote for the most likely outcome, or the more
tolerable death, just because they seemed to be the most likely choice?
NO! You'd vote to escape each and every time. Voting for the lesser
evil just means you wind up with evil government." This is the best
dismissal of the wasted vote myth I've ever heard, because the fact is
that the other candidates are on agendas of power, slavery, and death
to the common man.

LIVE WHAT YOU BELIEVE ..... and come to NH while you are at it...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Aug 25 13:50:54 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:50:54 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nicholas Kristof and `irreversible' genetic changes
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040825084906.01b62ae0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

[A reply to http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/25/opinion/25kristof.html?th :]

Dear Mr Kristof

You evoke a popular anxiety: "Genetic tinkering gives me the willies. My 
concern is [...] with the possibility that we will irreversibly change what 
it is to be human."

But this is very odd, surely? In my forthcoming book *Ferocious Minds: 
Polymathy and the New Enlightenment*, I discuss that fear of irreversibly 
by reference to environmentalist Bill McKibben's recent alarmist book:

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

...in *Enough: Staying Human in an Engineered Age* (2003), [McKibben] has 
advanced a nightmare prospect of genetic engineering that will tear the 
human species from our ancient roots and turn us into something terrible, 
robotic, without meaning. Such medical options, he has urged, ought to be 
made illegal (in more general terms that cover any germline enhancements): 
`People shouldn't be allowed to choose things this deep for their children 
(and for every generation thereafter),' (192)

The slip of logic is customary in such Jeremiads, but no less bizarre for 
that. Watch McKibben's hands carefully: If we gain the power to make *any 
changes we wish* in the DNA of our offspring, this should be forbidden. Why 
so? Because these changes will thereafter be *permanently embedded* in the 
species. Note how the argument starts by assuming what it then denies: that 
science will provide us with the power to alter, enhance, add, or delete 
genes. The bogeyman of `permanent embeddedness' is precisely a relic of 
previous, more restricted technologies.

McKibben goes on to draw out dire recommendations from his 
misunderstanding. Making such germinal-choice changes illegal, he admits,

"will involve limiting freedom, just as forbidding people to drive their 
cars the wrong way down one-way street limits freedom. The liberty of one 
generation, ours, would be in some small way constrained... in order to 
protect the far more basic liberties of those yet to come. To demand this 
right is to make a mockery of liberty. It's to choose, forever, against 
choice." (192)

What we are headed toward, McKibben asserts (in his wooly confusion), is a 
regime of `programmed' lives, known totally in advance, which will be 
`ineradicable' (because by then, even if the prowess remains, our will 
shall have been sapped; we will be contented Stepford Hive drones). 
Absurdly, given where he is avowedly coming from, he writes as a 
simple-minded genetic determinist. Once those devilish genes are locked in 
place, we will be obliged to march forever to their drumming, without 
passion or challenge or the poignancy of death and its rewarding, decent 
return to the embrace of Nature.

In reality, the danger is not primarily from gene technology. Genes, and 
the proteins they code for, do significantly ordain our bent, and some of 
our limitations and abilities, but they do not *program* us. The true 
danger arises from the conceptual mischief liable to be spread by 
pseudo-arguments like McKibben's.

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

Now it might be that what you fear will be irreversibly changed is not some 
particular phenotype but the very immutability of inheritance itself 
(modulo nutrition, health care, education, culture in general). Is that of 
urgent concern? Perhaps so, but it seems to me to resemble other changes in 
the past: the change away from irreversible degradation of eyesight, once 
spectacles were invented, and so on. But I get the feeling that this moment 
of anxiety is more primal than any list of such technical changes wrought 
by new knowledge; that we are feeling essentialist qualms at the prospect 
of fast change to aspects of ourselves that seem better masked in mystery 
and evasion. Although it's a widespread sentiment that does need to be 
taken into account, that's not a very good basis for making policy, it 
seems to me.

Damien Broderick
Senior Fellow, Department of English
University of Melbourne
biblio: www.thespike.us  




From rafal at smigrodzki.org  Wed Aug 25 14:20:01 2004
From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:20:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reversible genetic change 
Message-ID: <412CA011.5060001@smigrodzki.org>

Damien Broderick wrote:

 > [A reply to 
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/25/opinion/25kristof.html?th :]
 >
 > Dear Mr Kristof
 >
 > You evoke a popular anxiety: "Genetic tinkering gives me the willies. 
My concern is [...] with the possibility that we will irreversibly 
change what it is to be human."


### Mitochondrial replacement therapy (see my presentation at TV'04) 
promises reversible genetic modification. In the future, artificial 
chromosomes will give even more choice.

Our adversaries' arguments are already moot (we only need to get the 
word out).

Rafal




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Aug 25 14:42:25 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:42:25 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Reversible genetic change
In-Reply-To: <412CA011.5060001@smigrodzki.org>
References: <412CA011.5060001@smigrodzki.org>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040825094117.01b27ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 10:20 AM 8/25/2004 -0400, Rafal wrote:

>(see my presentation at TV'04)

I've been hoping you might post it here, or an url to some site with the 
full text (if available).

Damien Broderick




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 25 23:19:37 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:19:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nicholas Kristof and `irreversible' genetic changes
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040825084906.01b62ae0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040825231937.9744.qmail@web60501.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> What we are headed toward, McKibben asserts (in his
> wooly confusion), is a 
> regime of `programmed' lives, known totally in
> advance, which will be 
> `ineradicable' (because by then, even if the prowess
> remains, our will 
> shall have been sapped; we will be contented
> Stepford Hive drones). 
> Absurdly, given where he is avowedly coming from, he
> writes as a 
> simple-minded genetic determinist. Once those
> devilish genes are locked in 
> place, we will be obliged to march forever to their
> drumming, without 
> passion or challenge or the poignancy of death and
> its rewarding, decent 
> return to the embrace of Nature.

Well spoken, Damien. To think that engineered genes
could make us less human, "sap our will", and oblige
us to march to their drumming is silly. It ignores
precisely what it means to be human. Being human is
all about having a mind and a will capable of defying
any genetic programming. After all the normal
"god-given" genes I have now tell me to do all sorts
of bad things like sleep with other men's wives, steal
their stuff, and beat them to a pulp if they annoy me.
The reason I don't do any of these things is that my
mind rejects these urges and in this and only this am
I exercising what truly makes me human and not some
dumb animal.
      This McKibben seems to think that if I were to
get engineered genes to lower my cholesterol or see in
the dark, I would suddenly forget I have a mind and
become some mindless drone or savage animal?
Ridiculous. If he worried about future generations
having their will sapped and living "programmed lives"
he would be better off campaigning against mass media
marketing than against genetic engineering. After all
it is television (actually the unscrupulous elite that
control it) that will be mostly responsible for
sapping our wills and turning our kids into fat, lazy,
complacent, mindless drones that only get off the
couch long enough to rush out and buy "super-sized"
fast food or whatever garbage the Madison Avenue spin
doctors hail as the next big thing.
     What is it with people that they would rather
tolerate a familiar evil than risk an uncertain good? 
   

=====
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!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Aug 25 23:33:41 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:33:41 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY><DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield><5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield><03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc><1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield><03f801c48a3c$d63f73d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<1093396934.1036.111.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <00bd01c48afb$f43ded20$362c2dcb@homepc>

Stephen J. Van Sickle write:

>...  What I do think is that it
> is dangerous to consider international law as highly evolved
> and well developed as, say, US commercial law.  Therefore,
> splitting hairs the way that a contract lawyer might is
> counterproductive, *at this time*, to the purpose of international
> law, which is (or should be), peace, freedom, and prosperity.

Security is the first thing that has to be gotten right in international
law. That is why the UN Charter matters. Without security "trade"
is used like an Orwellian term for exploit or plunder.

> Furthermore, what use is law without enforcement?

No use.

> There *are* no international police.

Nations that are signatories to the UN charter like the US have given
their word of honour. If the strong don't keep their word the weak see
it and will only pretend to keep theirs.

At present only US citizens can hold a US President to account for
breaking an agreement or a treaty.

> ... The current situation with international law is
> similar to the situation prior to the development of police forces, i.e.
> enforcement was primarily a private matter, with the law picking up the
> pieces and deciding who is right after the fact.

Well it is now after the fact, Iraq was invaded, no weapons of mass
destruction were found, if I show you that it was illegal, what would
you do?

> I am more concerned with the way things are, rather than the way they
> ought to be.  If international law is to have any meaning, Saddam should
> have been in prison 20 years ago, and Pol Pot would not have died in bed
> of old age.

On the one hand your arguing that international law had (or has) to evolve
- that makes sense - there could not be international law without nations
that
recognized a need for it, but then about you mix present and past tenses as
though time doesn't matter.  If international law IS to have meaning you say
... Saddam should have .. Pol Pot would have..

The fact is that for most of its history the UN was blocked from taking
effective action against anything that any one of the 5 permanent security
council members could veto.

It is only now that the US has become the sole military superpower that
any country really has a chance to reform and improve the UN. If the US
doesn't do it - then the US will be an impossible blocker to it happening
because of the US's power.  It simply comes down to what US citizens
want.

There was a window of opportunity, after 1441 was signed and before
Iraq was invaded when President Bush (or a better person in his role)
could have made the UN work by threatening (without bluffing) to revoke
the UN Charter and to withdraw the US from the United Nations. Bush
blinked in the critical diplomatic game of brinksmanship with Chirac of
France. (All of which assumes of course that Bush was genuine in wanting
to get a UN resolution and genuine in being concerned about Iraq having
weapons of mass destruction - at the time I was giving him the benefit of
the doubt on both those things). I wrote quite a lot on this at the time.
It is hard (not impossible but time consuming) to recreate the historical
details that constituted the window of opportunity now because the world's
attention has moved on to more current events.

 > How do we get from here to there?

Progress in the short term depends on US citizens. They can sanction or
accept illegal or legal actions of their President. In the long term what
goes
around comes around... but in the long term most of here are dead.

> I don't know, but I'm pretty sure
> that it's not by giving murderous dictators a pass while hamstringing
> liberal democracies.

> Still, I *am* interested in the way international law is, and how it is
> developing, and would be interested in what parts of international law,
> UN resolutions, and the laws and customs of warfare you think the
> US has violated.  If you don't wish to play, though, I understand.

The UN Charter is not a long document, and the structure of the UN
Security Council is pretty simple and logical. Being signed in 1945, it
would be older than most of the posters to this list. I do not think that
people will come up with a simpler or more logical template for
managing international peace and security. I don't think that there is
one.

I do wish to play but am tired. I have looked through the Exi archives
in 2003. I wrote ad nauseum on this topic and what I wrote seems to
have affected nothing. I have to draw my own conclusions on that.

Brett Paatsch







From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Thu Aug 26 00:38:04 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:38:04 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY><DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield><5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield><03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield>
Message-ID: <00da01c48b04$f2c9ad90$362c2dcb@homepc>

Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:
>
> > When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting resolution
> > 1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that he
> > alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the UN
> > Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization
> > (a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
> > better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of the
> > US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a timetable
> > and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and
> > invade.
>
> How would a more capable President have handled the situation?

He'd have threatened to revoke the Charter and withdraw the US
from the UN in the media if Chirac of France did not come up
with a general standard for determining when the UN Security Council
should go to war. The security council has to be willing to go to war
sometimes or their can be no peace. At a critical point Chirac
of France was saying that France would "never, never" go to war.

Had Saddam had weapons of mass destruction Chiracs position would
have given him confidence that the UN would not and could not invade
because the French President would not make the necessary call and
as a permanent security council member could veto and resolution that
would have required force.

So Bush should have challenged Chirac in the media to come up
with a standard (in murder trials its 'proof beyond reasonable doubt',
in civil trials its 'on the balance of probabilities') and should have
stated
in the media that unless France was willing to be practical international
laws aimed at maintaining internation peace and security were meaningless
so Chirac should either come up with a standard (a standard that would
have been applied in the case of Iraq) or that he George W Bush would
deem that the UN Charter had been revoked by France.

Chirac would have had to come up with a standard.

The standard would have been applied.

If Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction it would not have been
invaded but the UN would have had a standard to use for go-to-war
don't-go-to-war decisions in the future.

In a world where terrorists could have weapons of mass distruction
it is not unreasonable that the sovereignty of countries be put aside
provided that it is done in the right way. There is not currently a
workable right way. Bush could have made it so that there was
- but instead he chose a wrong way.

> The only alternative I can see was standing down the troops and
> letting the sanctions collapse.  And how, exactly, was the invasion
> in violation of 1441 and the Charter?

The charter makes it unlawful to invade sovereign countries (except
in self defence - eg Afghanistan) or with security council approval
which would come in the form of a resolution.

1441 was the unanimous resolution that threaten "serious consequence"
on Iraq if it did not comply with previous resolutions and did not show
that it did not posses weapons of mass destruction.

The security council with 1441 gave Iraq one "final opportunity" to
comply. And the security council advised that it was "seized of the
matter" ie. the security council had assumed jurisdiction and the US
has concurred in the assumption of jurisdiction.

Because "serious consequences" did not explicitly authorise invasion
another security council resolution was required to authorise it. The UK
and the US argued that it wasn't necessary that the authorisation to
invade was contained in previous resolutions relating to the cease
fire after Kuwait. That was arrant rot which the UK and the US only
fell back on as a peice of obscrure legalese able to be slipped past
the public.

Because the security council gave Iraq one "final opportunity" and
because it was "seized of the matter" only the security council
could determine when the "final opportunity" was over.

The security council never made such a determination because
Bush was not willing to go back to it to loose his legalistic pretext.

To have done so would have made it clear to the whole world
(if it wasn't already) that the UN security council did not think
the use of force at that time was warranted - inspections were
still going on etc.

The UK, Spain and the US had prepared another resolution
that effectively said only that the "final opportunity" granted
Iraq under 1441 was up. But they never tabled the resolution
to be voted on because it was clear that it would not have
gotten up and in failing to get up the PR battle would be
lost.

So Bush and the coalition of the willing invaded before
the security council had deemed Iraq's final opportunity
over. That was clear cut illegal. And as it turned out
Iraq didn't have the weapons.

The tradgedy is that the concerns over weapons were
not unreasonable and the criticisms made of the UN
were not unreasonable - there can be no peace under
the United Nations if the United Nations Security Council
would not enforce it - but it was within the range of
Bush's possible diplomatic moves to make the UN
security council live up to its mandate - he either just
didn't see the move (to challenge Chirac to produce a
standard or he would deem the UN Charter revoked)
- or he didn't want to see it - he wanted to invade Iraq
whether it had weapons or not.

Brett Paatsch




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Aug 26 19:06:18 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:06:18 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] [fwd] Werner's Syndrome Mice
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040826140533.01b173a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

[our absent pal Robert Bradbury posted this to another list:]

It is being reported [1,2] that researchers seem to finally
have a workable model for Werner's Syndrome in mice.

Having to cross WRN and telomerase deficient mice and
then breed them to get short telomeres points out how
complex species differences may be in both (a) the
activity level of genes in specific tissues and (b)
physical attributes of specific genomes (such as telomere
length) in influencing disease development rates and
overall aspects of aging.

The fact that the mouse cancer profiles did not generally
match human cancer profiles may suggest that there are
still some things we are missing here, for example,
throwing out a couple of off the cuff examples, the human
immune system may be better at eliminating certain types of
cancer than the mouse immune system is or mice may have
diminished defenses against mutations in certain tissues.

While we *are* making progress the problems are complex.
A quick PubMed scan this morning suggested that the W.S.
gene may interact with up to 15 other proteins involved
in DNA replication & repair.  The answers are going to
come very slowly I fear.

Robert

1. "Mouse Model Of Rare Disease Offers Clues To Aging And
Cancer Development"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/040820082119.htm

2. Chang S, Multani AS, Cabrera NG, Naylor ML, Laud P, Lombard D, Pathak S,
Guarente L, DePinho RA.
Essential role of limiting telomeres in the pathogenesis of Werner syndrome.
Nat Genet. 2004 Aug;36(8):877-82. Epub 2004 Jul 04.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15235603




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Thu Aug 26 19:15:02 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:15:02 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] "The Most Dangerous Idea"  (that is us)
Message-ID: <151560-22004842619152101@M2W066.mail2web.com>

Friends,

I just read this on the ExtroBritannia list and wanted to forward it to you
all:

"'What ideas, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the 
welfare of humanity?' That question was posed to eight prominent 
policy intellectuals by the editors of Foreign Policy in its 
September/October issue (not yet available online). One of the eight 
savants consulted was Francis Fukuyama, professor of international 
political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International 
Studies, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the 
Biotechnology Revolution, and a member of the President's Council on 
Bioethics. His choice for the world's most dangerous idea? 
Transhumanism."

Transhumanism: The Most Dangerous Idea? 
Ronald Bailey 
http://www.reason.com/rb/rb082504.shtml 



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




From jpnitya at verizon.net  Thu Aug 26 19:22:51 2004
From: jpnitya at verizon.net (Joao Magalhaes)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:22:51 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] [fwd] Werner's Syndrome Mice
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040826140533.01b173a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040826140533.01b173a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040826151303.01cae6a0@incoming.verizon.net>

Hi,

I've read the paper and these animals do not display such a marked 
accelerated aging phenotype as do human patients with WS. Therefore, the 
possibility exists that Werner Syndrome mice suffer from accelerated 
pathology rather than accelerated aging, a bit like it appears to happen in 
the Lamin A mutant mice. The reference for the LMNA mutants:

Nikolova V, et al (2004) Defects in nuclear structure and function promote 
dilated cardiomyopathy in lamin A/C-deficient mice. J Clin Invest 113:357-69.

Actually, WRN appears to interact with at least 17 other proteins 
(http://genomics.senescence.info/genes/entry.php?id=13). On the issue of 
protein interactions and aging, there was a fun paper by Daniel Promislow 
arguing that proteins more likely to be involved in aging are the ones with 
the higher connectivity--that is, with the higher number of protein-protein 
interactions. The reference is:

Promislow DE. Protein networks, pleiotropy and the evolution of senescence. 
Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004 Jun 22;271(1545):1225-34.

His ideas are a good complement to my own recent paper:

de Magalh?es, JP and Toussaint, O (2004) "GenAge: a genomic and proteomic 
network map of human ageing." FEBS Letters 571(1-3):243-247.

Lastly, those of you interested in telomeres and telomerase as a way to 
delay aging may be interested in another recent paper of mine:

de Magalh?es, JP and Toussaint, O (2004) "Telomeres and telomerase: a 
modern Fountain of Youth?" Rejuvenation Research 7:126-132.

All the best,

Joao


---

Joao Pedro de Magalhaes, PhD

Harvard Medical School, Dept. of Genetics
Avenue Louis Pasteur, 77, Room 238
Boston, MA 02115
Telephone: 1-617-432-6550

http://www.senescence.info 



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 26 20:32:05 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:32:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] "The Most Dangerous Idea"  (that is us)
In-Reply-To: <151560-22004842619152101@M2W066.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20040826203205.88375.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

"First they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win, and they
say they knew you were right all along."

Sounds like transhumanism is solidly out of the kook phase of
development.

--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Friends,
> 
> I just read this on the ExtroBritannia list and wanted to forward it
> to you
> all:
> 
> "'What ideas, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the 
> welfare of humanity?' That question was posed to eight prominent 
> policy intellectuals by the editors of Foreign Policy in its 
> September/October issue (not yet available online). One of the eight 
> savants consulted was Francis Fukuyama, professor of international 
> political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International 
> Studies, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the 
> Biotechnology Revolution, and a member of the President's Council on 
> Bioethics. His choice for the world's most dangerous idea? 
> Transhumanism."
> 
> Transhumanism: The Most Dangerous Idea? 
> Ronald Bailey 
> http://www.reason.com/rb/rb082504.shtml 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> 


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Aug 27 00:03:08 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:33:08 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] "The Most Dangerous Idea" (that is us)
In-Reply-To: <151560-22004842619152101@M2W066.mail2web.com>
References: <151560-22004842619152101@M2W066.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04082617035288c91d@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:15:02 -0400, natashavita at earthlink.net
<natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Friends,
> 
> I just read this on the ExtroBritannia list and wanted to forward it to you
> all:
> 
> "'What ideas, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the
> welfare of humanity?' That question was posed to eight prominent
> policy intellectuals by the editors of Foreign Policy in its
> September/October issue (not yet available online). One of the eight
> savants consulted was Francis Fukuyama, professor of international
> political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
> Studies, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the
> Biotechnology Revolution, and a member of the President's Council on
> Bioethics. His choice for the world's most dangerous idea?
> Transhumanism."
> 
> Transhumanism: The Most Dangerous Idea?
> Ronald Bailey
> http://www.reason.com/rb/rb082504.shtml
> 

woohoo!

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From sjatkins at gmail.com  Fri Aug 27 07:04:49 2004
From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:04:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <00da01c48b04$f2c9ad90$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY><DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield><5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield><03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield>
	<00da01c48b04$f2c9ad90$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <948b11e040827000447544006@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:38:04 +1000, Brett Paatsch
<bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:
> >
> > > When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting resolution
> > > 1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that he
> > > alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the UN
> > > Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization
> > > (a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
> > > better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of the
> > > US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a timetable
> > > and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and
> > > invade.
> >
> > How would a more capable President have handled the situation?
> 
> He'd have threatened to revoke the Charter and withdraw the US
> from the UN in the media if Chirac of France did not come up
> with a general standard for determining when the UN Security Council
> should go to war. The security council has to be willing to go to war
> sometimes or their can be no peace. At a critical point Chirac
> of France was saying that France would "never, never" go to war.
>

Nonsense! Hypocrisy! One nation's head must come up with when to go to
war and if he doesn't we simply withdraw altogether?   Isn't this
ignoring the 60-odd very strong resolutions against the behavior of
Israel whom we support nearly without reservation and never call for a
war against?   There was no good evidence for war worthy breaking of
UN weapsons resolution in Iraq.  So France and other countries quite
rightly held back.  We went ahead anyway and made fools of ourselves
to say the least.
 
> Had Saddam had weapons of mass destruction Chiracs position would
> have given him confidence that the UN would not and could not invade
> because the French President would not make the necessary call and
> as a permanent security council member could veto and resolution that
> would have required force.
>

You mean like we have vetoed any action against Israel for all these
many long years?   Besides you are setting up a hypothetical that is
pure supposition.
 
> 
> If Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction it would not have been
> invaded but the UN would have had a standard to use for go-to-war
> don't-go-to-war decisions in the future.
>

A standard is a reasonable thing but I don't see it was Chirac who was
principally in the way of one or that we should have withdrawn if
Chirac did not come up with one.
 
> In a world where terrorists could have weapons of mass distruction
> it is not unreasonable that the sovereignty of countries be put aside
> provided that it is done in the right way. There is not currently a
> workable right way. Bush could have made it so that there was
> - but instead he chose a wrong way.
> 

In a world where the down-trodden may use terrorism I would advise
being damn careful about invading people's homeland on suspicion.    I
would also advise being careful about bullying various peoples. 
Impunity is harder to come by.   Of course this advice will be
considered being "soft on terrorism".  More "realistic" folks will
instead turn the world into an armed camp and throw away their
freedoms to stop those insane terrorists who "hate us because we are
good".


> > The only alternative I can see was standing down the troops and
> > letting the sanctions collapse.

The sanctions had been outrageous for a long time.  Largely they
should have been dropped long ago.

> 
> The charter makes it unlawful to invade sovereign countries (except
> in self defence - eg Afghanistan) or with security council approval
> which would come in the form of a resolution.
>

Afghanistan was not self-defense.  
 
> 1441 was the unanimous resolution that threaten "serious consequence"
> on Iraq if it did not comply with previous resolutions and did not show
> that it did not posses weapons of mass destruction.
>

It seems to me it did its best to prove a negative.   We didn't really
give a shit about WMD to start with of course.  We were bound and
determined to go in.

 
> 
> Because the security council gave Iraq one "final opportunity" and
> because it was "seized of the matter" only the security council
> could determine when the "final opportunity" was over.
> 
> The security council never made such a determination because
> Bush was not willing to go back to it to loose his legalistic pretext.
> 
> To have done so would have made it clear to the whole world
> (if it wasn't already) that the UN security council did not think
> the use of force at that time was warranted - inspections were
> still going on etc.
>

Yep.
 
> The UK, Spain and the US had prepared another resolution
> that effectively said only that the "final opportunity" granted
> Iraq under 1441 was up. But they never tabled the resolution
> to be voted on because it was clear that it would not have
> gotten up and in failing to get up the PR battle would be
> lost.
> 
> So Bush and the coalition of the willing invaded before
> the security council had deemed Iraq's final opportunity
> over. That was clear cut illegal. And as it turned out
> Iraq didn't have the weapons.
> 
> The tradgedy is that the concerns over weapons were
> not unreasonable and the criticisms made of the UN
> were not unreasonable - there can be no peace under
> the United Nations if the United Nations Security Council
> would not enforce it - but it was within the range of
> Bush's possible diplomatic moves to make the UN
> security council live up to its mandate - he either just
> didn't see the move (to challenge Chirac to produce a
> standard or he would deem the UN Charter revoked)
> - or he didn't want to see it - he wanted to invade Iraq
> whether it had weapons or not.
> 

Using this would have made us look very foolish after all the times we
have backed down regarding Israel.

- samantha


From pgptag at gmail.com  Fri Aug 27 07:54:01 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:54:01 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] "The Most Dangerous Idea" (that is us)
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04082617035288c91d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <JDEOJKPFAFBENABJDLIPIEBPCBAA.pgptag@gmail.com>

Fukuyama calling us a "greatest threat" is definitely a positive thing: our
enemies are acknowledging that we are strong and may well become stronger
than them in the long run.
Lets prove Fukuyama is right.
G.

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Emlyn
Sent: viernes, 27 de agosto de 2004 2:03
To: natashavita at earthlink.net; ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] "The Most Dangerous Idea" (that is us)


On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:15:02 -0400, natashavita at earthlink.net
<natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I just read this on the ExtroBritannia list and wanted to forward it to
you
> all:
>
> "'What ideas, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the
> welfare of humanity?' That question was posed to eight prominent
> policy intellectuals by the editors of Foreign Policy in its
> September/October issue (not yet available online). One of the eight
> savants consulted was Francis Fukuyama, professor of international
> political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
> Studies, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the
> Biotechnology Revolution, and a member of the President's Council on
> Bioethics. His choice for the world's most dangerous idea?
> Transhumanism."
>
> Transhumanism: The Most Dangerous Idea?
> Ronald Bailey
> http://www.reason.com/rb/rb082504.shtml
>

woohoo!

--
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.719 / Virus Database: 475 - Release Date: 12/07/2004

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.719 / Virus Database: 475 - Release Date: 12/07/2004



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Aug 27 09:02:50 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 19:02:50 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <008101c485aa$6092bb60$6401a8c0@SHELLY><DBC6B696-F47F-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093218003.1041.35.camel@Renfield><5313AD83-F59A-11D8-B115-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><1093361549.1036.42.camel@Renfield><03e801c48a30$a8c91430$362c2dcb@homepc><1093391024.1036.85.camel@Renfield><00da01c48b04$f2c9ad90$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<948b11e040827000447544006@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <017b01c48c14$a1911150$362c2dcb@homepc>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

> > > How would a more capable President have handled the
> > > situation?
> >
> > He'd have threatened to revoke the Charter and withdraw
> > the US from the UN in the media if Chirac of France did not
> > come up with a general standard for determining when the UN
> > Security Council should go to war. The security council has to
> > be willing to go to war sometimes or there can be no peace. At
> > a critical point Chirac of France was saying that France would
> >  "never, never" go to war.
> >
>
> Nonsense! Hypocrisy! One nation's head must come up with when to
> go to war and if he doesn't we simply withdraw altogether?

Yes (to answer your question).

But not just any one nation's head of state - it had to be Chirac of France
in particular that was challenged to come up with a standard because
Chirac of France in particular was in the world media and heading the
country most likely to veto the formulation of an effective resolution
BECAUSE in no small part Chirac (like Bush) had his own domestic
constituency to deal with - many of whom wanted war no more than
you did.

It is VERY reasonable to want to avoid war if possible - but sometimes
it isn't possible (for the simple reason that our choices don't remove the
choices of others to see us as their prey) and so some capacity for it
must be maintained - for a leader to do less is to be irresponsible in the
face of history, and not just human history, but all of natural history.
Nature does not favour peace. Evolution has no preference for it. Peace
is precious precisely because it is must be painstakingly won against
enormous logistical difficulties and odds.

The US President (whoever happened to be in the role) had and has a
first duty to his own citizens and to their safety. That is not spin.

September 11 showed the world a new type of sophisticated
organised terrorist.  It would have been irresponsible of Bush (or any
President) not to consider what such terrorists might do should they get
hold of weapons of mass destruction.

The whole purpose of the UN Charter is to maintain international peace
and security.  Take a look at article 1. Google the United Nations.

Having a permanent security council member that would not go to
war under ANY circumstances (which was what Chirac was at least
pretending his position to be) is utterly incompatible with the founding
purpose of the UN.  Had Bush called Chirac on this - Chirac would
have had to step back from his rhetoric which was almost certainly not
his final position but rather diplomatic positioning designed to counter
balance Bush's pretended or real statements implying eagerness for
war with Saddam (a valid brinksmanship tactic).

Bush could not make the UN non-farcical if Chirac or others wanted
it to be farcical - but he could refuse to participate in the farce, if
Chirac did not come up with a standard. And that would have
been an option that 'the world' could have respected as honorable.

No agreement is binding when the bad faith of one of the parties is
absolutely manifest. Thats why Bush should have challenge Chirac
in front of the media.

People in all legal jurisdictions get that basic principle. It's almost
pre-law and straight logic.

> Isn't this
> ignoring the 60-odd very strong resolutions against the behavior of
> Israel whom we support nearly without reservation and never call for a
> war against?   There was no good evidence for war worthy breaking of
> UN weapsons resolution in Iraq.  So France and other countries quite
> rightly held back.  We went ahead anyway and made fools of ourselves
> to say the least.

No. I think you misunderstand the UN Charter in a way that it is most
commonly misunderstood. You seem to think that it is a more
comprehensive tool that it is, or that it realistically could be yet. That's
a pity. I am pretty sure that no UN resolutions were made against Israel
because the US veto'd them from being made.  Veto'ing a resolution
from being made is different (and valid) from disregarding it when it has
been made (as was the case with 1441 by the US and the UK).

The UN security council is a very blunt instrument. It is incapable of
delivering the sort of fine grained justice that many westerners may think
their morality requires. It had to be minimalistic and to not get too
involved
in domestic matters to be able to be agreed to at all within its historical
period by the war powers.

Whenever one or more of the big 5 objected to a course - say the US
did not want to see a resolution passed against Israel then it would stop
a resolution being MADE. That is a different matter to having one
made and then breaking it.

In a way, the Bush administration showed almost world historical levels
of good faith (perhaps because of pressure/influence from Powel or Blair
or perhaps because Bush wanted to do what he saw as the right thing
- I don't know) in going to the UN security council about Iraq. And in
placing the matter of Iraq in the hands of the security council. That was
almost the first time that a power gave the UN a real chance to do its
job.  It was almost the UNs first chance. For the first time China and
Russia were not going to be reflexively obstructionist.

September 11 had endowed the US with enormous goodwill and China
and Russia were looking for good relations with the US for economic
reasons.

> > Had Saddam had weapons of mass destruction Chiracs position would
> > have given him confidence that the UN would not and could not invade
> > because the French President would not make the necessary call and
> > as a permanent security council member could veto and resolution that
> > would have required force.
> >
>
> You mean like we have vetoed any action against Israel for all these
> many long years?   Besides you are setting up a hypothetical that is
> pure supposition.

Yes the US did veto resolutions against Israel. The US acted to support
Israel. I am no expert in the history of the UN, but I think that Israel
probably warranted US support on many if not all of those vetos.

Israel for much of its history has been a country surrounded by enemies
and left to fend for itself with its own resources.

> > If Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction it would not have been
> > invaded but the UN would have had a standard to use for go-to-war
> > don't-go-to-war decisions in the future.
> >
>
> A standard is a reasonable thing but I don't see it was Chirac who was
> principally in the way of one or that we should have withdrawn if
> Chirac did not come up with one.

A standard would quite possibly have been a world changing civilization
enhancing thing. Imagine a world where the UN would go to war and the
US did not have to shoulder the entire burden.

> > In a world where terrorists could have weapons of mass distruction
> > it is not unreasonable that the sovereignty of countries be put aside
> > provided that it is done in the right way. There is not currently a
> > workable right way. Bush could have made it so that there was
> > - but instead he chose a wrong way.
> >
>
> In a world where the down-trodden may use terrorism I would advise
> being damn careful about invading people's homeland on suspicion.

The doctrine of preemption is self defeating when practices by a single
nation as it makes even that nations allies nervous.

> I  would also advise being careful about bullying various peoples.
> Impunity is harder to come by.   Of course this advice will be
> considered being "soft on terrorism".  More "realistic" folks will
> instead turn the world into an armed camp and throw away their
> freedoms to stop those insane terrorists who "hate us because we are
> good".

Samantha, where is your responsibility in this? Do you or do you
not accept that to have peace one has to be willing to fight for it
sometimes?

> > > The only alternative I can see was standing down the troops and
> > > letting the sanctions collapse.
>
> The sanctions had been outrageous for a long time.  Largely they
> should have been dropped long ago.
>
> >
> > The charter makes it unlawful to invade sovereign countries (except
> > in self defence - eg Afghanistan) or with security council approval
> > which would come in the form of a resolution.
> >
>
> Afghanistan was not self-defense.

Yes it was.

> > 1441 was the unanimous resolution that threaten "serious consequence"
> > on Iraq if it did not comply with previous resolutions and did not show
> > that it did not posses weapons of mass destruction.
> >
>
> It seems to me it did its best to prove a negative.   We didn't really
> give a shit about WMD to start with of course.  We were bound and
> determined to go in.

Whose we?  I cared.

> >
> > Because the security council gave Iraq one "final opportunity" and
> > because it was "seized of the matter" only the security council
> > could determine when the "final opportunity" was over.
> >
> > The security council never made such a determination because
> > Bush was not willing to go back to it to loose his legalistic pretext.
> >
> > To have done so would have made it clear to the whole world
> > (if it wasn't already) that the UN security council did not think
> > the use of force at that time was warranted - inspections were
> > still going on etc.
> >
>
> Yep.
>
> > The UK, Spain and the US had prepared another resolution
> > that effectively said only that the "final opportunity" granted
> > Iraq under 1441 was up. But they never tabled the resolution
> > to be voted on because it was clear that it would not have
> > gotten up and in failing to get up the PR battle would be
> > lost.
> >
> > So Bush and the coalition of the willing invaded before
> > the security council had deemed Iraq's final opportunity
> > over. That was clear cut illegal. And as it turned out
> > Iraq didn't have the weapons.
> >
> > The tradgedy is that the concerns over weapons were
> > not unreasonable and the criticisms made of the UN
> > were not unreasonable - there can be no peace under
> > the United Nations if the United Nations Security Council
> > would not enforce it - but it was within the range of
> > Bush's possible diplomatic moves to make the UN
> > security council live up to its mandate - he either just
> > didn't see the move (to challenge Chirac to produce a
> > standard or he would deem the UN Charter revoked)
> > - or he didn't want to see it - he wanted to invade Iraq
> > whether it had weapons or not.
> >
>
> Using this would have made us look very foolish after all the
> times we have backed down regarding Israel.

Foolish to whom?

Brett Paatsch




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 27 15:30:06 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <948b11e040827000447544006@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040827153006.36508.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:38:04 +1000, Brett Paatsch
> <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > Stephen J. Van Sickle wrote:
> > >
> > > > When Bush bungled the handling of the UN after getting
> resolution
> > > > 1441 agreed to unanimously and invaded Iraq on a timetable that
> he
> > > > alone was setting and against resolution 1441 and against the
> UN
> > > > Charter he squandered an opportunity to strengthen civilization
> > > > (a more capable President could have handled the UN situation
> > > > better and made the UN a better institution in the interests of
> the
> > > > US and of the rest of the world) instead, working to a
> timetable
> > > > and/or an agenda of his own, he decided to just go ahead and
> > > > invade.
> > >
> > > How would a more capable President have handled the situation?
> > 
> > He'd have threatened to revoke the Charter and withdraw the US
> > from the UN in the media if Chirac of France did not come up
> > with a general standard for determining when the UN Security
> Council
> > should go to war. The security council has to be willing to go to
> war
> > sometimes or their can be no peace. At a critical point Chirac
> > of France was saying that France would "never, never" go to war.
> >
> 
> Nonsense! Hypocrisy! One nation's head must come up with when to go
> to
> war and if he doesn't we simply withdraw altogether?   Isn't this
> ignoring the 60-odd very strong resolutions against the behavior of
> Israel whom we support nearly without reservation and never call for
> a war against?  There was no good evidence for war worthy breaking of
> UN weapsons resolution in Iraq.  So France and other countries quite
> rightly held back.  We went ahead anyway and made fools of ourselves
> to say the least.

This is just not true. France, at the time, was convinced there was WMD
at the time, and said so. They opposed the US only because they believe
there needs to be a 'counterbalance' to the US. Since the only real
counterbalance to the US today seems to be radical islamists, their
statement is clearly one of alliance.

>  
> > Had Saddam had weapons of mass destruction Chiracs position would
> > have given him confidence that the UN would not and could not
> invade
> > because the French President would not make the necessary call and
> > as a permanent security council member could veto and resolution
> that
> > would have required force.
> >
> 
> You mean like we have vetoed any action against Israel for all these
> many long years?   Besides you are setting up a hypothetical that is
> pure supposition.

Just as we vetoed actions sponsored by the Soviet Union (oh, btw, they
were the sponsor of those resolutions.... yuk yuk)....

>    
> > In a world where terrorists could have weapons of mass distruction
> > it is not unreasonable that the sovereignty of countries be put
> aside
> > provided that it is done in the right way. There is not currently a
> > workable right way. Bush could have made it so that there was
> > - but instead he chose a wrong way.
> > 
> 
> In a world where the down-trodden may use terrorism I would advise
> being damn careful about invading people's homeland on suspicion.   
> I would also advise being careful about bullying various peoples. 
> Impunity is harder to come by.   Of course this advice will be
> considered being "soft on terrorism".  More "realistic" folks will
> instead turn the world into an armed camp and throw away their
> freedoms to stop those insane terrorists who "hate us because we are
> good".

If the down-trodden kept to themselves and actually attacked the
governments who are actually trodding them down, i.e. fascist muslim
governments, I could see your logic. But they don't.


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 27 15:47:50 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 08:47:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <017b01c48c14$a1911150$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040827154750.32038.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> But not just any one nation's head of state - it had to be Chirac of
> France
> in particular that was challenged to come up with a standard because
> Chirac of France in particular was in the world media and heading the
> country most likely to veto the formulation of an effective
> resolution
> BECAUSE in no small part Chirac (like Bush) had his own domestic
> constituency to deal with - many of whom wanted war no more than
> you did.

So what you are saying, then, is since Chirac said that France would
"never, never" vote for the UN to go to war that the UN is therefore
without any teeth, and international law no longer exists on a de facto basis????

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 27 16:21:40 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:21:40 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Any Subscribers to Foreign Policy?
Message-ID: <189360-220048527162140838@M2W088.mail2web.com>

Hi Frank,

I had posted this yesterday, but thank you for staying on top of such 
important things!

Natasha

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Premise Checker checker at panix.com
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:40:29 -0400 (EDT)
To: natashavita at earthlink.net, wta-talk at transhumanism.org,
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org, ART-tac at groups1.vip.scd.yahoo.com,
exi-la at lists.extropy.org, la-futurists at groups1.vip.scd.yahoo.com,
amara at kurzweilai.net
Subject: Any Subscribers to Foreign Policy?


Frank Forman here:

Was: Re: [wta-talk] "The Most Dangerous Idea"  (that is us)

Jose bought the issue and showed it to us a dinner we hosted for him last 
night in DC. I used to subscribe, so I can get the articles online. But if 
some subscriber here would please post them, we'd all be grateful!

On 2004-08-26, natashavita at earthlink.net opined [message unchanged below]:

> Friends,
>
> I just read this on the ExtroBritannia list and wanted to forward it to
you
> all:
>
> "'What ideas, if embraced, would pose the greatest threat to the
> welfare of humanity?' That question was posed to eight prominent
> policy intellectuals by the editors of Foreign Policy in its
> September/October issue (not yet available online). One of the eight
> savants consulted was Francis Fukuyama, professor of international
> political economy at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
> Studies, author of Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the
> Biotechnology Revolution, and a member of the President's Council on
> Bioethics. His choice for the world's most dangerous idea?
> Transhumanism."
>
> Transhumanism: The Most Dangerous Idea?
> Ronald Bailey
> http://www.reason.com/rb/rb082504.shtml

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




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Aug 27 19:13:30 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 15:13:30 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Doctors grow new jaw in man's back
Message-ID: <242460-220048527191330701@M2W096.mail2web.com>

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/08/27/jaw.transplant.ap/index.html

CNN headlines story of using human body to host the growth of new bone
mass. This type of medical innovation is marvelous.

This story is particularly facsinating to me.  When I was 11 years old, I
had to have 1/2 of my jaw removed due to a tumor that was growing quite
rapidly within my facial bone structure.  I had plastic surgery and within
a few years, my jaw grew back because of my age and the fact that I was
pre-puberty and still growing.

Natasha

Natasha



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




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 27 19:21:34 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:21:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <20040827154750.32038.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040827192134.67254.qmail@web60509.mail.yahoo.com>

> So what you are saying, then, is since Chirac said
> that France would
> "never, never" vote for the UN to go to war that the
> UN is therefore
> without any teeth, and international law no longer
> exists on a de facto basis????

Nah, I interperate this to mean that the last French
head of state that had any testicular fortitude was
Napolean Bonaparte and he was a megalomaniac. Since 
WW-II seems to indicate that France won't even go to
war to defend themselves against invasion, I have to
question WHY they are on the U.N. Security Council to
begin with. I mean isn't this a little bit like hiring
a hari-krishna to be your body guard? I like the U.N.,
I support its mission, but I think it definately needs
to "clean house".
   

=====
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!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 28 00:26:29 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:26:29 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <20040827154750.32038.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01a501c48c95$a9c59310$362c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > 
> > But not just any one nation's head of state - it had to be
> > Chirac of France in particular that was challenged to come
> > up with a standard because Chirac of France in particular
> > was in the world media and heading the country most likely
> > to veto the formulation of an effective resolution BECAUSE
> > in no small part Chirac (like Bush) had his own domestic
> > constituency to deal with - many of whom wanted war no 
> > more than you did.
> 
> So what you are saying, then, is since Chirac said that France
> would "never, never" vote for the UN to go to war that the UN
> is therefore without any teeth, and international law no longer
> exists on a de facto basis????

No. Your missing an important bit of what I am saying. 

I think perhaps you are too keen to hang this on France ;-).
Whereas I hang the failure on Bush's diplomatic skills.  

I am saying that that "never, never" statement by Chirac in the 
world's media constituted a diplomatic negotiating opportunity
for Bush (had he been alert enough and in good faith enough to
grasp it) to force Chirac to either BECOME practical or to 
SHOW the world that his manifest impracticality and irresponsibilty
left Bush with no choice other than to withdraw from the United
Nations as it could not possibly fulfill its mandate of maintaining
international peace and security. There is no way to remove a 
permanent security council member.
 
Chirac's "never, never" statement constituted an OPPORTUNITY
for Bush to give Chirac a diplomatic ultimatum in front of the
worlds media, to come up with a practical standard (heck Bush
could have even put a time limit of say two weeks on Chirac to
coming up with that standard) and that if Chirac had THEN and only
THEN conspicuously refused then it would be clear to the world that
Bush would have no practical choice himself but to find that the 
French position was such that the UN could not possibly fulfill its
mandate to maintain internation peace and security in the face of 
the new threat to it constituted by terrorists with WMD's. 

I cannot hang the failure on Chirac Mike, because Chirac like
Bush was having to use the media and Chirac had less freedom
to move diplomatically and to propose options to Bush that Bush
would have had to give a fair hearing too then Bush could to
Chirac.  

Chirac always had to deal with the POSSIBILITY that the militarily 
powerful US President was not really operating in good faith. Or 
that he was not going to strike a reasonable balance. As a permanent
security council member head Chirac did have a responsibility to
counterbalance an over-exuberance to go to war too readily on the
part of the US President. 

On the other hand Bush, because he had the military in position
and 1441 was unanimously signed off, had more than enough time
to show that Chirac was being impractical and irresponsible if he
was. 

I suspect had Bush called out Chirac to come up with a standard
that Chirac would have done so and there would have be political 
credit in it for both of them. 

Together they'd have given the UN real teeth. Bush would have
lost some slight freedom of movement in exchange for legitimacy.

But, although I did not like Chirac's "never, never" statement,
on balance I think Chirac did the right thing in adopting the
negotiating stance he did. Chirac had to hold a strong line of 
restrain against an overwillingness to use  military force war to
balance Bush's media projected 'enthusiasm' for using it against
Saddam. 

Chirac had to try to bring Bush to the table properly using the
media. Chirac had no other tool to use and his own population
(quite rightly) would not have let him just toady to Bush. 

Because Bush had the options and the freedom to move and
to tease out the weaknesses in Chirac's stated position and to
develop it into something workable, (whereas Chirac did not), 
the diplomatic failure and the failure of the UN goes, in my 
opinion to Bush.

Brett Paatsch



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 28 00:49:13 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:49:13 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <20040827192134.67254.qmail@web60509.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01af01c48c98$d6dcd1d0$362c2dcb@homepc>


"The Avantguardian" wrote:

> > So what you are saying, then, is since Chirac said
> > that France would
> > "never, never" vote for the UN to go to war that the
> > UN is therefore
> > without any teeth, and international law no longer
> > exists on a de facto basis????
> 
> Nah, I interperate this to mean that the last French
> head of state that had any testicular fortitude was
> Napolean Bonaparte and he was a megalomaniac.

:-)

> Since WW-II seems to indicate that France won't even
> go to war to defend themselves against invasion, I have to
> question WHY they are on the U.N. Security Council to
> begin with. 

They had a thing called the Marginot line, which I understand
the unobliging German's went around rather than over. Rommel and
his blitzcreiging panzers did meet French resistance but the French
were prepared to fight the last war (trenches) not the then current
one. 

The French fought. And there was a resistance. They were a war
power. 

If you going to have an international law body dedicated to maintaining
international peace and security you can't have a cast of thousands on
it or it wouldn't work. It would take too long to make decisions. 
 
To be legitimate (in the eyes of most people in the world)
it needs to represent most people in the world. 

Its like the no taxation without representation thing. 

If your going to have 5 permanent security council members I think
you have to have the US, China and Russia's power and populations
give then a place, and the last two could be any number of countries
but the UK and France are as good as any other so far as I can see.

If I was planning to build a UN that was good for the US I'd be pleased
to have the UK and France on it. They have a lot in common with
the US. It is unlikely that another representative UN would suit the US
so well. 

>I mean isn't this a little bit like hiring
> a hari-krishna to be your body guard? 

Could be.  

>I like the U.N.,
> I support its mission, but I think it definately needs
> to "clean house".

It's a club. A club of nations. Only the club members
can fix it and like in any club some members have more
influence than others. The big 5 have a lot of influence
but no one has more influence than the USA.

At this point in history the USA can make or break the
UN. But what worries me is that to make it work requires 
enlightened self interest on the part of the US over the long
term wheras the US like most liberal democracies is only
used to thinking ahead in 4 year terms. 

The people that have the most power to fix the UN are US
citizens but they are unlikely to see it as something that it is
worth their while to attend to, let alone fix. International law
is just not something most people (US voters) minds seem
to stretch too. 

Brett Paatsch




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 04:28:46 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:28:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <01a501c48c95$a9c59310$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040828042846.33617.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> Chirac always had to deal with the POSSIBILITY that the militarily 
> powerful US President was not really operating in good faith. Or 
> that he was not going to strike a reasonable balance. As a permanent
> security council member head Chirac did have a responsibility to
> counterbalance an over-exuberance to go to war too readily on the
> part of the US President. 

What about the possibility that the US became overexuberant in order to
counterbalance Chirac's obstructionism?

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. 
http://messenger.yahoo.com


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sat Aug 28 04:33:02 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:33:02 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <01af01c48c98$d6dcd1d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <20040827192134.67254.qmail@web60509.mail.yahoo.com>
	<01af01c48c98$d6dcd1d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <5919C90E-F8AB-11D8-AF0B-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 27, 2004, at 5:49 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> If your going to have 5 permanent security council members I think
> you have to have the US, China and Russia's power and populations
> give then a place, and the last two could be any number of countries
> but the UK and France are as good as any other so far as I can see.


I think one could make a reasonable argument that one of the permanent 
European countries should be replaced by Japan, which has a military, 
economy, and population that is at least as large or larger than any of 
them.  But there is the problem of appearances.

France, for all intents and purposes, has been reduced to a bit player 
on the world scene.  They use to have a sizable global footprint with 
their intelligence services, covert operations, etc but that has 
deteriorated markedly.  The French military has negligible ability to 
project force outside their borders.  They have about as much right to 
be in the security council as a country like India.  The problem is 
that removing them would leave the UK as the only permanent member from 
Europe.

France acts as a proxy in the security council for western mainland 
Europe, which some would argue is useful, even if the countries they 
represent are somewhat impotent.  The UK is the only European country 
with substantial military projection capability, but because they align 
so closely with the US the mainland Europeans would not be happy with 
them as the only European voice in the security council.

Part of the problem is that the "security council" has more to do with 
politics than security.  They want equality of voice rather than the 
more sensible equitable voice based on their ability to effect and 
affect security.  Asia has some heavy weights that are comparable to 
western Europe yet they are mostly ignored.

Perhaps a three-tier structure would be more appropriate, with one or 
two rotating seats shared by a small number of countries in a middle 
tier:

Permanent: US, Russia, UK, maybe China
Rotating: France, Japan, India, maybe China
And then everyone else


I would restrict the permanent positions to those countries that 
actually have the ability (and are frequently asked) to do the dirty 
work.  Only the US, UK, and Russia have the military infrastructure to 
do global force projection, and as a result they are frequently the 
only countries to do so on any significant basis when it is mandated 
for "security" purposes.  The Rotating countries are geopolitically 
very important, but are unable to project power outside of their 
continental sphere as a general rule.  Japan is a strange case in that 
they are both very potent geopolitically and yet find much of their 
influence in the west rather than Asia -- they have few friends in 
Asia.

cheers,

j. andrew rogers






From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 04:42:21 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:42:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <01af01c48c98$d6dcd1d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040828044221.86559.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:


> The French fought. And there was a resistance. They were a war
> power. 

The French Resistance primarily fought itself, betraying partisans of
opposing political fealties to the Germans at every opportunity. The
French resisted Germany NO MORE than Poland did, and the exiled armed
forces of the two nations shared a beach at Normandy. I say we toss
France and add Poland to the Security Council. France has had it for 50
years, it's Poland's turn.

Oh, and btw, there IS a way to remove a Security Council member. We've
done it once already, when in the early 70's Taiwan was removed and
Communist China was added. Until that time, the Nationalists had held
that SC seat.

> 
> If you going to have an international law body dedicated to
> maintaining
> international peace and security you can't have a cast of thousands
> on it or it wouldn't work. It would take too long to make decisions. 
>  
> To be legitimate (in the eyes of most people in the world)
> it needs to represent most people in the world.

The spanish speaking people of the world are unrepresented on the SC.
How about Spain, or Argentina, or Mexico? The african people of the
world are similarly unrepresented, how about South Africa. India has a
billion people, why is China on the SC and not India? The muslim people
of the world are 800 million strong. Why isn't Saudi Arabia or Turkey
on the SC?
 
> 
> Its like the no taxation without representation thing.

So sorry, but I don't recall ever being permitted to vote for a single
member of the UN General Assembly or the Security Council. Could you
please post an election schedule?

The UN does not represent mankind. It represents a club of legal
fictions intent on perpetuating their power over mankind. It is
therefore an anti-human institution and therefore an anti-transhuman institution.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 28 05:13:04 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 15:13:04 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <20040828042846.33617.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01e501c48cbd$b2b85930$362c2dcb@homepc>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense


>
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > Chirac always had to deal with the POSSIBILITY that the militarily
> > powerful US President was not really operating in good faith. Or
> > that he was not going to strike a reasonable balance. As a permanent
> > security council member head Chirac did have a responsibility to
> > counterbalance an over-exuberance to go to war too readily on the
> > part of the US President.
>
> What about the possibility that the US became overexuberant in order to
> counterbalance Chirac's obstructionism?

I think I've shown how Bush could have used the media attention to
expose Chirac's obstructionism (if that was all it was -we have no way to
know now) by calling for a standard. Revealing Chirac as an obstructionist
would have been an outcome of that strategy if Chirac had not come up
with a standard.

Mike, people in any country can make mistakes. Chirac can, Bush can,
I can, you can. At the highest levels, at the head of state levels, the
people
that have to make judgement calls are still just people.

"My-country-right-or-wrong", as a policy, ends up hurting both those that
hold it, and their country.

C'mon Mike, get with the program. A part cannuck cannot really despise
*all* things French.  ;-)

Brett Paatsch







From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Sat Aug 28 06:14:45 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 23:14:45 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Restructuring the UN [was urban sprawl as defense]
References: <20040828044221.86559.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <413022D5.CF98CE52@mindspring.com>

Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> > The French fought. And there was a resistance. They were a war
> > power.
> 
> The French Resistance primarily fought itself, betraying partisans of
> opposing political fealties to the Germans at every opportunity. The
> French resisted Germany NO MORE than Poland did, and the exiled armed
> forces of the two nations shared a beach at Normandy. I say we toss
> France and add Poland to the Security Council. France has had it for 50
> years, it's Poland's turn.
> 
> Oh, and btw, there IS a way to remove a Security Council member. We've
> done it once already, when in the early 70's Taiwan was removed and
> Communist China was added. Until that time, the Nationalists had held
> that SC seat.

Bill Hanne, my old geography teacher, spoke of reorganizing the UN security
council to reflect a two-tier system of permanent and rotating members.  I
vote for removing France as an anachronism of de Gaulle's delusions of
grandeur. 

> > If you going to have an international law body dedicated to
> > maintaining
> > international peace and security you can't have a cast of thousands
> > on it or it wouldn't work. It would take too long to make decisions.
> >
> > To be legitimate (in the eyes of most people in the world)
> > it needs to represent most people in the world.
> 
> The spanish speaking people of the world are unrepresented on the SC.
> How about Spain, or Argentina, or Mexico? The african people of the
> world are similarly unrepresented, how about South Africa. India has a
> billion people, why is China on the SC and not India? The muslim people
> of the world are 800 million strong. Why isn't Saudi Arabia or Turkey
> on the SC?

Agreed to include Brazil, India, and Japan and perhaps South Africa.  This
would reflect more than the good ole boy's club we now have.
 
> > Its like the no taxation without representation thing.
> 
> So sorry, but I don't recall ever being permitted to vote for a single
> member of the UN General Assembly or the Security Council. Could you
> please post an election schedule?

Exactly, it's like too much taxation and too much representation.
 
> The UN does not represent mankind. It represents a club of legal
> fictions intent on perpetuating their power over mankind. It is
> therefore an anti-human institution and therefore an anti-transhuman institution.
> 
> =====
> Mike Lorrey
> Chairman, Free Town Land Development

Terry


The attached article seems very appropriate:


< http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/letter_from_america/ >

< http://www.wbur.org/inside/personality/detail6870.asp >

PEACE FOR OUR TIME by Alistair Cooke, BBC Broadcaster (he is ~95 years old)

About the author: In 1936, the NBC network invited Alistair Cooke to do a 
weekly broadcast of reflections on British life called London Letter. Cooke 
then emigrated to the United States in 1937, and asked the BBC to let him 
do the same thing in reverse. Eventually he succeeded, and 'Letter from 
America' is now the longest running radio broadcast in human history. In 
the process it has won a faithful worldwide audience of several million and 
many friends in high places. When Cooke was awarded an honorary knighthood 
in 1973, the Queen is reputed to have expressed bewildered admiration at 
his ability to sit down, week after week, and communicate so directly with 
his audience.

I promised to lay off topic A - Iraq - until the Security Council makes a 
judgment on the inspectors' report and I shall keep that promise. But I 
must tell you that throughout the past fortnight I've listened to everybody 
involved in or looking on to a monotonous din of words, like a tide 
crashing and receding on a beach - making a great noise and saying the same 
thing over and over. And this ordeal triggered a nightmare - a day-mare, if 
you like. Through the ceaseless tide I heard a voice, a very English voice 
of an old man - Prime Minister Chamberlain saying: "I believe it is peace 
for our time" - a sentence that prompted a huge cheer, first from a 
listening street crowd and then from the House of Commons and next day from 
every newspaper in the land. There was a move to urge that Mr Chamberlain 
should receive the Nobel Peace Prize. In Parliament there was one 
unfamiliar old grumbler to growl out: "I believe we have suffered a total 
and unmitigated defeat."

  He was, in view of the general sentiment, very properly booed down. This 
scene concluded in the autumn of 1938 the British prime minister's 
effectual signing away of most of Czechoslovakia to Hitler. The rest of it, 
within months, Hitler walked in and conquered. "Oh dear," said Mr 
Chamberlain, thunderstruck. "He has betrayed my trust."

During the last fortnight a simple but startling thought occurred to me 
--every single official, diplomat, president, prime minister involved in 
the Iraq debate was in 1938 a toddler, most of them unborn. So the dreadful 
scene I've just drawn will not have been remembered by most listeners. 
Hitler had started betraying our trust not 12 years but only two years 
before, when he broke the First World War peace treaty by occupying the 
demilitarised zone of the Rhineland. Only half his troops carried one 
reload of ammunition because Hitler knew that French morale was too low to 
confront any war just then and 10 million of 11 million British voters had 
signed a so-called peace ballot. It stated no conditions, elaborated no 
terms, it simply counted the numbers of Britons who were "for peace".

The slogan of this movement was "Against war and fascism" - chanted at the 
time by every Labour man and Liberal and many moderate Conservatives - a 
slogan that now sounds as imbecilic as "against hospitals and disease". In 
blunter words a majority of Britons would do anything, absolutely anything, 
to get rid of Hitler except fight him. At that time the word pre-emptive 
had not been invented, though today it's a catchword. After all the 
Rhineland was what it said it was - part of Germany. So to march in and 
throw Hitler out would have been pre-emptive - wouldn't it? Nobody did 
anything and Hitler looked forward with confidence to gobbling up the rest 
of Western Europe country by country - "course by course", as growler 
Churchill put it. I bring up Munich and the mid-30s because I was fully 
grown, on the verge of 30, and knew we were indeed living in the age of 
anxiety. And so many of the arguments mounted against each other today, in 
the last fortnight, are exactly what we heard in the House of Commons 
debates and read in the French press. The French especially urged, after 
every Hitler invasion, "negotiation, negotiation". They negotiated so 
successfully as to have their whole country defeated and occupied. But as 
one famous French leftist said: "We did anyway manage to make them declare 
Paris an open city - no bombs on us!"

In Britain the general response to every Hitler advance was disarmament and 
collective security. Collective security meant to leave every crisis to the 
League of Nations. It would put down aggressors, even though, like the 
United Nations, it had no army, navy or air force. The League of Nations 
had its chance to prove itself when Mussolini invaded and conquered 
Ethiopia (Abyssinia). The League didn't have any shot to fire. But still 
the cry was chanted in the House of Commons - the League and collective 
security is the only true guarantee of peace. But after the Rhineland the 
maverick Churchill decided there was no collectivity in collective security 
and started a highly unpopular campaign for rearmament by Britain, warning 
against the general belief that Hitler had already built an enormous 
mechanised army and superior air force.

But he's not used them, he's not used them - people protested. Still for 
two years before the outbreak of the Second War you could read the debates 
in the House of Commons and now shiver at the famous Labour men -Major 
Attlee was one of them - who voted against rearmament and still went on 
pointing to the League of Nations as the saviour. Now, this memory of mine 
may be totally irrelevant to the present crisis. It haunts me. I have to 
say I have written elsewhere with much conviction that most historical 
analogies are false because, however strikingly similar a new situation may 
be to an old one, there's usually one element that is different and it 
turns out to be the crucial one. It may well be so here.

All I know is that all the voices of the 30s are echoing through 2003...


-- 
"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 > [Southeast Asia
veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 28 06:38:39 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 16:38:39 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <20040828044221.86559.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <025601c48cc9$a78edf50$362c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Oh, and btw, there IS a way to remove a Security Council
> member. We've done it once already, when in the early 70's
> Taiwan was removed and Communist China was added. 
> Until that time, the Nationalists had held that SC seat.

Not one of the 5 PERMANENT Security Council members.

Here is a link to the copy of the Charter. 

http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html

Chapter V   The Security Council - Composition

Article 23 says:

1. The Security Council shall consist of  fifteen Members of
the United Nations. The Republic of China, France, the Union
of Soviet socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America
shall be permanent members of the Security Council. The General
Assembly shall elect ten other Members of the United Nations
to be non-permanent members of the Security Council, due
regard being specifically paid, in the first instance to the contribution
of Members of the United Nations to the maintenance of 
international peace and security and to the other purposes of 
the Organization, and also to equitable geographical distribution. 


> The spanish speaking people of the world are unrepresented on
> the SC. How about Spain, or Argentina, or Mexico? The african
> people of the world are similarly unrepresented, how about South
> Africa. India has a billion people, why is China on the SC and not
> India? The muslim people of the world are 800 million strong. Why
> isn't Saudi Arabia or Turkey on the SC?


10 non-permanent revolving security council member slots are available
and are filled by the General Assembly voting member nations into
them.

China was a victorious WWII power. India only separated from
Britain after WWII. 

> > Its like the no taxation without representation thing.
> 
> So sorry, but I don't recall ever being permitted to vote for a single
> member of the UN General Assembly or the Security Council. Could you
> please post an election schedule?


It's not a club of citizens - its a club of nations. Your's has a particularly
priviledged seat on it. Your personal capacity to influence it is not great
but its a lot better than most one persons living in the world.  You have
free speech rights in the US and you have a Bill of Rights.
  Mike, you were born lucky.  

The power of US citizens, should they choose to accept it, lies not in their
single individual votes but in their power to speak out for things that are
in their interest.   

> The UN does not represent mankind. It represents a club of legal
> fictions intent on perpetuating their power over mankind. It is therefore
> an anti-human institution and therefore an anti-transhuman institution.

Fiction?  But its as legal real as the good will of people can make it.
Including yours. 

Anti-human?  Anti-transhuman? Which bits ?  Look at the preamble 

---

"We the peoples of the United Nations

determined 

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice
in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind,
and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth
of the human person, in the equal rights of mean and women and of
nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the 
obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international
law can be maintaine, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger
freedom, 

and for these ends

to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another
as good neighbours, and

to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security,
and

to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of
methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common
interest, and 

to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic
and social advancement of all people,

    have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims

According, our respective Governments, through representatives 
assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their
full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the
present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an 
international organization to be known as the United Nations.

---

Looks pretty human and arguably even trans-human to me. 

It may be a bit idealistic and it may not be able to be carried out
(that is up to people) but it doesn't seem to be anti-human.


Brett Paatsch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040828/00b6b411/attachment.html>

From bjk at imminst.org  Sat Aug 28 07:01:07 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 02:01:07 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update - Chat: Nanotechnology & Longevity
Message-ID: <41302DB3.4050809@imminst.org>

IMMINST UPDATE

CHAT

Sun, Aug 29 - Philip Van Nedervelde - Nanotechnology & Longevity
Representing the Foresight Institute in Europe since 1997,
Philip joins ImmInst to discuss ideas on nanotechnology and
indefinite(healthy) longevity.
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=3802


PROJECTS

1. Book - http://www.imminst.org/book1
2. Film - http://www.imminst.org/film
3. Conference - http://www.imminst.org/conference
4. Why Life Extension - http://www.imminst.org/why
5. Facing Cryonics - http://www.imminst.org/facing_cryonics


RESOURCES

1. Forum - http://www.imminst.org/forum
2. Chat Room -  http://www.imminst.org/chat
3. Member Articles - http://www.imminst.org/archive/imminst_writers.php
4. Affiliates - http://imminst.org/about/affiliates.php
5. Store - http://www.imminst.org/amember/apparel.php


ABOUT IMMINST

Immortality Institute -- For Infinite Lifespans
501(c)3 Non-profit Mission -- End the Blight of Involuntary Death
August 2004 -- Members: 1,645 -- Full Members: 100
http://www.imminst.org/fullmembers






From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Aug 28 09:32:18 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:32:18 +1000
Subject: Reengineering the UN (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
References: <20040827192134.67254.qmail@web60509.mail.yahoo.com><01af01c48c98$d6dcd1d0$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<5919C90E-F8AB-11D8-AF0B-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <02df01c48ce1$e9a52120$362c2dcb@homepc>

"J. Andrew Rogers" wrote:
 
> On Aug 27, 2004, at 5:49 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> > If your going to have 5 permanent security council members
> > I think you have to have the US, China and Russia's power and 
> > populations give them a place, and the last two could be any 
> > number of countries but the UK and France are as good as any
> > other so far as I can see.
 
> I think one could make a reasonable argument that one of the 
> permanent European countries should be replaced by Japan, which
> has a military, economy, and population that is at least as large or
> larger than any of  them.  But there is the problem of appearances.

That wouldn't be unreasonable, in theory, I accept that Japan or
Germany might be as good or better than France, but there is no way
within the UN Charter to remove an encumbent permanent security
council member.

Article 6 allows for expelling members from the UN upon the 
recommendation of the SC but the only recommendations the SC
makes are in the form of resolutions and a permanent SC member
would certainly veto any resolution aimed at its own removal. 

To remake the UN with different permanent security council members 
or with a differently tiered structure as you suggest you'd really have to
break it properly (ie. completely) and come up with a UN V.3 like the
UN is sort of a version 2 after the League of Nations.  

The problem with all this is it takes an enormous amount of political
will to do something like that.  It would normally be beyond what a 
democratically elected politician (even a US President on a 4 year 
term) could politically dare to take on (even if he/she wanted too). 

It took a world war to provide a failure conspicuous enough to end
the League of Nations. 

Brett Paatsch




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 16:06:37 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <025601c48cc9$a78edf50$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040828160637.38178.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Oh, and btw, there IS a way to remove a Security Council
> > member. We've done it once already, when in the early 70's
> > Taiwan was removed and Communist China was added. 
> > Until that time, the Nationalists had held that SC seat.
> 
> Not one of the 5 PERMANENT Security Council members.
> 
> Here is a link to the copy of the Charter. 
> 
> http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html
> 
> Chapter V   The Security Council - Composition
> 
> Article 23 says:
> 
> 1. The Security Council shall consist of  fifteen Members of
> the United Nations. The Republic of China, snip....

Brett, shows you weren't reading. The Republic of China is known as
Taiwan (ROC) (as in: Republic of China). The ROC was removed in the
1970's and the PRC, the People's Republic of China, was put in its
place on the Security Council.

> 
> 
> > The spanish speaking people of the world are unrepresented on
> > the SC. How about Spain, or Argentina, or Mexico? The african
> > people of the world are similarly unrepresented, how about South
> > Africa. India has a billion people, why is China on the SC and not
> > India? The muslim people of the world are 800 million strong. Why
> > isn't Saudi Arabia or Turkey on the SC?
> 
> 
> 10 non-permanent revolving security council member slots are
> available
> and are filled by the General Assembly voting member nations into
> them.
> 
> China was a victorious WWII power. India only separated from
> Britain after WWII. 

India remained in the British Empire through WWII ONLY because a deal
had been struck, by Lord Mountbatten, Gandhi, Nehru (who was best of
friends with Lady Mountbatten), and others, to keep India in the empire
through the war (Mountbatten became the last Viceroy and oversaw the
handover of power and partitioning). India was as much an ally on the
victorious side as anybody, and it could easily be said it was the
BIGGEST ally in the war. It's value as a logistical base and source of
men and arms for the battle through Burma and supplying the Chinese
Nationalists and the forces under Gen. Claire Chenault in China was of
paramount importance for containing Japanese southeastern and eastern
expansionism. This prevented Japan from reaching and establishing a
greater sphere for industrial and logistical support of its war effort
on the continent and across the Pacific. The war in China kept them
bogged down long enough that the US could devote most of its efforts
toward the European fronts.

> 
> > > Its like the no taxation without representation thing.
> > 
> > So sorry, but I don't recall ever being permitted to vote for a
> single
> > member of the UN General Assembly or the Security Council. Could
> you
> > please post an election schedule?
> 
> 
> It's not a club of citizens - its a club of nations. Your's has a
> particularly priviledged seat on it. Your personal capacity to
> influence it is not great but its a lot better than most one
> persons living in the world.  

At best we can influence which person gets to appoint the US ambassador
to the UN, as we vote for president. This is no different than
Britain's Parliament, or that of France.

> You have
> free speech rights in the US and you have a Bill of Rights.
>   Mike, you were born lucky.  

I was born to good parents, and to a family of people wise enough to
have gotten out of whatever hellhole they lived in to emigrate to the
US. No luck about it.

> 
> The power of US citizens, should they choose to accept it, lies not
> in their single individual votes but in their power to speak out
> for things that are in their interest.   

It is not in our interest for France to hamstring the SC and thereby
eliminate the effectiveness of the UN to promote individual human
liberty.

> 
> > The UN does not represent mankind. It represents a club of legal
> > fictions intent on perpetuating their power over mankind. It is
> therefore
> > an anti-human institution and therefore an anti-transhuman
> institution.
> 
> Fiction?  But its as legal real as the good will of people can make
> it. Including yours. 
> 
> Anti-human?  Anti-transhuman? Which bits ?  Look at the preamble 
> 
> ---
> 
> "We the peoples of the United Nations

This was a document written by Alger Hiss, convicted spy for Stalin,
when he had influence and sway over all of US foreign policy under the
Roosevelt and Truman administrations. The use of the term "peoples" is
indicative. We don't use "peoples" in our Consitution, we use "people",
and its meaning there is specifically in reference to the rights and
powers of individual persons, NOT collective rights which are a fiction
of the world communist movement. "Peoples" indicates that only an
entire body politic has rights, not individuals.

This is evidenced by the fact that the UN is steadfastly attempting to
create a worldwide ban on the private ownership of firearms, which are
the only means by which individuals can resist state fascism without
massive loss of life.

We've seen the recent posting that Fukuyama has stated that
transhumanism is the worlds most dangerous idea. Well, here is my list
of the most dangerous people in the world:

George Soros
Andrew McKelvey
Bill McKibben
Jeremy Rifkin
Jerry Mander
Francis Fukuyama
Leon Kass
Khofi Annan
Teresa Heinz Kerry
Frank Lautenberg
Teddy Kennedy
Charlie Schumer
Diane Feinstein
Barbara Boxer
Richard Daley
Jaques Chirac
Osama bin Laden

The most dangerous groups:
Animal Liberation Front
Earth Liberation Front
The Ruckus Society
TAO
ANSWER
IWW
5th ComIntern
Americans for Gun Safety
The Brady Campaign
Million Mom March
National Chiefs of Police Association
Turning Point Project
among others...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 16:12:28 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:12:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Reengineering the UN (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as
	defense)
In-Reply-To: <02df01c48ce1$e9a52120$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040828161228.38700.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> "J. Andrew Rogers" wrote:
>  
> > On Aug 27, 2004, at 5:49 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> > > If your going to have 5 permanent security council members
> > > I think you have to have the US, China and Russia's power and 
> > > populations give them a place, and the last two could be any 
> > > number of countries but the UK and France are as good as any
> > > other so far as I can see.
>  
> > I think one could make a reasonable argument that one of the 
> > permanent European countries should be replaced by Japan, which
> > has a military, economy, and population that is at least as large
> or
> > larger than any of  them.  But there is the problem of appearances.
> 
> That wouldn't be unreasonable, in theory, I accept that Japan or
> Germany might be as good or better than France, but there is no way
> within the UN Charter to remove an encumbent permanent security
> council member.

This just ISN'T TRUE, so please stop stating so. Resolution 2758 of the
United Nations is the main action taken by the UN which removed Taiwan
from the SC. Passed in 1971, Taiwan lost its seat in the United
Nations, and in the Security Council, to the People?s Republic of
China. 

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 16:14:25 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <01e501c48cbd$b2b85930$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040828161425.17614.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> 
> C'mon Mike, get with the program. A part cannuck cannot really
> despise *all* things French.  ;-)

I am 1/8th French Canadian. Since the French French despise French
Canadians, their dialect, and culture, I see no problem with
reciprocating the gesture.


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 16:33:27 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 09:33:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <20040828161425.17614.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040828163327.19896.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > C'mon Mike, get with the program. A part cannuck cannot really
> > despise *all* things French.  ;-)
> 
> I am 1/8th French Canadian. Since the French French despise French
> Canadians, their dialect, and culture, I see no problem with
> reciprocating the gesture.

I am also 1/4 Scottish Canadian, which explains my derision of France.
That being said, geneological research has led us to the conclusion
that "Lorrey" is derived from an appellation given to describe sworn
men of the Sun King who remained with Mary, Queen of Scots when she
returned to Scotland after her husband's early death. That we were all
transported in the centuries following her death and our family's
support of Bonnie Prince Charlie, etc is indicative...

You can imagine my joy....

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 28 17:28:17 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Reengineering the UN (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as
	defense)
In-Reply-To: <20040828161228.38700.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040828172817.65789.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


 
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > > 
> > That wouldn't be unreasonable, in theory, I accept that Japan or
> > Germany might be as good or better than France, but there is no way
> > within the UN Charter to remove an encumbent permanent security
> > council member.

Resolution 2758 (XXVI) 

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,

Recalling the principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Considering the restoration of the lawful rights of the People's
Republic of China is essential both for the protection of the Charter
of the United Nations and for the cause that the United Nations must
serve under the Charter.

Recognizing that the representatives of the Government of the People's
Republic of China are the only lawful representatives of China to the
United Nations and that the People's Republic of China  is one of the
five permanent members of the Security Council,

Decides to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China and
to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only
legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations, and to expel
forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which
they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations and in all the
organizations related to it.

1967th plenary meeting
25 October 1971
end quote

This clearly shows that the General Assembly voted to remove the
Republic of China government (which they disengenuously referred to as
"the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek") in favor of the People's
Republic of China government as the legitimate representative of the
people of China, even though the UN Charter does not name "China" as
having a seat in the Security Council, but specifically the "Republic
of China", which is a government, not a people.

We could, if we wished, decide to pass a resolution in the general
assembly that recognised that Mary Queen of Scots was the legitimate
heir to the French crown, and therefore, as her son James Stewart was
her legitimate heir, and thereafter the British Crown is the rightful
ruler of France, that Britain should have two seats on the Security
Council, representing both Britain and France.... it is no less
ludicrous than that ridiculous resolution that kicked Taiwan out of the
SC and the UN.




=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Aug 28 17:52:11 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:52:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Restructuring the UN [was urban sprawl as defense]
In-Reply-To: <413022D5.CF98CE52@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20040828175211.85065.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > The spanish speaking people of the world are
> unrepresented on the SC.
> > How about Spain, or Argentina, or Mexico? The
> african people of the
> > world are similarly unrepresented, how about South
> Africa. India has a
> > billion people, why is China on the SC and not
> India? The muslim people
> > of the world are 800 million strong. Why isn't
> Saudi Arabia or Turkey
> > on the SC?
> 
> Agreed to include Brazil, India, and Japan and
> perhaps South Africa.  This
> would reflect more than the good ole boy's club we
> now have.

Actually, if you cut it by population, according to
the US Census Bureau the top 10 countries are:

China - 1,298,847,624
India - 1,065,070,607
United States - 293,027,571
Indonesia - 238,452,952
Brazil - 184,101,109
Pakistan - 159,196,336
Russia - 143,782,338
Bangladesh - 141,340,476
Nigeria - 137,253,133
Japan - 127,333,002

So...

1) Make as permanent members all those countries
capable (physically and psychologically) of projecting
significant military strength beyond their borders.
E.g., the USA, the UK, Russia, and China.

2) Rotate the remaining spots among India, Indonesia,
Brazil, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Japan.
Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan represent the
Muslims, Brazil speaks for the Spanish, and Nigeria
speaks for Africa.  *Maybe* include France, for
historical reasons and because they do still have
nuclear weapons (then again, so do India and
Pakistan) - or maybe just include the EU as a whole in
the rotating seats in addition to the UK's permanent
seat (France and Germany alone, if combined, would
easily break into the top 10).


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sat Aug 28 17:59:22 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:59:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Restructuring the UN [was urban sprawl as defense]
In-Reply-To: <20040828175211.85065.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040828175211.85065.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FDA17388-F91B-11D8-AF0B-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Aug 28, 2004, at 10:52 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> Brazil speaks for the Spanish


You better put on your asbestos suit...

j. andrew rogers



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Aug 28 18:08:03 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Restructuring the UN [was urban sprawl as defense]
In-Reply-To: <FDA17388-F91B-11D8-AF0B-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <20040828180803.98156.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
wrote:
> On Aug 28, 2004, at 10:52 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > Brazil speaks for the Spanish
> 
> You better put on your asbestos suit...

Did I say "Spanish"?  I meant "Latin America".
Sorry, my mistake.  (And if Spanish per se is
desired, extend to the top 11 and you've got Mexico.)


From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Sat Aug 28 23:24:01 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:24:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Restructuring the UN [was urban sprawl as defense]
Message-ID: <BAY17-F26XiHY5FbEFY0008a1d0@hotmail.com>

I think any time you try to say that one country speaks for some other 
segment you're going to get into trouble. For example, the current security 
council has the non-permanent slots sort of assigned by geography (that's 
why Syria is currently holding a seat).

But saying that Brazil speaks for Latin America would certainly piss of 
Mexico (or vice versa). As well as saying Egypt speaks for Africa or 
Indonesia speaks for Muslims, etc.

The SC can't be much more ineffectual as it currently is so you may as well 
leave France and Britain. It's not like they really matter that much.

BAL

>From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Restructuring the UN [was urban sprawl as 
>defense]
>Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:08:03 -0700 (PDT)
>
>--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
>wrote:
> > On Aug 28, 2004, at 10:52 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > > Brazil speaks for the Spanish
> >
> > You better put on your asbestos suit...
>
>Did I say "Spanish"?  I meant "Latin America".
>Sorry, my mistake.  (And if Spanish per se is
>desired, extend to the top 11 and you've got Mexico.)
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 29 02:41:25 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:41:25 +1000
Subject: Reengineering the UN (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl
	asdefense)
References: <20040828172817.65789.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c48d71$ad910600$362c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> > --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > That wouldn't be unreasonable, in theory, I accept that 
> > > Japan or Germany might be as good or better than France, 
> > > but there is no way within the UN Charter to remove an 
> > > encumbent permanent security council member.

Good work!

Ok, I stand corrected .... I should have said there is no way to
remove an encumbent permanent security council member against
that permanent security council members will (ie. against its veto). 

If the permanent SC member has ceases to exist in the form that 
it was - as happened with the USSR, and as you point out appears
to have happened with China during the late 40's early 50's (my
knowledge of the history of that period and region is slight) - then
that is a different matter. 

Your point below goes to the question of what the UN does
when there is a question as to who IS the real permanent 
security council member when the member nation that had the 
spot is no longer functioning as the same single coherent member 
nation anymore.   

> Resolution 2758 (XXVI) 
> 
> THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,
> 
> Recalling the principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
> 
> Considering the restoration of the lawful rights of the People's
> Republic of China is essential both for the protection of the
> Charter of the United Nations and for the cause that the United
> Nations must serve under the Charter.

Makes sense. 

> Recognizing that the representatives of the Government of the
> People's Republic of China are the only lawful representatives
> of China to the United Nations and that the People's Republic
> of China  is one of the five permanent members of the Security
> Council,

So the People's Republic of China is deemed to be the successor
to the Republic of China.  
 
> Decides to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China
> and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the 
> only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations,
> and to expel  forthwith the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek 
> from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United
> Nations and in all the organizations related to it.
> 
> 1967th plenary meeting
> 25 October 1971
> end quote
 

> This clearly shows that the General Assembly voted to remove
> the Republic of China government (which they disengenuously
> referred to as "the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek") in favor
> of the People's Republic of China government as the legitimate
> representative of the people of China, even though the UN 
> Charter does not name "China" as having a seat in the Security
> Council, but specifically the "Republic of China", which is a 
> government, not a people.

You have hit on an interesting point Mike and have taught me
something but I don't think it means exactly what you think it means.

ie. I think because the Republic of China is named in the Charter
at Article 23 as a permanent member that when the Republic of
China ceased to be a unified member nation (it was at war with
itself)  that what must have arisen was a question as to who the 
rightful permenant security council member should be.  

Only the Republic of China (and not merely "the represenatives
of Chiang Kai-shek") could exercise a security council veto. I
presume the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek still called
themselves the Republic of China ? 

So anyway you do show a legal way of getting around a veto in
some exceptional cases.  Deem the country (member nation) that
has the veto to no longer in fact be that member nation.  

So if the world can be convinced that France is not in fact France
then you could get them removed (with the consent of the other 
security council members who for good measure would allow 
the general assembly to vote on it) and claim those pretending to 
be France could not exercise a veto against it as they are not in 
fact the relevant France that they claim to be !  :-)

The same thing must have happened when Russia took over from
the USSR.

> We could, if we wished, decide to pass a resolution in the 
> general  assembly that recognised that Mary Queen of Scots
> was the legitimate heir to the French crown, and therefore, as
> her son James Stewart was her legitimate heir, and thereafter
> the British Crown is the rightful ruler of France, that Britain
> should have two seats on the Security Council, representing
>  both Britain and France.... it is no less ludicrous than that 
> ridiculous resolution that kicked Taiwan out of the SC and the
> UN.

I am impressed by your scholarship Mike and you have clarified
something for me. You've shown me how Russia would probably
have replaced the USSR. As the USSR had ceased to exist it
would not have veto'd its removal as a permanent SC member - 
and as members of the General Assembly and the Security Council
would have wanted to preserve the UN they would have replaced
the USSR with Russia as the line of least resistance.  

But your example about Mary Queen of Scots, though funny
doesn't work. 

France signed in 1945. Even if your creative arguments held true
you'd have to show why they were not made in 1945 rather than 
now.

After all the US signed in 1945 too and they signed knowing that
France was to be a permanent security council member. 

Seriously I think you (like most people) are still missing an
understanding of the difference between what the General Assembly
can do versus what the Security Council can do. The Security 
Council outranks everything else on the key matter of international
peace and security which is the main purpose of the UN. 

Hey I could be wrong on some details too - I'm talking from 
memory most of the time. But if this interests you I will drill
down. 

Brett Paatsch




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Aug 29 02:50:26 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 12:50:26 +1000
Subject: Born lucky ?  (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
References: <20040828160637.38178.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005b01c48d72$effb2ba0$362c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> > It's not a club of citizens - its a club of nations. Your's has a
> > particularly priviledged seat on it. Your personal capacity to
> > influence it is not great but its a lot better than most one
> > persons living in the world.  
> 
> At best we can influence which person gets to appoint the US
> ambassador to the UN, as we vote for president. This is no 
> different than Britain's Parliament, or that of France.

Votes do determine who gets to be president but the sort of
influence an individual has (or can potentially have, if they are born
in the US is not just limited to their vote - which is only the crudest 
way to exercise minimal political influence). Some individuals in the
US can go into politics and get to be the US ambassador to the UN
or even President.   Or can they?  Are you actually living in a
plutocracy that is just pretending to be a democracy? 

What do you think?
 
> > You have
> > free speech rights in the US and you have a Bill of Rights.
> >   Mike, you were born lucky.  
> 
> I was born to good parents, and to a family of people wise enough to
> have gotten out of whatever hellhole they lived in to emigrate to the
> US. No luck about it.

That's kudo's to your good parents and family though. Not to you
personally.  You didn't pick your genes - and you are not merely 
you genes.  

I'm pushing you on this because I think you'd see the world quite a 
lot differently had your parents not been so good or wise. 

What would Mike Lorrey libertarian be like born in the Middle East
or Iraq? Or France?  Would he be the arch-enemy of the Mike Lorrey
born in the US?

In Iraq you'd still have had to fight to make space for yourself in which
to live but the ground on which you'd have had to fight would not have
been so favourable.  Maybe you'd have grown up irritated by Saddam's
regime but still managing to get by under it, not by supporting it, but
managing to stay out of its way, then someday in the name of freedom
someone drops a misguided bomb on your house.

Your family is dead - collateral damage - you weren't fond of Saddam
but you were managing - how do you imagine that you'd feel towards
the country that invaded your country and killed your family to deprive
Saddam of weapons that it turned out Saddam didn't have?

Wouldn't you be pissed? Would you perhaps become a terrorist
in order to get payback? 

Those guys that flew planes into buildings on september 11, you could
call them terrorists and I *would* agree with you. But if you want to call
them crazy just because they were zeolous believers I'd have to disagree.

They were also motivated warriors - they died and knew they would 
die doing what they did. That sort of passion coupled with that sort of 
organisation and planning comes from somewhere. I suspect it came 
from cold-burning moral outrage. I suspect those guys *thought* they 
had good reason to be pissed off.  

> It is not in our interest for France to hamstring the SC and thereby
> eliminate the effectiveness of the UN to promote individual human
> liberty.

I'd agreed if they were hamstringing. But as it turned out there were no
WMD's, and the restraint that they were showing with respect to Iraq
turned out to be well founded. 

Would you only have yes-men and your enemies give you counsel?
Are you that sure that you are always going to be right?  

> This is evidenced by the fact that the UN is steadfastly attempting to
> create a worldwide ban on the private ownership of firearms, which are
> the only means by which individuals can resist state fascism without
> massive loss of life.

That's too big a claim for me to accept without your showing me the
evidence.  I respect that you have done some reading here (that's good)
but I still think you have your wires crossed.

Consider Article 2 (7)

"Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorise the United
Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic
jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such 
matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall
not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter
VII." 
 
It is that prohibition against intervening in domestic matters which most
people don't get - that is what makes the UN limited (sensibly limited)
in what it can do. 

Regards,
Brett Paatsch



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Aug 29 09:38:00 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:38:00 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <00bd01c48afb$f43ded20$362c2dcb@homepc>
References: <1093396934.1036.111.camel@Renfield>
	<00bd01c48afb$f43ded20$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040829093759.GC1051@leitl.org>

On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 09:33:41AM +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> I do wish to play but am tired. I have looked through the Exi archives
> in 2003. I wrote ad nauseum on this topic and what I wrote seems to
> have affected nothing. I have to draw my own conclusions on that.

Writing here in order to affect things is even more futile than blogging.
Congratulations, you were quicker to realize this than me.

-- 
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/20040829/352e6d6f/attachment.bin>

From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Aug 29 13:25:28 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 09:25:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
References: <1093396934.1036.111.camel@Renfield><00bd01c48afb$f43ded20$362c2dcb@homepc>
	<20040829093759.GC1051@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <003801c48dcb$a741c780$0b893cd1@pavilion>

I haven't been following this thread closely, but the idea is not a new
one.  Dispersal -- I believe it was called "tactical employment" -- in
nuclear war was, IIRC, a defensive doctrine of the US military during
the Cold War.  Also, the Soviets did a lot of their city planning in
order to create sprawl as a defense against nuclear attacks.

(Jim Stumm also mentioned it as a defense against terrorism around the
time of the first WTC attack.)

On a related note, the "superstealth" strategy proposed by Dennis May
and I (see my site) involves settling space and using high mobility,
stealth, and dispersal as a defense.  Of course, I believe this will be
the unplanned outcome (in a sort of Hayekian fashion) of settling space.

Later!

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 29 23:15:54 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:15:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Population 'bomb' is fizzling to a 'pop' 
In-Reply-To: <20040829093759.GC1051@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040829231554.38342.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com>

Friends,

The sky is not falling after all, surprise, surprise.

The article's actual title is, 

Demographic 'bomb' is fizzling to a 'pop',  

but it seemed to me that "Population bomb", now common
parlance from the title of the book by Paul Ehrlich,
was the obvious choice and more apt. 

http://www.iht.com/articles/536363.html

Best, Jeff Davis

   "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                           Ray Charles

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE  Sun Aug 29 17:33:07 2004
From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 19:33:07 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
In-Reply-To: <4124162F.9050803@barrera.org>
References: <1092882860.26349@whirlwind.he.net> <4124162F.9050803@barrera.org>
Message-ID: <7D7FF510-F9E1-11D8-8A37-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>


On 19 Aug 2004, at 04:53, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
> Well, the problem is that someone ELSE gave these power tools to
> these monkeys, and I'm here driving to work in a Honda del Sol
> hoping some monkey doesn't plot a course over my body.

I loved driving my old Honda del Sol around Los Angeles. I never minded 
the SUVs. I found it exhilarating darting around the feet those big 
dinosaurs with the roof off and the air whizzing past. An ancestral 
rush I guess...

I felt  lucky to be reminded of my mortality on a twice daily basis 
(even if this was only a small reminder). Driving as a forced mediation 
on the here-and-now is really great. Be grateful that you are awake to 
receive the message, while the masses drift by around you in a 
soporific haze. :)

Yes the risk of death is real. When isn't it? But that's also true for 
the folks in the SUVs. Personally, if I am risking death I would prefer 
to do in a fast red sports car with the roof off and the stereo up, 
than in a fat waddling SUV.

best, patrick



From scerir at libero.it  Mon Aug 30 08:47:30 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:47:30 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Real Extropians don't drive SUVs
References: <1092882860.26349@whirlwind.he.net> <4124162F.9050803@barrera.org>
	<7D7FF510-F9E1-11D8-8A37-000A959DA830@nat.uni-magdeburg.de>
Message-ID: <000401c48e6d$fca30ca0$91bc1b97@administxl09yj>

> Personally, if I am risking death I would prefer 
> to do in a fast red sports car with the roof off 
> and the stereo up, [...]
> best, patrick

as Terence Stamp in 'Spirits of the Dead' (1969)
(or 'Tales of Mystery', 1968) story by E.A.Poe
'Don't Wager Your Head to the Devil'), adapted 
(Stamp drives a superfast 'roof off' red Ferrari) 
and directed by Federico Fellini, musics by Nino Rota
http://www.moria.co.nz/horror/talesofm&i.htm
http://www.hypermusic.net/grimsby/pages/art_tdammit.html
http://www2.biglobe.ne.jp/~naxos/cinema/ftoby.htm 
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000654/
http://www.bestprices.com/cgi-bin/vlink/759259180741IE





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 30 17:35:26 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:35:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Born lucky ?  (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
In-Reply-To: <005b01c48d72$effb2ba0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040830173526.10348.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

In any other country, I'd likely either be in prison or dead, or in an
asylum for politically incorrect thinkers. There might be a few other
countries where this would not be the case. NZ, and Oz, for two
possible examples.
  
> 
> > This is evidenced by the fact that the UN is steadfastly attempting
> to
> > create a worldwide ban on the private ownership of firearms, which
> are
> > the only means by which individuals can resist state fascism
> without
> > massive loss of life.
> 
> That's too big a claim for me to accept without your showing me the
> evidence.  I respect that you have done some reading here (that's
> good)but I still think you have your wires crossed.
> 
> Consider Article 2 (7)
> 
> "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorise the United
> Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the
> domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to
> submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but
> this principle shall
> not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter
> VII." 
>  
> It is that prohibition against intervening in domestic matters which
> most people don't get - that is what makes the UN limited (sensibly
> limited) in what it can do. 

Suggest you read up on what the UN is really doing, then. On the heels
of its treaty over the banning of landmines, the UN has been working on
a protocol for the elimination of all private trade and ownership of
small arms of any kind. People I know personally have represented the
US in these negotiations. The US, under Clinton, had been totally
willing to cave to the UN on this, but Bush is not, and specifically
told the UN so. Kerry, on the other hand, is fully in support of the UN
Convention on Small Arms, which would obligate US armed forces to
search every American household for firearms to be confiscated...

This is reason number one why I am steadfastly AGAINST Kerry. He would
make the world safe for global fascism.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From godsdice at gmail.com  Tue Aug 31 00:04:14 2004
From: godsdice at gmail.com (xllb)
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:04:14 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Googols of gmail invitations
Message-ID: <a69380f04083017046f0ad531@mail.gmail.com>

Might gmail invitations be catching up with demand? If the market
isn't flooded, I've six to give away.

Send me a note and please mention this list.

Regards,

xllb

godsdice at gmail.com
-- 
Hell is overkill.
Dogma blinds.


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug 31 00:17:01 2004
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 09:47:01 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Googols of gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <a69380f04083017046f0ad531@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a69380f04083017046f0ad531@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc04083017172d1a90a1@mail.gmail.com>

I've got a handful too, email me personally.

Emlyn

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:04:14 -0400, xllb <godsdice at gmail.com> wrote:
> Might gmail invitations be catching up with demand? If the market
> isn't flooded, I've six to give away.
> 
> Send me a note and please mention this list.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> xllb
> 
> godsdice at gmail.com
> --
> Hell is overkill.
> Dogma blinds.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *


From lphege at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 31 00:48:25 2004
From: lphege at hotmail.com (H C)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:48:25 +0000
Subject: Born lucky ?  (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as
Message-ID: <BAY19-F35AiEGKROptz00073c81@hotmail.com>

"The US, under Clinton, had been totally
willing to cave to the UN on this, but Bush is not, and specifically
told the UN so. Kerry, on the other hand, is fully in support of the UN
Convention on Small Arms, which would obligate US armed forces to
search every American household for firearms to be confiscated...

This is reason number one why I am steadfastly AGAINST Kerry. He would
make the world safe for global fascism."

Vote Libertarian! For everyone's sake..

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Aug 31 01:28:01 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:28:01 +1000
Subject: Born lucky ?  (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
References: <20040830173526.10348.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <004c01c48ef9$c1534fc0$362c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> In any other country, I'd likely either be in prison or dead, or in an
> asylum for politically incorrect thinkers. There might be a few other
> countries where this would not be the case. NZ, and Oz, for two
> possible examples.
>
> >
> > > This is evidenced by the fact that the UN is steadfastly
> > > attempting to create a worldwide ban on the private ownership
> > > of firearms, which are the only means by which individuals can
> > > resist state fascism without massive loss of life.
> >
> > That's too big a claim for me to accept without your showing me the
> > evidence.  I respect that you have done some reading here (that's
> > good)but I still think you have your wires crossed.
> >
> > Consider Article 2 (7)
> >
> > "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorise the United
> > Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the
> > domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to
> > submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but
> > this principle shall
> > not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter
> > VII."
> >
> > It is that prohibition against intervening in domestic matters which
> > most people don't get - that is what makes the UN limited (sensibly
> > limited) in what it can do.
>
> Suggest you read up on what the UN is really doing, then.

What specifically do you want me to read?

For my part I want you to take a look at the Charter. You could
probably read the whole thing in about an hour. I'd guess its less than
5000 words.

What you'd do with any new found knowledge of it would be up to
you. Perhaps you find a bunch of reasons for thinking it was farcical
and for wanting it revoked.

> On the heels of its treaty over the banning of landmines, the UN
> has  been working on a protocol for the elimination of all private
> trade and ownership of small arms of any kind.

The General Assembly cannot (it doesn't have even the legal power
even under the UN Charter to) make a law that is legally binding on
the US unless the US agrees.

The only way the General Assembly influences the US is politically
or 'morally' as a sort of body of world opinion.  That is not of no
consequence, but it definitely would not be enough to deprive US
citizens of constitutional rights -including the right to bear arms if
US citizens actually have that now.

I say IF only because I googled on it and was surprised to find the
link below.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Second%20Amendment%20to%20the%20United%20States%20Constitution

> People I know personally have represented the
> US in these negotiations. The US, under Clinton, had been totally
> willing to cave to the UN on this, but Bush is not, and specifically
> told the UN so. Kerry, on the other hand, is fully in support of the UN
> Convention on Small Arms, which would obligate US armed forces to
> search every American household for firearms to be confiscated...
>
> This is reason number one why I am steadfastly AGAINST Kerry.
> He would make the world safe for global fascism.

I don't think private gun ownership would make any difference to state
fascism either way.  Whatever weapons are readily available the state
(if it is an effective political organisation) is going to have more or
better
of them.

Fascist thugs don't need guns they just need superior brute force. If the
citizens are not paying attention and are not willing to speak out against
it then guns are irrelevant. You might as well plan to oppose political
thugs with lollipops if your are going to wait until they appear at your
door and you do nothing to stop them beforehand.

Fists, boots and clubs were enough for the brownshirts in Germany.
Had they been widely opposed by guns then I've no doubt they'd
have been happy enough to use guns themselves but guns just
weren't necessary.

I think the only effective weapon against fascism within a state is a
citizenry alert enough and ready enough to speak out and counter
organise against any emerging or organising fascism.

Brett Paatsch




From kpj at sics.se  Tue Aug 31 03:50:37 2004
From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:50:37 +0200
Subject: Born lucky ? (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense) 
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch@bigpond.net.au> of "Tue,
	31 Aug 2004 11:28:01 +1000." <004c01c48ef9$c1534fc0$362c2dcb@homepc> 
Message-ID: <200408310350.i7V3ocb13751@r2d2.sics.se>

It appears as if Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> and Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

ML:
|Suggest you read up on what the UN is really doing, then.

BP:
|
|For my part I want you to take a look at the Charter. You could
|probably read the whole thing in about an hour. I'd guess its less than
|5000 words.

Which court would prosecute the United Nations for not following its charter?

Do not treat United Nations as you would a local organization.
Politics, in the form of foreign policy, controls United Nations, not law.

When they feel that the charter hinders them, they will simply sidestep it.

In one word: Realpolitik.


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Aug 31 04:48:25 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:48:25 +1000
Subject: Born lucky ? (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
References: <200408310350.i7V3ocb13751@r2d2.sics.se>
Message-ID: <00c101c48f15$c02434e0$362c2dcb@homepc>

"KPJ" wrote:

> Which court would prosecute the United Nations for not following its
charter?

That sentence doesn't parse for me.  The United Nations is not a single
sentience or a single consciousness its an organisation made up of member
nations.    http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html

I welcome criticisms of the UN.  To criticise it effectively will require
understanding it and understanding it could be a very healthy thing.

I don't claim to understand it completely - I just claim that it is worth
understanding - that it makes sense to understand it if one wants to
pursue what I understand to be extropic and transhumanist agendas
effectively globally.

---
Chapter III
Organs (of the UN)

Article 7

1. There are established as the principle organs of the UN; a General
Assembly; a Security Council, an Economic and Social Council,
a Trusteeship Council, an International Court of Justice, and a
Secretariat.

2. Such subsidiary organs as may be found necessary may be established
in accordance with the present Charter.
-----

(That's about 2/3rd of the whole chapter III - we are not talking about
a big document here)

So the UN Charter creates an International Court of Justice like I
presume the US constitution creates a Supreme Court of the US.


 > Do not treat United Nations as you would a local organization.

I won't. I promise. :-)

> Politics, in the form of foreign policy, controls United Nations, not law.
>
> When they feel that the charter hinders them, they will simply sidestep
it.

The members of the United Nations are nations.

The prohibition on nations 'sidestepping' their obligations under the UN
has been limited yes - because the security council had to approve
disciplinary measures taken against the offending nation and usually one
of the big 5 was onside with the offender and so stopped any effective
resolution against the offender being passed.

Now, the only nation powerful enough to sidestep the UN Charter is
the US. And the US does it only through the actions of the commander
in chief - the President.

Clearly other countries cannot remove the US President if he sets aside
the UN Charter unless they are willing to go to war against him.

But here is the important point, US citizens *can* remove the US President
*if* they want the UN Charter to work, and *if* they want the US signature
on treaties to carry a difference sort of weight than merely the weight of
military power.

I am saying that it is for the US citizens to police the US President and to
uphold the UN Charter if they so choose, or not, if they don't.

If as a US citizen, you don't want the UN to work or to mean anything,
then that is *your* choice.

If you do want it to work or to be reformed you will have to understand
how it works currently.  Ignorance of the UN by US citizens will produce
a set of consequences.

Brett Paatsch




From kpj at sics.se  Tue Aug 31 06:04:21 2004
From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:04:21 +0200
Subject: Born lucky ? (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense) 
In-Reply-To: Message from "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch@bigpond.net.au> of "Tue,
	31 Aug 2004 14:48:25 +1000." <00c101c48f15$c02434e0$362c2dcb@homepc> 
Message-ID: <200408310604.i7V64Mn14256@r2d2.sics.se>

KPJ wrote:
|
|Which court would prosecute the United Nations for not following its charter?

It appears as if Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>:
|
|That sentence doesn't parse for me.  The United Nations is not a single
|sentience or a single consciousness its an organisation made up of member
|nations.    http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html

Mea culpa.  I will rephrase the question as follows:

There exists a number of humans who use the power of deadly force to back
their control over some specific territory. Some 60 earth years ago, a number
of these humans decided to force other humans to fight in an event usually
called World War II.

After this event ended, those humans who made the other humans lose the
control of their territory ("the victors") decided to form an organization
with a written set of rules. They named the organization United Nations and
called the written rules a "charter".

According to these rules humans who represent the humans who rule over some
of specific territories shall meet, and humans representing some of these
rulers have more to say over the proceedings of the organization.

When the rulers of those territories decide that they do not want follow the
written rules of the organization, which humans in which courts would prosecute
them for not following those rules?

				- - - - -

I believe the rulers sending representatives to the Security Council to have
act as the ultimate court over matters of the organization.

If they decide to not follow the written rules, then that's that.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 12:31:50 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:31:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Born lucky ? (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
In-Reply-To: <00c101c48f15$c02434e0$362c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040831123150.96797.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> "KPJ" wrote:
> 
> > Which court would prosecute the United Nations for not following
> its
> charter?
> 
> That sentence doesn't parse for me.  The United Nations is not a
> single sentience or a single consciousness its an organisation made
> up of member nations. http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html

It is also made up of a Court of International Law at the Hague.
Furthermore, the Hague Convention on Internation Service of Process
also seeks to apply US interstate principles of 'full faith and credit'
to serving process internationally, at least to some extent. Even
there, nations like Britain put up as many roadblocks to simple
discovery process as muslim countries put up roadblocks to single
American mothers getting their kids back from their kidnapping muslim
husbands.

> 
> I welcome criticisms of the UN.  To criticise it effectively will
> require understanding it and understanding it could be a very
> healthy thing.
> 
> I don't claim to understand it completely - I just claim that it is
> worth
> understanding - that it makes sense to understand it if one wants to
> pursue what I understand to be extropic and transhumanist agendas
> effectively globally.

Understand that the Charter is only ONE document. Any UN Convention
treaty agreed to by the General Assembly and passed by the Security
Council effectively amends that Charter as much as it amends the
Constitution and laws of every member nation bound by said treaty. The
Land Mine Convention is one such treaty. The Small Arms Convention is
another possibility which will come into force if a Kerry
administration takes office.

If we in the US refuse to ratify said treaty to begin with, the
radicals all say that we 'broke' the treaty, when we never agreed to it
in the first place. You then make us out to be the bad guys, and try to
label us as pariahs. It's absolute bs, but typical agitprop.

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Aug 31 15:27:58 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 01:27:58 +1000
Subject: Born lucky ? (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense)
References: <20040831123150.96797.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <013101c48f6f$18342970$362c2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > "KPJ" wrote:
> >
> > > Which court would prosecute the United Nations for not following
> > its
> > charter?
> >
> > That sentence doesn't parse for me.  The United Nations is not a
> > single sentience or a single consciousness its an organisation made
> > up of member nations. http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html

> It is also made up of a Court of International Law at the Hague.

Sure  - Article 92

"The International Court of Justice shall be the principle judicial organ of
the United Nations....."

  But check this (below).... the 'appeals process' from the ICJ goes to the
  Security Council. This is because only the SC can authorise force.


Article 94 (2)

"If any party to a case fails to perform the obligations incumbent upon it
under a judgement rendered by the Court, the other party may have
recourse to the Security Council, which MAY, [note MAY not must]
if it deems necessary, make recommendations or decide upon measures
to be taken to give effect to the judgement."

So say that the US was taken to the ICJ and a ruling was made against
it, then the only way to enforce the ruling is by recourse to the Security
Council that could only authorise enforcement by a resolution - and the
US would have power to veto any such resolution.

So in practice an ICJ ruling against the US amounts to only a rebuff for
the US in the 'court of international public opinion' the SC won't enforce
the ICJ's ruling (against any veto it can't).


> Furthermore, the Hague Convention on Internation Service of Process
> also seeks to apply US interstate principles of 'full faith and credit'
> to serving process internationally, at least to some extent.

Mike the court cannot seek to apply its jurisdiction to the US willy nilly,
the US has to accept the jurisdiction of the court on some matter ahead
of time. If the US for instance refuses to let its nationals be tried for
war
crimes then it is NOT revoking a treaty it is exercising its right not to
sign on to it.

Now that might make a few countries grumble and talk of double standards
and they may or may not be right but if they say that the US revoked the
treaty when the US didn't sign onto that treaty then they are just plain
wrong.

> Even there, nations like Britain put up as many roadblocks to simple
> discovery process as muslim countries put up roadblocks to single
> American mothers getting their kids back from their kidnapping muslim
> husbands.


> >
> > I welcome criticisms of the UN.  To criticise it effectively will
> > require understanding it and understanding it could be a very
> > healthy thing.
> >
> > I don't claim to understand it completely - I just claim that it is
> > worth
> > understanding - that it makes sense to understand it if one wants to
> > pursue what I understand to be extropic and transhumanist agendas
> > effectively globally.
>
> Understand that the Charter is only ONE document.

I DO understand. But SOME single document HAS to have PRIMACY
in international law as a simple matter of logic. Just like the Constitution
is the single document into which all the laws of the US must hook.

The Charter is that one document because all the member nations
agreed that it would be when they signed it. See Articles 102 and 103
below.

Chapter XVI  Miscellaneous Provisions of the UN Charter

Article 102

1. EVERY TREATY and EVERY INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT
 entered into by any Member of the United Nations after the present
Charter comes into force [ie. after 24 October 1945] shall as soon as
possible be registered with the Secretariat and published by it.

2. No party to any such treaty or international agreement which has not
been registered in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of this
Article may invoke that treaty or any agreement before any organ of the
United Nations. (ie that would include the International Court of Justice].

Article 103

IN THE EVENT OF A CONFLICT betwen the obligations of the
Members of the United Nations under the present Charter and their
obligations under any other international agreement, their
OBLIGATIONS UNDER the present CHARTER SHALL PREVAIL.


> Any UN Convention treaty agreed to by the General Assembly and
> passed by the Security Council effectively amends that Charter as much
> as it amends the Constitution and laws of every member nation bound
> by said treaty.

Mike the Charter CANNOT be amended willy nilly against the US without
US approval. It says so in the Charter.

Chapter XVIII

Amendments

Amendments to the present Charter shall come into force for all Members
of the United Nations when they have been adopted by two thirds of the
members of the General Assembly and ratified in accordance with their
respective constitutional process by two thirds of the Members of the UN,
INCLUDING ALL of the PERMANENT MEMBERS (of which the US
is one) of the Security Council.

>  The  Land Mine Convention is one such treaty. The Small Arms
> Convention is  another possibility which will come into force if a Kerry
> administration takes office.

I don't know about those treaties Mike but I can read the Charter as above
and so I do know that those treaties are only legally binding on the US if
the US agreed to sign them. The US could not have been legally compelled
to sign them or have been shanghied into signing a bunch of stuff down
the road just because it signed the Charter.  Smaller countries perhaps
but not the US.

There is a difference between people applying political pressure and
legal pressure. Although in the case of the US as sole superpower legal
pressure in the form of pressure to uphold its word of honor on the
charter is pretty hard to enforce by the other member countries as
well.

Say it was France as another Permanent SC member that did not
want to sign a treaty against land mines. As a permanent SC member
if might choose not to and it could not be legally compelled to even
by the US as France would still have a SC veto.

> If we in the US refuse to ratify said treaty to begin with, the
> radicals all say that we 'broke' the treaty, when we never agreed to it
> in the first place.

If the US never agreed to a particular treaty then it cannot be said
truthfully
to have broken it - it is that simple.

Brett Paatsch




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Aug 31 17:31:44 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:31:44 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] the extropy list isn't actually dead
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040831122718.01a86ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

It's just very, very calm.

Is it the weather? Not the Olympics, for dog's sake?

No, I don't have anything interesting to add either.

Damien Broderick
[snooooze...]




From scerir at libero.it  Tue Aug 31 18:07:49 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:07:49 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] the extropy list isn't actually dead
References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040831122718.01a86ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <004501c48f85$72eccb40$a0b91b97@administxl09yj>

"May you live in interesting times"
         (Chinese curse)

----------------------------------------

'Church says girl's communion not valid'

Thursday, August 19, 2004

BRIELLE, New Jersey (AP) -- An 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare
digestive disorder and cannot eat wheat has had her first Holy Communion
declared invalid because the wafer contained no wheat, violating Roman
Catholic doctrine.

Now, Haley Waldman's mother is pushing the Diocese of Trenton and the
Vatican to make an exception, saying the girl's condition should not exclude
her from the sacrament, which commemorates the Last Supper of Jesus Christ
before his crucifixion. The mother believes a rice Communion wafer would
suffice.

"It's just not a viable option. How does it corrupt the tradition of the
Last Supper? It's just rice versus wheat," said Elizabeth Pelly-Waldman.

Church doctrine holds that Communion wafers, like the bread served at the
Last Supper, must have at least some unleavened wheat. Church leaders are
reluctant to change anything about the sacrament.

"This is not an issue to be determined at the diocesan or parish level, but
has already been decided for the Roman Catholic Church throughout the world
by Vatican authority," Trenton Bishop John M. Smith said in a statement last
week.

Haley was diagnosed with celiac sprue disease when she was 5. The disorder
occurs in people with a genetic intolerance of gluten, a food protein
contained in wheat and other grains.

When consumed by celiac sufferers, gluten damages the lining of the small
intestine, blocking nutrient absorption and leading to vitamin deficiencies,
bone-thinning and sometimes gastrointestinal cancer.

The diocese has told Haley's mother that the girl can receive a low-gluten
wafer, or just drink wine at Communion, but that anything without gluten
does not qualify. Pelly-Waldman rejected the offer, saying her child could
be harmed by even a small amount of the substance.

Haley's Communion controversy isn't the first. In 2001, the family of a
5-year-old Massachusetts girl with the disease left the Catholic church
after being denied permission to use a rice wafer.

Some Catholic churches allow no-gluten hosts, while others do not, said
Elaine Monarch, executive director of the Celiac Disease Foundation, a
California-based support group for sufferers.

"It is an undue hardship on a person who wants to practice their religion
and needs to compromise their health to do so," Monarch said.

The church has similar rules for Communion wine. For alcoholics, the church
allows a substitute for wine under some circumstances, however the drink
must still be fermented from grapes and contain some alcohol. Grape juice is
not a valid substitute.

Haley, a shy, brown-haired tomboy who loves surfing and hates wearing
dresses, realizes the consequences of taking a wheat wafer.

"I'm on a gluten-free diet because I can't have wheat. I could die," she
said last week.

Last year, as the third grader approached Holy Communion age in this Jersey
Shore town, her mother told officials at St. Denis Catholic Church in
Manasquan that the girl could not have the standard host.

After the church's pastor refused to allow a substitute, a priest at a
nearby parish volunteered to offer one, and in May, Haley wore a white
Communion dress, and received the sacrament alongside her mother, who had
not taken Communion since she herself was diagnosed with the disease.

Last month, the diocese told the priest that the church would not validate
Haley's sacrament because of the substitute wafer.

"I struggled with telling her that the sacrament did not happen," said
Pelly-Waldman. "She lives in a world of rules. She says 'Mommy, do we want
to break a rule? Are we breaking a rule?"'

Pelly-Waldman is seeking help from the Pope and has written to Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
in Rome, challenging the church's policy.

"This is a church rule, not God's will, and it can easily be adjusted to
meet the needs of the people, while staying true to the traditions of our
faith," Pelly-Waldman wrote in the letter.

Pelly-Waldman -- who is still attending Mass every Sunday with her four
children -- said she is not out to bash the church, just to change the
policy that affects her daughter.

"I'm hopeful. Do I think it will be a long road to change? Yes. But I'm
raising an awareness and I'm taking it one step at a time," she said.





From mayagin at earthlink.net  Tue Aug 31 19:10:15 2004
From: mayagin at earthlink.net (maya gingery)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:10:15 -0700
Subject: 4. Re: Born lucky ?  (was Re: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as 
Message-ID: <63C99F56-FB81-11D8-BB08-000393530B86@earthlink.net>

IN reply:

If you are inferring that Clinton's and Kerry's support of dialogue 
directed toward making this world a safer place for EVERYONE is worse 
than Bush's catastrophic EGoWAR that is NOT making this world a safer 
place for ANYONE (say again, how much did Greece spend on security for 
the Olympics?), then I suggest you get off your pedestal and get some 
help for your paranoid delusions.  The world does not need people like 
you.  I suppose you think Abu Ghraib was just the boys and girls having 
some fun.  No problem with small arms down there!   Guns?  That's for 
wimps.  Let's do performance art!



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 20:45:53 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <5919C90E-F8AB-11D8-AF0B-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <20040831204553.38577.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>


--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
wrote:

> France, for all intents and purposes, has been
> reduced to a bit player 
> on the world scene.  


>The French military has
> negligible ability to 
> project force outside their borders.  They have
> about as much right to 
> be in the security council as a country like India. 
> The problem is 
> that removing them would leave the UK as the only
> permanent member from 
> Europe.

> The UK is the only European country 
> with substantial military projection capability, but
> because they align 
> so closely with the US the mainland Europeans would
> not be happy with 
> them as the only European voice in the security
> council.

     Although I might have started this particular
thread about kicking France off of the security
council for being pansies, I have since seen some
objective data that has caused me to withdraw my
objections to France. Here is the results of my
research utilizing 
http://www.nationmaster.com
&
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/

     Assuming that Permanent Security Council members
should be the 5 most militarily powerful nations, I
used 2 criteria in my analysis. My first criterion was
military personnel. A country needs soldiers in order
to fight a war, if only to push the big red button. So
the top 25 nations in terms of military manpower:
	
Rank	Nation	Military Personnel
1	China	2,810,000
2	Russia	1,520,000
3	United States	1,366,000
4	India	1,303,000
5	Korea, South	683,000
6	Pakistan	612,000
7	Turkey	610,000
8	Iran	513,000
9	Vietnam	484,000
10	Egypt	448,000
11	Ethiopia	352,000
12	Burma	344,000
13	Syria	316,000
14	Ukraine	304,000
15	Thailand	301,000
16	Indonesia	297,000
17	France	294,000
18	Brazil	288,000
19	Italy	251,000
20	Japan	237,000
21	Germany	221,000
22	Poland	217,000
23	United Kingdom	212,000
24	Romania	207,000
25	Saudi Arabia	202,000

The second criteria I used was military expenditures
in absolute dollars. After all the most well trained
combatant is of no use unless his hardware is up to
par. So the top 25 countries ranked by military
expenditure are as follows:
		
Rank    Nation     Military Expenditures(billions $US)
	
1	United States	$276.70 
2	China	$55.91 
3	France	$46.50 
4	Japan	$39.52 
5	Germany	$38.80 
6	United Kingdom	$31.70 
7	Italy	$20.20 
8	Saudi Arabia	$18.30 
9	Brazil	$13.41 
10	Korea, South	$13.09 
11	India	$11.52 
12	Australia	$11.39 
13	Iran	$9.70 
14	Israel	$8.97 
15	Spain	$8.60 
16	Turkey	$8.10 
17	Canada	$7.86 
18	Taiwan	$7.57 
19	Netherlands	$6.50 
20	Greece	$6.12 
21	Korea, North	$5.22 
22	Singapore	$4.47 
23	Sweden	$4.40 
24	Argentina	$4.30 
25	Egypt	$4.04 

Then I calculated a statistic by simply multiplying
these two figures together that I will call aggregate
military power.

Rank  Nation Aggregate Military Power (manpowerXmoney)
 1    United States	377972200
 2    China	157107100
 3    Russia	72777600
 4    India	15010560
 5    France	13671000
 6    Japan	9366240
 7    Korea, South	8943406.9
 8    Germany	8574800
 9    United Kingdom	6720400
 10   Italy	5070200
 11   Turkey	4941000
 12   Brazil	3861504
 13   Saudi Arabia	3696600
 14   Egypt	1809920

    So assuming that the Security Council should
consist of the nations with the greatest ability to
extend military power thoughout the globe, France is
still a very powerful nation that definitely deserves
its place on the Council. 
     According to my analysis it ranks as the 5th most
militarily powerful country in the world. The
surprising thing is that with the exception of
swapping India for the UK, the UN Security Council IS
comprised of the most militarily powerful countries in
the world. Based upon my now objective evaluation of
France (I still enjoy making fun of the cheese-eating
surrender monkeys), any weakness attributed to them is
merely perceived or otherwise intangible. (perhaps
psychological or related to covert intelligence, etc.)
As they clearly have the military personnel and budget
to play with the big boys.
     Also now I think that India should replace the UK
on the Security Council (although since the US and UK
are such close allies, this might hurt the United
State's interests somewhat since the UK seems to be
happy to play the role of synchophant and support us
no matter what crazy scheme for world domination we
want to engage in. Then again the purpose of UN is to
ensure that a global war (like WWII) is not fought
again and not neccessarily that the United State's
interests are always supported. Plus there is the old
chestnut of "keeping friends close but enemies
closer".
      So was what happened in Iraq a UN failure? No,
not unless you consider the fact that the UN did not
deploy peacekeeping troops to defend Iraq against the
US a failure. What happened was Bush & Cheney were too
eager to invade Iraq to wait until they had a tenable
"causus belli". (After all they could only work their
no-bid Halliburton Scam during the 4 years they had in
office so they needed to do the hard sell.) Thus, when
the UN failed to help Dubya in his self-proclaimed
"crusade", the NeoCon spin doctors told everybody that
the United Nations was weak, obsolete, and
ineffectual. When really, it was just doing it's job
of preventing an unneccesary conflict aimed at
inflating the value of General Dynamics and
Halliburton stocks while settling a personal beef that
the Bushes had with Hussein. In other words, Chirac
was just less gullible than Blair and the American
Public.
     So the People of the United States were tricked
into wasting our military resources (an euphemism for
soldier's lives and money) to reconquer an already
defeated enemy (those pesky Iraquis... why haven't we
sown their fields with salt yet? oh yeah, it's a
desert.) in order to save ourselves from imaginary
weapons of mass distruction. Anybody want to
pre-emptively invade Mars to protect ourselves from
Marvin and his Illudium Pew-36 Explosive Space
Modulator?   


=====
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!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 20:57:43 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:57:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the extropy list isn't actually dead
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040831122718.01a86ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040831205743.39706.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

Just reading Charlie's novel "Singularity Sky". A really good romp,
kind of like Vinge's "Deepness..." with a bit of "Coming of the Quantum
Cats" with a bit of Heinleins "Number of the Beast"... and of course
some Egan-esque and Broderickian influences...

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> It's just very, very calm.
> 
> Is it the weather? Not the Olympics, for dog's sake?
> 
> No, I don't have anything interesting to add either.
> 
> Damien Broderick
> [snooooze...]
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 21:15:48 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:15:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] urban sprawl as defense
In-Reply-To: <20040831204553.38577.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040831211548.43474.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>


--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:> 
> The second criteria I used was military expenditures
> in absolute dollars. After all the most well trained
> combatant is of no use unless his hardware is up to
> par. So the top 25 countries ranked by military
> expenditure are as follows:

An error in this is that you are not factoring in the military cost of
killing and how it is impacted by the national cost of living.... A
French soldier is effectively less capable of killing in the national
interest for a given number of francs than the US soldier. His gun may
cost more due to union saddled military industry, etc.... but he likely
also gets paid much differently than the US soldier...

=====
Mike Lorrey
Chairman, Free Town Land Development
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                         -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Aug 31 21:19:45 2004
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:19:45 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl News~
Message-ID: <008201c48fa0$402b5ee0$1db71218@Nano>

The Nanogirl News
August 31, 2004

How to Build a Biobot. Synthetic-biology researchers are creating a tool kit to build biobots, autonomous, special-purpose nanorobots the size of cells, with applications in medicine, national security, environmental protection, and many other fields. Too simple to replicate, biobots will be put together like Legos from a catalogue of biological and artificial parts.   
(ScienceBeat 8/27/04) http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/sb/Aug-2004/2_biobots.html   

Nanoscale parts get binding aid. Nanoscale particles that are easy to manufacture piecemeal - but hard to assemble - may benefit from a new "sticky patch" technology that researchers at the University of Michigan say enables nanoscale self-assembly. "By mimicking biological assembly, we are exploring ways to nanoengineer materials that are self-assembling, self-sensing, self-healing and self-regulating," said Sharon Glotzer, an associate professor of chemical engineering on the Ann Arbor campus. (EETimes 8/23/04) http://www.eetimes.com/at/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=29116670
View an image here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/040819082902.htm

Spotlight on Nanotubes. Think of it as track lighting on the smallest possible scale. Physicists recently discovered that a tiny tube-like molecule of carbon can produce light when electricity passes through it. Now, the same team has captured images of the precise spot from which the light shines, and by varying the applied voltages, the researchers have even moved the spot back and forth along the 3-nanometer-wide molecule. Described in the 13 August PRL, the effect provides a new tool for studying the inner workings of nanotubes, which might someday serve as the building blocks for molecular electronic circuits. (PRL 8/19/04) http://focus.aps.org/story/v14/st8

Tiny Writing: Researchers Develop Improved Method to Produce Nanometer-scale Patterns. Researchers from the Georgia Institute of Technology and the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) have developed an improved method for directly writing nanometer-scale patterns onto a variety of surfaces. The new writing method, dubbed "thermal dip pen nanolithography," represents an important extension for dip pen nanolithography (DPN), an increasingly popular technique that uses atomic force microscopy (AFM) probes as pens to produce nanometer-scale patterns. (Georgia Tech 8/30/04)
http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/newsrelease/tdpn.htm

Zyvex Offers New Nanoprobing/Nanomanipulation Analytical Services. Zyvex Corporation today (25th) announced that it will provide IC probing, electrical characterization of nanomaterials, TEM sample lift-out, nanomanipulation, and other analytical services to both potential and existing customers. These services allow customers to test, measure, and characterize their samples at Zyvex's state-of-the-art facilities. (Yahoo 8/25/04) http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040825/daw004_1.html

A Push-Pull Approach to Proteins. Researchers learn the biophysical properties of bacterial condensin. By stretching a poorly understood protein like a rubber band, a team of Berkeley Lab and University of California at Berkeley scientists is learning how the protein and its cousins perform some of life's most fundamental tasks. Their work, published in the journal Science, is the first look at the biophysical properties of a condensin. (Science Beat 8/27/04)
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/sb/Aug-2004/1_condensin.html

Nanotubes may have no 'temperature'. Could quantum effects plague miniature devices? Physicists have made a bizarre discovery: the concept of temperature is meaningless in some tiny objects. Although the concept of temperature is known to break down on the scale of individual atoms, research now suggests that it may also fail to apply in rather larger entities, such as carbon nanotubes. (Nature 8/17/04) http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040816/full/040816-4.html

(UK) Nanotechnology projects win ?15 million funding from DTI. The Department of Trade and Industry has given a major boost to Nanotechnology projects throughout the UK. Twenty five projects are to receive ?15 million worth of funding for projects ranging from anti-corrosion coatings and electronics to water purification and printing. This new investment will provide up to a maximum of 50% of each project's total value. A further ?3 million will be given to INEX, a microsystems and nanotechnology facility for industry based at Newcastle. These grants are the first to be allocated from the Government's ?90 million micro and nanotechnology manufacturing initiative in support of both nanotechnology applied research programmes and for the creation of new nanotechnology facilities across the country. Further grants will be made available over the next five years to complete the initiative.
(PublicTechnology 8/24/04)
http://www.publictechnology.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1635&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

RNA shapes up for "nano-scaffolding". Researchers at Purdue University, US, have made a variety of shapes from molecules of packaging ribonucleic acid (pRNA). The forms included twins, tetramers, triangles, rods and three-dimensional arrays. "Our work shows that we can control the construction of three-dimensional arrays made from RNA blocks of different shapes and sizes," said Peixuan Guo of Purdue. "With further research, RNA could form the superstructures for tomorrow's nanomachines." (Nanotechweb 8/25/04) http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/8/7/1

Now, nanotechnology to help surf the Internet 100 times faster! University of Toronto's Edward S. Rogers Sr. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering have claimed that in the future nanotechnology could be used to surf on the Internet through light. The findings published in the journal Nano Letters states that nano technology can make the networks work as much as 100 times faster compared to present day's technology. (Yahoo 8/30/04)
http://in.tech.yahoo.com/040830/139/2frrh.html

Scientists Reinvent DNA As Template To Produce Organic Molecules. By piggybacking small organic molecules onto short strands of DNA, chemists at Harvard University have developed an innovative new method of using DNA as a blueprint not for proteins but for collections of complex synthetic molecules. The researchers will report on the prolific technique, dubbed "DNA-templated library synthesis," this week on the web site of the journal Science. (Bio.com 8/20/04) http://www.bio.com/realm/research.jhtml?realmId=5&cid=3500012

Nanotube Dynamos. Two scientists in India have produced a tiny voltage in a small electrical circuit by blowing gas across a mat of carbon nanotubes and doped semiconductors. This result arises from two physical effects. First, in the Bernoulli effect, gas rushing past a surface produces pressure differences along streamlines, which in turn can produce a temperature gradient along a material sample. (Physics News Update 8/19/04) http://www.aip.org/pnu/2004/split/697-3.html

Nanowires take directions from substrate. For the first time, scientists have been able to control the growth direction of a gallium nitride nanowire. The researchers, from the University of California, Berkeley and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, US, tailored the growth by altering the substrate on which they grew the wires. (nanotechweb 8/4/04)
http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/8/2/1

Holographix Finds Replication Niche in Nano Industry. Call it the art of making cheap knockoffs, at the nanoscale. Holographix LLC, a 10-person startup in suburban Boston, knows it has neither the resources nor the expertise to fabricate nanoscale components. So the team has put its efforts in another valuable niche of nanoscale manufacturing: making inexpensive replicas of components that others have fabricated already. (8/23/04) http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=8237

Smooth operators: New fabrics fight off wrinkles and stains. We may soon be listening to music emitted by the fabric of our clothing or watching our shirts change color as we heat up. But the hottest thing in fabric for the moment is only a little less remarkable, able to fight off dirt and wrinkles like something out of Superman's closet. That's the view from Eva Snopek, fashion design instructor at the Illinois Institute of Art in Chicago. "There is a lot of new technology out there," she said, citing nanotechnology as the superstar of the day. And our testing backed her up.
(Fortwayne 8/31/04) http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/9545951.htm

Grad's Breakthrough Artificial Pancreas May Help Diabetics. Even though her colleagues told her it was impossible to create an artificial pancreas that could alleviate diabetes, and that she would never finish it in time to graduate from UC Berkeley, Tejal Desai finished what she set out to do...Desai, 31, built an implantable device-containing live pancreas cells-that could be used in place of daily insulin injections for diabetics to control their blood sugar levels...This combination of biology and nanotechnology was unknown when Desai began her research, but bioengineering breakthroughs such as her own are making it a quickly growing field.  (Dailycal 8/31/04) http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=15896

Professor Ken Donaldson, a lung toxicology expert and Professor of Respiratory Medicine at the University, calls for a new discipline--nanotoxicology-- to be built up, to address knowledge gaps and to help develop a safe nanotechnology. He wants guidelines to be developed to test all materials in the nanoscale where human health could be involved. (Physorg 8/30/04) http://www.physorg.com/news995.html

Hope for Alzheimer's patients: Virus that cures. Scientists here have found method which uses virus to deliver DNA to damaged brain cells and help mend them in patients. Researchers at the Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (IBN) are relying on the prowess of viruses to get into cells and deliver healthy genes in order to reverse the effects of these debilitating diseases.
(StraitsTimes 8/28/04) http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/techscience/story/0,4386,269719,00.html

The future of nanotech. Students at new college proud and excited to be in 1st class...When Garg started her doctoral program, she was a graduate student at UAlbany's School of NanoScience and NanoEngineering. Beginning Aug. 30, she'll be a charter member of the new College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering, which absorbed the school...One of the main purposes of the college is to make computer chips smaller and more powerful. It already has been recognized by Phil Bond, President Bush's chief technology expert, as the first in the country to focus exclusively on nanotechnology. (MSNBC 8/29/04) http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5843618/

Little particles make cars, profits shine. Keith Matthews knows his car wax. A car detailer at International Motor Car Co., 2111 Dana Ave., he puts a shine on two or three vehicles a day for the luxury-car dealership. "Nanowax is the best thing I've used, and I've been doing this for 15 years,'' he said. Eagle One Nanowax, produced by Ashland Inc.'s Lexington-based Valvoline unit, is easier to apply, leaves less residue and does a better job of handling swirls and defects in car finishes, he says. (Enquirer 8/27/04) http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/08/27/biz_nanowax27.html

Big Minds Gather to Discuss Ultra-Small Technology at NASA. Experts from NASA, academia and industry will meet this week to learn the latest developments in nanotechnology and provide input to guide the fledgling industry. The National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) Grand Challenge workshop, hosted by NASA Ames Research Center, located in California's Silicon Valley, will be held Aug. 24-26, 2004 at Rickey's Hyatt Hotel in Palo Alto, Calif. The workshop will focus on six themes: nanomaterials, microcraft, nanorobots, nano-micro-macro integration, nanosensors and instrumentation and astronaut health management. During the workshop, participants will attend a series of 'breakout' sessions with guest experts. (SpaceRef 8/24/04) http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=14876

Chemical Sensors Made from Nanomaterials. New types of chemical sensors for environmental monitoring, food safety or security applications could be based on nanotechnology, according to Frank Osterloh, an assistant professor of chemistry at UC Davis. "Nanomaterials are very well suited for chemical sensor applications, because their physical properties often vary considerably in response to changes of the chemical environment," Osterloh said.
(azom 8/24/04) http://www.azom.com/news.asp?newsID=1873

Trapped Single Atom Presages New Technology. Once thought impossible to catch, scientists have now snared a single atom. A report from the Department of Energy?s Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Tennessee says that collaborating Indian-American researchers have accomplished the feat, which could lead to a whole new technology. ORNL scientists Thomas Thundat and Adosh Mehta have collaborated with Ramesh Bhargava of Nanocrystals Technology in Briarcliff, N.Y., to cage single atoms in nanocrystals not much larger than the atoms themselves. Previous attempts to catch atoms have been difficult because of the unpredictable nature of atoms, as dictated by the rules of quantum mechanics. (Indolink 8/20/04)
http://www.indolink.com/SciTech/fr082004-035406.php
 


Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html
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
Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040831/1b79df02/attachment.html>

From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Tue Aug 31 23:02:36 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 19:02:36 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] the extropy list isn't actually dead
Message-ID: <BAY17-F43CAazonR8uH000b3627@hotmail.com>

I was wondering about that. Good to see it's still around after a few days 
of minimal posts.

How about those RNC protests?

BAL

>From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
>To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] the extropy list isn't actually dead
>Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:31:44 -0500
>
>It's just very, very calm.
>
>Is it the weather? Not the Olympics, for dog's sake?
>
>No, I don't have anything interesting to add either.
>
>Damien Broderick
>[snooooze...]
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 31 23:17:20 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:17:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the extropy list isn't actually dead
In-Reply-To: <BAY17-F43CAazonR8uH000b3627@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040831231720.70598.qmail@web60507.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Brian Lee <brian_a_lee at hotmail.com> wrote:

> 
> How about those RNC protests?
> 
 They are a beautiful example of democracy in action.
100,000 people are just too many to lock up in a "free
speech zone". Hitler himself would tremble if that
many people showed up to fire him.

=====
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!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush