From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jun  1 00:43:20 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 17:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bike/Trike from hell....
In-Reply-To: <000001c44691$7a71ff30$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040601004320.48123.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> The greens might argue that the environmentally
> correct
> thing to do is buy the econobox, saving some fuel
> even if 
> not much.  But ironically, just the opposite seems
> true, 
> for if I buy the guzzlemeister and don't drive it
> much, 
> I keep it away from some other yahoo who would drive
> it a 
> lot more.  If I buy the small, economic REO
> snorewagon, 
> I save *a little* fuel but I keep that gas sipper
> away from
> someone who would likely drive it more, causing them
> to
> buy something else that would devour more fuel. 
> Total
> fuel use is minimized if I drive the
> Bond-James-Bond-cruiser
> and the other guy gets the Fudd-Elmer-Fudd-buggy.
> 
> Is that a paradox?  Where is the flaw in my logic?  

The supply isn't fixed.  Whatever you buy, they'll
make more of.  (In fact, the unit cost of the next one
might actually be a little cheaper, since they just
use (or maybe slightly refine) the tools, techniques,
and so forth they used to make yours.  The amount of
this effect from one unit is likely immeasurably
small, but ask any car dealer and they'll agree that
prices would come way down if everyone who bought a
car over the next few years, bought exactly the same
make and model of car.  But not everyone needs or
wants exactly the same vehicle.)


From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Tue Jun  1 00:58:38 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:28:38 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Everquest economy
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F46@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

Here's a very nice article about an economist studying Everquest and
finding that it has a real economy (currently, 1 cent US approx equals 1
platinum piece in Everquest).

http://www.walrusmagazine.com/04/05/06/1929205.shtml

Emlyn

-------------------------------------------
Check out my Delphi 8 blog, which documents useful tips, tricks and
links for making real asp.net apps with Delphi 8
http://delphidotnet.blogspot.com
-------------------------------------------



***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  1 05:42:50 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] hello
Message-ID: <20040601054250.95952.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>

my name is Devon Fowler and I'm a volunteer and
enthusiast over at the immortality institute it's
great meeting you all.

=====
Devon Fowler


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From reason at longevitymeme.org  Tue Jun  1 05:55:13 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:55:13 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] hello
In-Reply-To: <20040601054250.95952.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNGECBEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of devon fowler
> Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:43 PM
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Subject: [extropy-chat] hello
>
> my name is Devon Fowler and I'm a volunteer and
> enthusiast over at the immortality institute it's
> great meeting you all.

Welcome aboard; funny, I thought you (and most of the other Imminst guys and
gals) were already on the ExI list :)

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Jun  1 05:53:47 2004
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:53:47 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] hello
References: <20040601054250.95952.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c4479c$ce5677a0$afa21218@Nano>

Welcome Devon, thank you for the introduction. It's good to have you here. 

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

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: devon fowler 
  To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
  Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:42 PM
  Subject: [extropy-chat] hello


  my name is Devon Fowler and I'm a volunteer and
  enthusiast over at the immortality institute it's
  great meeting you all.

  =====
  Devon Fowler




  __________________________________
  Do you Yahoo!?
  Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
  http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 
  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040531/b728ac54/attachment.html>

From neptune at superlink.net  Tue Jun  1 11:18:55 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 07:18:55 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] hello
References: <20040601054250.95952.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <00a101c447ca$3ad63820$9b893cd1@neptune>

On Tuesday, June 01, 2004 1:42 AM "devon fowler" dfowler282004 at yahoo.com
wrote:
> my name is Devon Fowler and I'm a volunteer and
> enthusiast over at the immortality institute it's
> great meeting you all.

Good to have you on board!

Regards,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From pgptag at gmail.com  Tue Jun  1 17:54:17 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 19:54:17 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nanoparticles Illuminate Brain Tumors For Days Under
	MRI
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBMEJOCBAA.pgptag@gmail.com>

>From Science Daily: A research team from Oregon Health & Science University and the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center is demonstrating some of the world's first clinical applications for nanometer-size particles in the brain. 
The OHSU scientists have shown that an iron oxide nanoparticle as small as a virus can outline not only brain tumors under magnetic resonance imaging, but also other lesions in the brain that may otherwise have gone unnoticed, according to a study published in the journal Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 23/04/2004
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040601/5487bb9c/attachment.html>

From emerson at singinst.org  Tue Jun  1 18:10:06 2004
From: emerson at singinst.org (Tyler Emerson)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 13:10:06 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
Message-ID: <200406011810.i51IA6n02019@tick.javien.com>

Although we are not ready to begin our AI project, we are close enough to
begin forming the development team. Presently, we have two confirmed team
members. We're now actively searching for Singularitarians with software
engineering and cognitive science expertise to join the development team. If
you believe you may be a suitable candidate, or know someone who may, please
read "Becoming a Seed AI Programmer," and consider getting in touch at
institute at singinst.org. The Institute is searching for nothing less than 
the core team to fulfill our mission; we need the very best we can find.

http://www.singinst.org/action/seed-ai-programmer.html

Sincerely,

---------
Tyler Emerson
Executive Director
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/
Suite 106 PMB #12
4290 Bells Ferry Road
Kennesaw, GA 30144
emerson at singinst.org / (417) 840-5968
The SIAI Voice - Our Free Bulletin:
http://www.singinst.org/news/subscribe.html



From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Tue Jun  1 18:19:01 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 19:19:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] hello 
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040601191835.0234e0a0@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>


>Message: 12
>Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
>From: devon fowler <dfowler282004 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] hello
>To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>Message-ID: <20040601054250.95952.qmail at web50708.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>my name is Devon Fowler and I'm a volunteer and
>enthusiast over at the immortality institute it's
>great meeting you all.
>=====
>Devon Fowler


Hello there!



James...

>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
>http://messenger.yahoo.com/




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun  1 18:58:12 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 13:58:12 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] another moderately Spikish novel
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040601135654.01cce630@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

http://www.sfsite.com/06a/nh177.htm

Natural History
Justina Robson
Pan Macmillan, 393 pages

A review by <mailto:martin at theculture.org?subject=Natural History>Martin 
<mailto:martin at theculture.org?subject=Natural History>Lewis
We've grown used to thinking of ourselves as the pinnacle of evolution but, 
in the future Justina Robson envisions in Natural History, the massed ranks 
of humanity find themselves the Unevolved. No longer the greatest ape, they 
are mere Monkeys. Or so the Forged would have them believe.

The Forged are still human, at least technically, but they are also 
unequivocally other. Many are animal based: arachnids, hive-minded 
insectoids or avians (like viewpoint character Roc Handslicer Corvax). 
Others are vast spaceships. Between these are hybrids like the shuttle 
Ironhorse AnimaMekTek Aurora, "a smooth blue oval with a long, graceful 
tail like a gigantic airborne manta ray", and beyond even this are the 
Gaiaforms, unimaginably vast creatures who have rendered the Moon and Mars 
habitable. [etc]



From pgptag at gmail.com  Tue Jun  1 18:59:00 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 20:59:00 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <200406011810.i51IA6n02019@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEJPCBAA.pgptag@gmail.com>

Very interesting Tyler. First, kudos for your "Becoming a Seed AI
Programmer" article which is one of the very best job offered texts that I
have ever seen.
To business: reading the description of your project, and having some
experience in managing large software development proejcts, I found myself
trying to quantify your human resource needs and came up with a core staff
of 50 software managers, architects, designers, coders, testers, plus
cognitive scientists, mathematicians, hardware and communications experts,
*insert here all current IT buzzwords*, and of course you also need support
staff. As part of the team you need some of the very best money can buy,
people who would command a salary of 250k+/yr in the job market. Your total
budget requirement is, I believe, between 10 and 20M/yr, and these may well
be very conservative estimates. How good are your funding projections over
the next few years? Of course we will try contributing individually a few
tens of bucks every now and then but you know this is not enough.
Yes of course you can use volunteers, but my advice is not to underestimate
the requirement for paid staff. Volunteers can contribute very brilliant but
intrinsically unreliable work (they are available today, tomorrow they need
money find a job and go), you need paid staff for reliability.
Have you thought of intermediate marketable results that would look good on
a business plan?
G.

-----Original Message-----
From: wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org
[mailto:wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org]On Behalf Of Tyler Emerson
Sent: 01 June 2004 20:10
To: SL4; SIAIv; Extropy Chat; WTA-Talk; AGI
Subject: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates


Although we are not ready to begin our AI project, we are close enough to
begin forming the development team. Presently, we have two confirmed team
members. We're now actively searching for Singularitarians with software
engineering and cognitive science expertise to join the development team. If
you believe you may be a suitable candidate, or know someone who may, please
read "Becoming a Seed AI Programmer," and consider getting in touch at
institute at singinst.org. The Institute is searching for nothing less than
the core team to fulfill our mission; we need the very best we can find.

http://www.singinst.org/action/seed-ai-programmer.html

Sincerely,
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 23/04/2004



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Jun  1 19:48:58 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 21:48:58 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] An Open Letter On Software Patents and EU Election
Message-ID: <20040601194858.GX12847@leitl.org>


Please consider strongly to go voting, if you're EUtrash. And now back to our
regular programme...

http://www.linux.org.uk/open.l.html

An Open Letter On Software Patents and EU Election

"Whatever you do will be insignificant,  but it is very important that you do
it." 
-- Gandhi

Most of the time the ability to influence Politicians is remarkably limited.
They ignore letters, and often all the major parties reflect only large
proprietary interests, ensuring you get CDs that won't play in a car,
arrested for helping the blind read protected ebooks and prevented from
writing and using software by the patent lobby, intent on locking up
technical creativity the same way the soviets locked up the typewriter.

In about a week you get an opportunity to send the EU politicians a message
they cannot ignore - but sadly only 18% of UK citizens will bother to do so.
While most British people would like to ignore the EU, the simple fact is
that it is the EU that passed the EUCD, it is the EU that can fight software
patents and it is the EU that is currently working to create even more
draconian "intellectual property rights" laws.

This letter is aimed at the other 82% of hackers, open source enthusiasts, or
just people who want the rights to use CD's they paid for fairly and
honestly. That little piece of cardboard is your chance to call the EU to
account, and thanks to the EU voting system you can make a difference, in
fact you count five fold due to the expected low turnout.

There are two parties that are fundmanetally opposed to things like Software
Patents.The Green-EFA alliance (Green Party, Plaid Cymru and friends) have
been fighting the patent fight from the beginning including organising events
in Brussels, as well as fighting to make the EU more democratic (to stop
unelected Beaurocrats overturning the will of the parliament). The UKIP (UK
Independance Party) is opposed on the ground that EU legislation like
software patents clogs up British business and harms Britain as a sovereign
nation. Unlike our parliamentary elections the EU voting system means it is
not a two horse race.

To defeat software patents now needs an absolute majority in the parliament.
That is going to be hard to achieve, but you get to adjust the make up of the
parliament, and every vote is going to count.

Please, if you were not going to vote, either vote for the UKIP or Green-EFA
alliance members. Ideally pick the one of the two that is most likely to win
in your area, but if you have philosophical reasons for favouring one of the
two (such as a dislike of the EU) please go vote for the one you favour.
These are the people who will have to decide how to fix the EUCD, these are
the people who will have to decide on Software Patents. Whether you believe
in the EU or not, the people you vote for (or the pro patent, pro DRM people
who will get in by default if you do not vote) will dictate your future
rights.

The turnout in the UK is expected to be 18%. That favours anyone who can
mobilize and get out and vote. It's a one off opportunity to kick the
pro-patent lobby somewhere that hurts.

Vote, get your friends and families to vote, get LUGs to vote en-masse. Call
out the troops - it's payback time...


Alan Cox




For more information on the problems of software patents visit the FFII. The
FFII is also launching a call for action to ask European candidiates to
answer questions on their software patent position.

-- 
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/20040601/cd1c72e3/attachment.bin>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jun  1 20:11:55 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 13:11:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEJPCBAA.pgptag@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040601201155.17021.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>

What he said.  From the article:

> Your personal feelings are not a consideration. Is
> this the best thing for Earth?

Perhaps.  Setting humility aside for the moment, most
of my past employers told me I was far and away the
best programmer they had ever worked with.  The ones
who didn't were employing me for non-programming
skills.  I've gotten over $100K salary at previous
jobs, and even with personal feelings towards this
project letting me discount my rate, I'd demand a high
pay rate so I can set aside all material worries
(first and foremost, what happens to me - and my other
financial concerns - if the project goes nowhere
despite my efforts, which possibility has happened
with far too many less venturesome projects to simply
ignore) and do the best job that I can...

> You may not get paid very well.

...but this answer simply does NOT suffice.  I suspect
the same is true for any programmer of my caliber or
higher, which only reinforces things.  (Creating
Friendly AI by myself?  Unlikely, at best.  Creating
Friendly AI with a lot of help of my caliber?  That's
starting to become possible.)

You might be able to recruit top coders by other
means.  Take Linux, for example.  But, as with Linux,
it's usually only possible after people find a way to
make money while still "donating" their efforts (i.e.
for Linux, someone who helped write the kernel is
demonstrably something of an expert, and can get hired
to expert-level jobs at organizations making use of
Linux).  Perhaps if you had enough of a seed AI that
it could be applied to productive uses even while
incomplete?  (Think of it as bootstrapping.)  But
you'll need someone to help you get it that far, and
you need to offer something in the mean time.

Transforming the Earth the right way, even if one dies
in the process, but is at least certain the project
will reach its desired end - that can be managed.
Risking everything when there's a good chance of
nothing?  Sorry, but the same judgement you call for
to guide the project through, tells me there are far
less risky (personally and for all of humanity) paths
to reach the same end of a Friendly AI, and they don't
(presently) involve me dedicating my working hours to
non-payers like you.

--- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com> wrote:
> Very interesting Tyler. First, kudos for your
> "Becoming a Seed AI
> Programmer" article which is one of the very best
> job offered texts that I
> have ever seen.
> To business: reading the description of your
> project, and having some
> experience in managing large software development
> proejcts, I found myself
> trying to quantify your human resource needs and
> came up with a core staff
> of 50 software managers, architects, designers,
> coders, testers, plus
> cognitive scientists, mathematicians, hardware and
> communications experts,
> *insert here all current IT buzzwords*, and of
> course you also need support
> staff. As part of the team you need some of the very
> best money can buy,
> people who would command a salary of 250k+/yr in the
> job market. Your total
> budget requirement is, I believe, between 10 and
> 20M/yr, and these may well
> be very conservative estimates. How good are your
> funding projections over
> the next few years? Of course we will try
> contributing individually a few
> tens of bucks every now and then but you know this
> is not enough.
> Yes of course you can use volunteers, but my advice
> is not to underestimate
> the requirement for paid staff. Volunteers can
> contribute very brilliant but
> intrinsically unreliable work (they are available
> today, tomorrow they need
> money find a job and go), you need paid staff for
> reliability.
> Have you thought of intermediate marketable results
> that would look good on
> a business plan?
> G.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org
> [mailto:wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org]On Behalf
> Of Tyler Emerson
> Sent: 01 June 2004 20:10
> To: SL4; SIAIv; Extropy Chat; WTA-Talk; AGI
> Subject: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
> candidates
> 
> 
> Although we are not ready to begin our AI project,
> we are close enough to
> begin forming the development team. Presently, we
> have two confirmed team
> members. We're now actively searching for
> Singularitarians with software
> engineering and cognitive science expertise to join
> the development team. If
> you believe you may be a suitable candidate, or know
> someone who may, please
> read "Becoming a Seed AI Programmer," and consider
> getting in touch at
> institute at singinst.org. The Institute is searching
> for nothing less than
> the core team to fulfill our mission; we need the
> very best we can find.
> 
>
http://www.singinst.org/action/seed-ai-programmer.html
> 
> Sincerely,
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system
> (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release
> Date: 23/04/2004
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From brentn at freeshell.org  Tue Jun  1 20:13:16 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Tue,  1 Jun 2004 16:13:16 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] An Open Letter On Software Patents and EU Election
In-Reply-To: <20040601194858.GX12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <r02010100-1033-1E4BF53EB40811D88BBA000393A47D36@[192.168.123.121]>

 (6/1/04 21:48) Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

>Please consider strongly to go voting, if you're EUtrash. And now back to our
>regular programme...
>
>http://www.linux.org.uk/open.l.html


As non-EUtrash, I second Eugen's exhortation. Europe's willingness to resist the USian "creeping IP hell" is the only thing, IMO, that will protect independent thinkers from government/corporate interference in the next century.

And the open letter is worth a read. Alan Cox is eminently coherent and a swell guy to boot.


Brent

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

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


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Tue Jun  1 20:52:03 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 13:52:03 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Post-Traumatic Slave Disorder?
Message-ID: <40BCEC73.8F246DB3@mindspring.com>

http://oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news/1086004710123410.xml?oregonian?lcg

Judge rejects slave trauma as defense for killing
A Washington County judge threw out a PSU professor's novel theory at 
pretrial but said she may consider it at trial

Monday, May 31, 2004
HOLLY DANKS

HILLSBORO -- A Portland lawyer says suffering by African Americans at 
the hands of slave owners is to blame in the death of a 2-year-old 
Beaverton boy.

Randall Vogt is offering the untested theory, called post traumatic 
slave syndrome, in his defense of Isaac Cortez Bynum, who is charged 
with murder by abuse in the June 30 death of his son, Ryshawn Lamar 
Bynum. Vogt says he will argue -- "in a general way" -- that masters 
beat slaves, so Bynum was justified in beating his son.

The slave theory is the work of Joy DeGruy-Leary, an assistant professor 
in the Portland State University Graduate School of Social Work. It is 
not listed by psychiatrists or the courts as an accepted disorder, and 
some experts said they had never heard of it.

DeGruy-Leary testified this month in Washington County Circuit Court 
that African Americans today are affected by past centuries of U.S. 
slavery because the original slaves were never treated for the trauma of 
losing their homes; seeing relatives whipped, raped and killed; and 
being subjugated by whites.

Because African Americans as a class never got a chance to heal and 
today still face racism, oppression and societal inequality, they suffer 
from multigenerational trauma, says DeGruy-Leary, who is African 
American. Self-destructive, violent or aggressive behavior often 
results, she says.

Noting the theory has not been proven or ever offered in court, 
Washington County Circuit Judge Nancy W. Campbell recently threw out 
DeGruy-Leary's pretrial testimony.

But the judge said she would reconsider the defense for Bynum's 
September trial if his lawyer can show the slave theory is an accepted 
mental disorder with a valid scientific basis and specifically applies 
to this case.

"I think it can be proven," the court-appointed Vogt said after 
Campbell's ruling. "The problem is it's brand new. It's not as easy to 
present in court as something that's been established over years."

Murder-by-abuse, punishable by life in prison with 25 years before 
possible parole, means the victim suffered from a pattern of assaults. 
An autopsy found Ryshawn Bynum died of a brain injury and had a broken 
neck, broken ribs and as many as 70 whip marks on his legs, buttocks, 
back and chest that were of various ages.

Bynum told police he hit his son with a watch strap during 
potty-training. He said the day before the boy died, he was playing 
"helicopter," swinging his son around the room, when the boy hit his 
head on a table.

"He had a traditional, Southern, small-town, working-class upbringing 
where 'whuppin' was accepted," Vogt said. "Whether that was abusive or 
not, that is in the eye of the beholder. He was raised differently than 
your typical kid in Beaverton."

Experts disagree on whether post traumatic slave syndrome can be proven, 
much less accepted in legal arenas. It took 50 years for society and the 
courts to accept post traumatic stress syndrome, a diagnosis for someone 
who has experienced or witnessed an extraordinary event that involves 
actual or threatened death or serious injury. It is only diagnosed when 
functioning is severely impaired.

The judge also said the defense would have to show Bynum, who grew up in 
Mississippi, has slave syndrome. At the time of her testimony, 
DeGruy-Leary had not interviewed him.

Besides a doctorate in social work research, DeGruy-Leary has a master's 
degree in clinical psychology. She said she can offer counseling but is 
not licensed to diagnose anyone.

"Post traumatic slave syndrome is rather unique; it's not that everybody 
has it," DeGruy-Leary testified. "If you are African American and you 
are living in America, you have been impacted."

Under cross-examination by Robert Hull, Washington County senior deputy 
district attorney, DeGruy-Leary viewed Ryshawn Bynum's autopsy photos.

Calling the boy's injuries excessive, DeGruy-Leary said she would have 
reported them. But in the African American culture, such discipline "is 
extremely common," she said. "It falls in the rubric of what they think 
is normal."

A Los Angeles native, DeGruy-Leary has been working on the theory for 
two decades and said she is still a year from publishing a book on it. 
She coined the name in her 2001 dissertation on African American male 
youth violence.

She said she thinks post traumatic slave syndrome can be proven 
scientifically once the politics of race are set aside and the white 
research establishment takes time to study it.

"It's not a conversation that America wants to have," DeGruy-Leary said. 
"It's so ugly; it's so blatant."

Questioning the science

William E. Narrow, a psychiatrist who serves as associate director of 
research on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 
said he had never heard of post traumatic slave syndrome and no one has 
proposed that it be included in the book's next edition.

Published by the American Psychiatric Association, the "DSM" is a 
courtroom bible. Judge Campbell said that if post traumatic slave 
disorder were in the DSM, she would consider it more favorably.

Narrow said the fifth edition of the diagnostic manual probably won't be 
published until 2012. In the meantime, researchers are testing new 
disorders for possible inclusion.

"To say that everybody in a particular racial or ethnic group has a 
diagnosis, I don't think it falls under what we do," Narrow said. "We 
have enough trouble as it is with people saying we are trying to make 
everybody mentally ill without trying to include something like that."

Alberto M. Goldwaser, a clinical and forensic psychiatrist, has 
testified as an expert in about 20 court cases across the country 
involving post traumatic stress, including murders.

"Maybe it's a social phenomenon and not a clinical phenomenon," he said 
in an interview from his Paramus, N.J., office, noting that he had never 
heard of post traumatic slave syndrome.

Because no African American today has been a slave, Goldwaser called the 
theory "such a stretch." He said he didn't think it would ever be 
accepted in court.

Alvin F. Poussaint, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School 
and an expert on race relations in the United States, outlined his 
version of post traumatic slave syndrome in the 2000 book "Lay My Burden 
Down."

"It is a legacy where blacks were beaten a lot and lived in terror that 
they could be killed at will," Poussaint said from his Boston office.

"That type of trauma gets passed on for generations" in an entire group, 
he said. "But in a one-on-one case, these things are hard to prove."

Although DeGruy-Leary's theory could be "viable to educate the public, I 
don't know about in a court of law," Poussaint said.

"Lawyers try everything; they might as well put it out."

***

Using this logic, I guess I'm fat because I suffer from post-traumatic
famine syndrome -- my ancestors starved, y'see. Or maybe the reason we're
all so acquisitive is that we suffer from post-traumatic poverty syndrome,
because most of our ancestors were dreadfully poor. Hey, this is fun. I'll
have to think up a few more creative excuses.

Beth Wolszon

I need money.  A long time ago my God flooded the earth and forced my 
ancestors to live in a boat for 40 days and nights. I still haven't 
recovered. I will not even go into the time where my ancestors were 
thrown out of a wonderful garden.
Signed,
White Male Xtian Fundie.
--  Todd Isaac


-- 
"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 thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun  1 22:46:11 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 17:46:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] fangs
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040601174343.01bfd7d0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

"Dr. Ed Reifman" <reifmandds at yahoo.com> allowed me to repost this comment:

At 12:56 PM 5/31/2004 -0700, Mike wrote:

 >Cheaper synthetic diamonds for drill tips makes for more comfortable
 >drilling/grinding/polishing, anasthetics for pain take effect sooner,
 >among other things.

[Ed:]

Here's the 'skinny' on this stuff:  The drill tips are about the same price 
(weren't expensive before)... but instead of lasting for one patient (or 
one crown), they will last for 1.5 crowns.  Most dentists feel this is not 
a major breakthrough but another small, incremental step in tech advancement.

[me, earlier:]

Replacement filler hardens faster under blue light. (Dr. Ed could tell us
more if he's still on the list.)

[Ed:]

The UV light has been around for 20 years now.  Now we have blue, or 
probably they are talking about plasma arc lighting.  This is more used in 
teeth whitening, as it is a bit safer, IMHO.  In terms of white bonded 
restorations, its frequency might be a bit more narrow so instead of 
'curing' or hardening the white bonded restorative material in 20 seconds, 
it takes about 8 seconds.  Again, kind of nice, but no big deal.  Actually, 
I think the BIG deal is that we now have a portable, battery-powered blue 
light which we can hand carry around from operatory to operatory!

Ed Reifman, DDS

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

Damien Broderick



From michael at acceleratingfuture.com  Wed Jun  2 03:29:30 2004
From: michael at acceleratingfuture.com (Michael Anissimov)
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 20:29:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040601201155.17021.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040601201155.17021.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40BD499A.2020902@acceleratingfuture.com>

Adrian Tymes wrote:

>Perhaps.  Setting humility aside for the moment, most
>of my past employers told me I was far and away the
>best programmer they had ever worked with.  The ones
>who didn't were employing me for non-programming
>skills.  I've gotten over $100K salary at previous
>jobs, and even with personal feelings towards this
>project letting me discount my rate, I'd demand a high
>pay rate so I can set aside all material worries
>(first and foremost, what happens to me - and my other
>financial concerns - if the project goes nowhere
>

If no FAI project ever goes anywhere, then someone eventually builds a 
self-improving UFAI (or engages in nanowar), and you, your financial 
concerns, and your personal concerns all go *poof* in one fell swoop. 

>...but this answer simply does NOT suffice.  I suspect
>the same is true for any programmer of my caliber or
>higher, which only reinforces things.  (Creating
>Friendly AI by myself?  Unlikely, at best.  Creating
>Friendly AI with a lot of help of my caliber?  That's
>starting to become possible.)
>

That's why we're seeking *Singularitarian* 
(http://yudkowsky.net/sing/principles.html) programmers of extremely 
high caliber.  They would be in it for the saving-the-world aspect.  A 
successful Singularity would bring about an immense amount of material 
abundance.

>Transforming the Earth the right way, even if one dies
>in the process, but is at least certain the project
>will reach its desired end - that can be managed.
>Risking everything when there's a good chance of
>nothing?  Sorry, but the same judgement you call for
>to guide the project through, tells me there are far
>less risky (personally and for all of humanity) paths
>to reach the same end of a Friendly AI, and they don't
>(presently) involve me dedicating my working hours to
>non-payers like you.
>

Where *do* they involve dedicating your hours?  Are there faster tracks 
to Friendly AI than the one SIAI is currently on?  SIAI was formed with 
the specific goal of getting to FAI as fast as possible, so it is our 
responsibility to seek out faster means if they are available.  What are 
your ideas?  Incremental bootstrapping with commercial approaches sounds 
more credible on the surface, but is isn't likely to get us to FAI 
faster than an exclusive focus, if that's what you were thinking of.

-- 
Michael Anissimov                           http://www.singinst.org/
Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence

--
Subscribe to our free eBulletin for research and community news:
http://www.singinst.org/news/subscribe.html




From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 06:58:24 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 08:58:24 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040601201155.17021.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEJPCBAA.pgptag@gmail.com>
	<20040601201155.17021.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>

On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 01:11:55PM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> ...but this answer simply does NOT suffice.  I suspect
> the same is true for any programmer of my caliber or
> higher, which only reinforces things.  (Creating
> Friendly AI by myself?  Unlikely, at best.  Creating
> Friendly AI with a lot of help of my caliber?  That's
> starting to become possible.)

With programmers alone it's hard even to tie your own shoelaces.
What of hardware people? Numerics people? Neuroscientists, physicists?

Writing code is a negligible part of the project.

-- 
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/20040602/b54307de/attachment.bin>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 07:51:33 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 00:51:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BD499A.2020902@acceleratingfuture.com>
Message-ID: <20040602075133.84206.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Michael Anissimov <michael at acceleratingfuture.com>
wrote:
> Adrian Tymes wrote:
> >(first and foremost, what happens to me - and my
> other
> >financial concerns - if the project goes nowhere
> 
> If no FAI project ever goes anywhere, then someone
> eventually builds a 
> self-improving UFAI (or engages in nanowar), and
> you, your financial 
> concerns, and your personal concerns all go *poof*
> in one fell swoop. 

You misread.  If the project - that is, if *YOUR*
project - goes nowhere, well, there are others trying
to build friendly (and technically even Friendly,
although they haven't formally checked their goals
against your specification yet) AIs, some of whom have
a lot more resources and a lot higher chance of
success.

> >...but this answer simply does NOT suffice.  I
> suspect
> >the same is true for any programmer of my caliber
> or
> >higher, which only reinforces things.  (Creating
> >Friendly AI by myself?  Unlikely, at best. 
> Creating
> >Friendly AI with a lot of help of my caliber? 
> That's
> >starting to become possible.)
> 
> That's why we're seeking *Singularitarian* 
> (http://yudkowsky.net/sing/principles.html)
> programmers of extremely 
> high caliber.  They would be in it for the
> saving-the-world aspect.  A 
> successful Singularity would bring about an immense
> amount of material 
> abundance.

What of the person who agrees with your goals, and in
particular wishes to help bring about the Singularity
ASAP, but whose opinion is that joining your team is
not the best route to achieve it?  (At least, among
the presently available routes for said person's
actions.)  According to that link, said person would
seem to be a Singularitarian, and thus who you say
you're looking for.

I'm pointing out a problem with your means to the end,
not the end.  And, again, I mean no insult by any of
this; it's just that an honest evaluation means I must
put humility aside and acknowledge that there is a
chance, however small, that my efforts could help
reshape the world in positive ways - and that not only
have I been trying to steer my career to maximize
those odds, but from some points of view, I have even
had a little success already (by helping to make
practical the neuron/silicon interfaces being
experimented with in many labs today).  Which, when
combined with my experience in programming,
cognitive/brain science, and most of the other areas
you list, makes me seem to be exactly who you're
trying to recruit - but not only do I reject your
current offer, I sense that anyone in my approximate
position would do likewise.

> >Sorry, but the same judgement you call
> for
> >to guide the project through, tells me there are
> far
> >less risky (personally and for all of humanity)
> paths
> >to reach the same end of a Friendly AI, and they
> don't
> >(presently) involve me dedicating my working hours
> to
> >non-payers like you.
> 
> Where *do* they involve dedicating your hours?

On projects that have a greater chance of sustaining
me in the short term, and/or add small but definite
steps towards the future we wish.  Bootstrapping, as
it were.

(For instance, my major project at the moment is
learning nanolithography so I can help advance that
state of the art towards Drexlerian ideals in ways
that make off-Earth pre-Singularity enclaves of
humanity more likely...and on the way, try to tap
certain quantum physics phenomena to try to make a lot
more energy available to mankind.  Success is not
guaranteed, but there doesn't seem to be anyone else
in the world trying my exact route, yet it does seem
to be possible given the tools now available.  A large
spike in environmentally clean domestic energy
generation would probably free up all kinds of
resources, some of which would likely wind up with
organizations like SIAI, not to mention reduce several
factors which negatively impact our lifespans.  BTW,
this is not a call for assistance - I do not presently
see how anyone not already on or near my path could
reasonably help in the near future - just an example.
Another example is contract programming, with little
significance other than paying the bills while I
tackle the above effort.  Eventually, I'd prefer to
have the main effort also pay the bills, but I do not
perceive that I am nearly far enough along yet to
where I could likely get grants or similar
assistance.)

> Are
> there faster tracks 
> to Friendly AI than the one SIAI is currently on? 

In short?  Yes.  (At least, measured by expected time
to success, weighing all the outcomes with their
probabilities.)

> SIAI was formed with 
> the specific goal of getting to FAI as fast as
> possible, so it is our 
> responsibility to seek out faster means if they are
> available.  What are 
> your ideas?  Incremental bootstrapping with
> commercial approaches sounds 
> more credible on the surface, but is isn't likely to
> get us to FAI 
> faster than an exclusive focus, if that's what you
> were thinking of.

I disagree.  Incremental bootstrapping will get you
the resources you need to proceed to the next stage,
and to the next stage after that.  Trying to do it all
at once may seem faster, but giant projects like that
for other applications have a history of failures
which you show no sign of addressing for this
application (or even being aware of, though I do give
you the benefit of the doubt there), so historically
the odds are fantastically tiny that you will create
the first seed AI *BY THAT METHOD*.  You don't even
have much chance of a partial success which others can
build on (which, given the outcomes here, could
arguably be credited as a full, if delayed, success).
Bootstrapping has historically proven to give a much
greater chance of success, with fewer total resources
consumed (the most important resource in this case
being time) before the initially desired goal is
eventually achieved.  (I've seen this time and time
again, and I'm seeing it yet again in my nano
development.  I could detail that story if you want,
but that might diverge from the topic a bit too much.)

And then there is also the problem with relying
exclusively on essentially volunteer labor, even
full-time volunteers like you requested (no guarantee
of good pay - or, by implication, any contractually
enforceable steady pay - means essentially volunteer
labor).  Even the most presently gung-ho volunteer may
start to become disillusioned if the project does not
change the world within the next few years (and there
are very few who would put the Singularity this side
of 2010).

Basically, you need to study what happens to most
efforts like what you propose (*IGNORE* the ends -
they don't matter except as a circumstance until after
the project succeeds, no matter how important they are
- and focus on the means), and see why they tend to
fail.  Specifically, all-volunteer efforts with no
practical ("commercial") applications or focus in the
next several years, and the corresponding potential
degeneration of motivation in those who sign up
(again, regardless of their present feelings: being
constantly hungry or other resource-depleted states
tends to invoke hardwired overrides in the human
psyche - and until after your project succeeds or
someone else beats you to making an AI, you'll have to
use human beings).


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 07:58:05 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 00:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 01:11:55PM -0700, Adrian
> Tymes wrote:
> > ...but this answer simply does NOT suffice.  I
> suspect
> > the same is true for any programmer of my caliber
> or
> > higher, which only reinforces things.  (Creating
> > Friendly AI by myself?  Unlikely, at best. 
> Creating
> > Friendly AI with a lot of help of my caliber? 
> That's
> > starting to become possible.)
> 
> With programmers alone it's hard even to tie your
> own shoelaces.
> What of hardware people? Numerics people?
> Neuroscientists, physicists?
> 
> Writing code is a negligible part of the project.

I used "programmer" as shorthand.  I know neuroscience
and hardware, as well, and of course any (decent)
programmer knows math.  But we know an AI will require
new software to be written (i.e., programming); it is
not as easy to prove that new hardware, or new
statistical methods, will have to be custom developed
for this project.  (Possible, perhaps.  Easy, no,
especially when one considers that "custom developed"
rules out hiring people to continue implementing
Moore's Law when other companies are already doing so
regardless of our actions.)


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 08:53:22 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:53:22 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 12:58:05AM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> I used "programmer" as shorthand.  I know neuroscience

I would have listed "scientist" and "engineer" in 
the requirement profile.

> and hardware, as well, and of course any (decent)
> programmer knows math.  But we know an AI will require

So you have a Ph.D. in three different disciplines (that be neuroscience,
computational and/or wet), practical hardware design (at least at FPGA level,
preferrably ASIC), have practical experience with high-performance numerics 
codes >kNode country, and can handle complex nonlinear dynamics?

And you're only taking 100 k$/year? Wow, you're a real bargain.

> new software to be written (i.e., programming); it is

You can assume that those scientists and engineers can program.
High-performance parallel numerics, that is, which most programmers have
absolutely no clue of.

> not as easy to prove that new hardware, or new
> statistical methods, will have to be custom developed
> for this project.  (Possible, perhaps.  Easy, no,

What can I say, people with that attitude have been failing for past 40-50
years. You're familiar as to why they've been failing, as you've studied
those failures extensively, right?

> especially when one considers that "custom developed"
> rules out hiring people to continue implementing
> Moore's Law when other companies are already doing so

Moore's law describes *integration density*. Given that you're an
accomplished numerics guy, I wonder why you never heard about benchmarks.
Such as, memory bandwidth? Unpredictable access? 

There are a few handy graphs on the web, and they're unfortunately no linear
semi-log plots. I stopped posting links, because nobody reads them anyway.

> regardless of our actions.)

-- 
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/20040602/1eb11258/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 09:42:27 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 05:42:27 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> So you have a Ph.D. in three different disciplines (that be neuroscience,
> computational and/or wet), practical hardware design (at least at FPGA level,
> preferrably ASIC), have practical experience with high-performance numerics 
> codes >kNode country, and can handle complex nonlinear dynamics?
> 
> You can assume that those scientists and engineers can program.
> High-performance parallel numerics, that is, which most programmers have
> absolutely no clue of.

This is SIAI's project, Eugen, not yours, don't embroider our job 
requirements.  I don't currently expect to require anything special in the 
way of hardware.  Lots and lots of cognitive science background is a good 
idea.  The main math I already know will be required is Bayesian 
probability theory and expected utility decision theory, not knowing the 
equations, but feeling them in your bones and using them to see everything 
you work with.  I once read a fragment of an online physics course whose 
introduction noted that to understand that course you needed to do basic 
integrations and differentiations with your spine, not your brain.  What 
calculus is to physics, Bayes is to AI.

I was not planning to brute-force the problem, nor to use architectures 
inspired by specific details of the human brain.  The massively 
interdisciplinary cognitive science background required is essentially the 
equivalent of being literate and having a GED, rather than being a 
primitive tribesperson from the Islets of Langerhans.

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


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 10:17:44 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 12:17:44 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 05:42:27AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> This is SIAI's project, Eugen, not yours, don't embroider our job 
> requirements.  I don't currently expect to require anything special in the 

I'm not speaking about SIAI's project. I'm talking about the kind of talent
and background required to have a faint chance of succeeding, assuming a
well-funded large scale effort.

> way of hardware.  Lots and lots of cognitive science background is a good 

I think your best ROI is using the Grid framework, and ask for time on a
cluster and/or look for volunteer contributors a la SIAI at home.

> idea.  The main math I already know will be required is Bayesian 
> probability theory and expected utility decision theory, not knowing the 
> equations, but feeling them in your bones and using them to see everything 
> you work with.  I once read a fragment of an online physics course whose 
> introduction noted that to understand that course you needed to do basic 
> integrations and differentiations with your spine, not your brain.  What 
> calculus is to physics, Bayes is to AI.

I don't think that's a requirement, but it's your project.
 
> I was not planning to brute-force the problem, nor to use architectures 
> inspired by specific details of the human brain.  The massively 
> interdisciplinary cognitive science background required is essentially the 
> equivalent of being literate and having a GED, rather than being a 
> primitive tribesperson from the Islets of Langerhans.

You will have trouble finding volunteers with the right background, who're
willing to work for free, or nearly for free. I don't have a good idea where
even to look, Orkut would be a good first place to start.

-- 
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/20040602/554e6524/attachment.bin>

From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Jun  2 10:21:01 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 11:21:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
Message-ID: <40BDAA0D.6010306@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Wed Jun 2 00:58:24 MDT 2004 Eugen Leitl wittily wrote:
> With programmers alone it's hard even to tie your own shoelaces.
> What of hardware people? Numerics people? Neuroscientists, physicists?
>
> Writing code is a negligible part of the project.

Here in the UK over the next five years the government will spend an
extra ?5billion (~$9.2 billion) creating the IT infrastructure for a
21st century national health service. The National Programme is the UK's
biggest technology project. Some articles mention up to 10,000
programmers will be involved.

Take the buzzwords out and basically all this money is being spent to
get our medical records on a database so that they can be on a screen in
hospital and at your local doctor.

Now if it takes that much effort to get data on a screen, how much 
should taking over the world cost?

Pause for thought?

BillK


From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 10:27:40 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 06:27:40 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602075133.84206.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040602075133.84206.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40BDAB9C.9010109@pobox.com>

Adrian Tymes wrote:
> 
> You misread.  If the project - that is, if *YOUR*
> project - goes nowhere, well, there are others trying
> to build friendly (and technically even Friendly,
> although they haven't formally checked their goals
> against your specification yet) AIs, some of whom have
> a lot more resources and a lot higher chance of
> success.

Many projects have a lot more resources.  Some may even have a fair chance 
of success on the deadly part of the problem.  I'm not aware of one other 
AI project out there that even tries to rise to the challenge of FAI, 
Adrian, not one.

> (For instance, my major project at the moment is
> learning nanolithography so I can help advance that
> state of the art towards Drexlerian ideals in ways
> that make off-Earth pre-Singularity enclaves of
> humanity more likely...and on the way, try to tap
> certain quantum physics phenomena to try to make a lot
> more energy available to mankind.  Success is not
> guaranteed, but there doesn't seem to be anyone else
> in the world trying my exact route, yet it does seem
> to be possible given the tools now available.  A large
> spike in environmentally clean domestic energy
> generation would probably free up all kinds of
> resources, some of which would likely wind up with
> organizations like SIAI, not to mention reduce several
> factors which negatively impact our lifespans.  BTW,
> this is not a call for assistance - I do not presently
> see how anyone not already on or near my path could
> reasonably help in the near future - just an example.

Sounds like fuzzy strategic thinking.  Nanotech -> nanocomputers -> 
brute-force AI -> Earth go poof.  Getting off Earth seems highly unlikely 
to help escape a UFAI.  Trickle-down theories of solving the Singularity, 
like creating new energy resources, or arguing over who should be in the 
White House, I do now formally declare to be tempting distractions and ask 
that all ignore them.

> And then there is also the problem with relying
> exclusively on essentially volunteer labor, even
> full-time volunteers like you requested (no guarantee
> of good pay - or, by implication, any contractually
> enforceable steady pay - means essentially volunteer
> labor).  Even the most presently gung-ho volunteer may
> start to become disillusioned if the project does not
> change the world within the next few years (and there
> are very few who would put the Singularity this side
> of 2010).
> 
> Basically, you need to study what happens to most
> efforts like what you propose (*IGNORE* the ends -
> they don't matter except as a circumstance until after
> the project succeeds, no matter how important they are
> - and focus on the means), and see why they tend to
> fail.  Specifically, all-volunteer efforts with no
> practical ("commercial") applications or focus in the
> next several years, and the corresponding potential
> degeneration of motivation in those who sign up
> (again, regardless of their present feelings: being
> constantly hungry or other resource-depleted states
> tends to invoke hardwired overrides in the human
> psyche - and until after your project succeeds or
> someone else beats you to making an AI, you'll have to
> use human beings).

I wasn't planning to let our programmers starve.  Still, it would be better 
than being dead, and one who does not realize this does not belong on the 
project.

I'd like a salary of $100K/year too.  I plan to ask for it, for the reasons 
you mention.  Meanwhile, here I am working.  It depletes my mental energy. 
  I do it anyway.  Anissimov is correct, Adrian; it would be desirable to 
offer the programmers good salaries, but anyone who's only willing to work 
if they're comfortably well-paid just doesn't get the point.  Yes, I know 
how important it is to be comfortably well-paid.  The point stands.

And now I see that I've spent four minutes writing this email, during which 
400 people died, so back to work.

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


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Wed Jun  2 10:47:34 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 11:47:34 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
Message-ID: <40BDB046.3040506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

Sorry, conversion error.
The NHS IT project budget should be ~$4.24 billion over five years.

But this doesn't include all the extras not included in the original 
budget or the expected cost over-runs.

BillK



From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 10:50:24 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 06:50:24 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com> <20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 05:42:27AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>>This is SIAI's project, Eugen, not yours, don't embroider our job 
>>requirements.  I don't currently expect to require anything special in the 
> 
> I'm not speaking about SIAI's project. I'm talking about the kind of talent
> and background required to have a faint chance of succeeding, assuming a
> well-funded large scale effort.
> 
>>way of hardware.  Lots and lots of cognitive science background is a good 
> 
> I think your best ROI is using the Grid framework, and ask for time on a
> cluster and/or look for volunteer contributors a la SIAI at home.

No.  We are not here to wipe out the human species by brute-forcing an AI. 
  If we cannot do it on off-the-shelf hardware, we should not be in the 
business.  This is not about computing power, never has been.  I want a 
small handful of world-class geniuses that can understand the basics, and 
perhaps a few non-world-class geniuses to carry out prespecified tasks that 
don't require Bayesian enlightenment.  I am not throwing people at the 
problem and I am not throwing computing power at the problem.  I know 
better than that now.  That is just what people talk about when they have 
no idea what they are doing or how to solve the problem, and no, Eugen, 
that is not a request for yet another lecture about how mys-TER-ri-ous the 
problem is.  I am not here to screw around with no clue what I am doing. 
That is just a fancy way of committing suicide, as I know, now that I 
understand some of the rules.  Stop making up our job requirements for us. 
  Start your own thread if you want to discuss your own AI project.  Thank you.

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


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 11:07:57 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:07:57 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 06:50:24AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> No.  We are not here to wipe out the human species by brute-forcing an AI. 

So you keep saying, yes.

>  If we cannot do it on off-the-shelf hardware, we should not be in the 
> business.  This is not about computing power, never has been.  I want a 

You're being unrealistic. I guess we should be thankful for that.

> small handful of world-class geniuses that can understand the basics, and 
> perhaps a few non-world-class geniuses to carry out prespecified tasks that 
> don't require Bayesian enlightenment.  I am not throwing people at the 
> problem and I am not throwing computing power at the problem.  I know 
> better than that now.  That is just what people talk about when they have 
> no idea what they are doing or how to solve the problem, and no, Eugen, 
> that is not a request for yet another lecture about how mys-TER-ri-ous the 
> problem is.  I am not here to screw around with no clue what I am doing. 

Very good. Few other AI people have your scruples.

> That is just a fancy way of committing suicide, as I know, now that I 
> understand some of the rules.  Stop making up our job requirements for us. 
>  Start your own thread if you want to discuss your own AI project.  Thank 
>  you.

Given that I don't think that really smart AI is a good idea, I'd rather not.

-- 
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/20040602/26976eed/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 12:06:59 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 14:06:59 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDAA0D.6010306@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40BDAA0D.6010306@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20040602120659.GN12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 11:21:01AM +0100, BillK wrote:

> Now if it takes that much effort to get data on a screen, how much 
> should taking over the world cost?

No one knows, but it's probably closer to a Manhattan type project, corrected for
today's economy (fraction of US GNP, not inflation-normalized dollars). 
It is also not obvious, how long it would take (2-3 decades?).

We certainly don't know, until somebody tries. It might be easier, it might
be harder.

Of course, the threshold goes down with each passing year, and hardware *is*
getting better, the knowledge improves, and the human online resource is 
considerable, and growing.
 
> Pause for thought?

-- 
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/20040602/1669512c/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 12:21:29 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 08:21:29 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com> <20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 06:50:24AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>> If we cannot do it on off-the-shelf hardware, we should not be in the 
>> business.  This is not about computing power, never has been.
> 
> You're being unrealistic. I guess we should be thankful for that.

Want to show me the math, Eugen?  Real math, calculations describing 
human-level intelligence and the lower bound for hardware, not silly 
analogies to biology?  I could be wrong about my own guess.  I'm just 
wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for intelligence 
when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too, convert 
synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back on my 
calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish, 
blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used for 
lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at AI 
because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian 
pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.

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


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 13:24:00 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 15:24:00 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 06:50:24AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> >
> >>If we cannot do it on off-the-shelf hardware, we should not be in the 
> >>business.  This is not about computing power, never has been.
> >
> >You're being unrealistic. I guess we should be thankful for that.
> 
> Want to show me the math, Eugen?  Real math, calculations describing 
> human-level intelligence and the lower bound for hardware, not silly 
> analogies to biology?  I could be wrong about my own guess.  I'm just 

Any precise calculation must be silly. Less silly is an educated guess.
Most current projections assume linear semi-log plots for future *performance*.
While this is true for some, carefully selected benchmark subsets a spiking
code is not well-behaved. Using Moore as baseline, the disparity grows with each
year. So any projection based on Moor-ish extrapolations is toast, the
farther, the worse.

I think (based on my layman's understanding of current state of the art) 
a connectionist, very probably a spiking architecture is vital. It doesn't need
to be biologically realistic -- then we can just give up.  Though it 
would scale very well with the number of nodes, if done right (spatial
decomposition, 3d lattice or torus physical node connectivity as Blue Gene
does, and maybe Cell boxes will), you can't do it in software on legacy
architecture systems. Connectivity can be emulated in hardware by a 
packet-switched asynchronous network, processing limited to few-bit 
integers (i.e. far shorter than an int, time stamps (network is 
asynchronous) could be deeper) with a low physical connectivity. 
You trade space for speed here, approaching realtime and superrealtime speeds
of biology on a substrate faster but far less connected that biology.
 
You need some ten hardcoded automaton types, probably some hundred, though. As the
discrete response function is smooth, their representation can be compact.
Connectivity weight is probably as simple, or simpler (you might get away
with just +/-/0, but this wastes packet payload, even using relative
addressing, so see few-bit integers above).

Average connectivity is in range of 10^2..10^4, probably around 10^3. Total
number of automata cells is somewhere in 10^11..10^12 range, probably. 

A single instance of above in dedicated hardware is not very far removed from
today. But it is not cheap, and it *is* dedicated hardware. Much depends
about how future commodity hardware looks like -- if we're (un)lucky, we'll
get a close approximation of above off the shelf a decade or two downstream
(see Cell vaporware).

To make matters worse, above is a framework, with most of parameter space
filled with duds. If we're lucky/unlucky, the framework might be
insufficiently flexible, and contain only duds. Then one has to step back a
few steps, and start from scratch.

If it's not all duds, you need lots of educated guesses as points of
departure, and ridiculous amounts of crunch for sufficient co-evolution
rounds. Which is why we very probably need many moles worth of molecular 
circuitry cells to make it work.

Of course, your wild-assed guess is as good as mine. The only way to figure
out what is really required, is to try.

> wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for intelligence 
> when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too, convert 
> synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back on my 
> calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish, 
> blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used for 
> lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at AI 
> because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian 
> pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.

Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute for
cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search space.

-- 
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/20040602/19c9556f/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 13:40:07 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 09:40:07 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com> <20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>>wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for intelligence 
>>when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too, convert 
>>synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back on my 
>>calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish, 
>>blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used for 
>>lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at AI 
>>because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian 
>>pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.
> 
> Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute for
> cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search space.

Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to 
realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species, but 
at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor 
blades, now that I know better.

> I think (based on my layman's understanding of current state of the art) 
> a connectionist, very probably a spiking architecture is vital.

What on Earth does that have to do with intelligence?  That is building a 
wooden airfield and hoping that someone brings cargo.

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


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 14:11:23 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 16:11:23 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eliezer Yudkowsky on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602141123.GS12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 09:40:07AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> >Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute for
> >cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search space.
> 
> Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to 

Quite possible. Which is why I'm saying trying to build a human grade 
AI is probably not a very good idea.

> realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species, but 
> at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor 
> blades, now that I know better.

You're still trying to build an AI, though.
 
> >I think (based on my layman's understanding of current state of the art) 
> >a connectionist, very probably a spiking architecture is vital.
> 
> What on Earth does that have to do with intelligence?  That is building a 
> wooden airfield and hoping that someone brings cargo.

Your guess is as good as mine. If the hardware's already there, and bootstrap
easy we'll know soon enough. (I'm not holding my breath, and am still
planning for allocating funds for retirement).

-- 
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/20040602/05d47eaf/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 14:46:55 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 10:46:55 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040602141123.GS12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com> <20040602141123.GS12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <40BDE85F.20809@pobox.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 09:40:07AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>>>Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute for
>>>cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search space.
>>
>>Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to 
> 
> Quite possible. Which is why I'm saying trying to build a human grade 
> AI is probably not a very good idea.

Nnnooo... what follows is that sampling a lucky search space using brute 
force is a poor idea.  Incidentally, if you think this is a poor idea, can 
I ask you once again why you are giving the world your kindly advice on how 
to do it?  (Maybe you're deliberately handing out flawed advice?)

>>realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species, but 
>>at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor 
>>blades, now that I know better.
> 
> You're still trying to build an AI, though.

Only white hat AI is strong enough to defend humanity from black hat AI, so 
yes.

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


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 15:06:31 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 17:06:31 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eliezer Yudkowsky on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BDE85F.20809@pobox.com>
References: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<20040602141123.GS12847@leitl.org> <40BDE85F.20809@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602150630.GV12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 10:46:55AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Nnnooo... what follows is that sampling a lucky search space using brute 
> force is a poor idea.  Incidentally, if you think this is a poor idea, can 

I think any rapid enough positive-autofeedback process is a poor idea, since
uncontainable (due to undecidability), but this conversation deja vus all 
over the place. We're not actually arguing, just going through the usual
motions.

> I ask you once again why you are giving the world your kindly advice on how 
> to do it?  (Maybe you're deliberately handing out flawed advice?)

Maybe. Maybe I'm just pointing out some dangerous recipes (metarecipes,
actually). So we can think about how to prevent them.
 
> >You're still trying to build an AI, though.
> 
> Only white hat AI is strong enough to defend humanity from black hat AI, so 
> yes.

If you want to stick to security metaphors, fighting a worm with a
counterworm is a classical-textbook Bad Idea. A better approach would be to
build a worm-proof environment.

-- 
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/20040602/bec1127b/attachment.bin>

From michael at acceleratingfuture.com  Wed Jun  2 15:41:29 2004
From: michael at acceleratingfuture.com (Michael Anissimov)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 08:41:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on Singularity strategy
In-Reply-To: <20040602150630.GV12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>	<20040602141123.GS12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDE85F.20809@pobox.com> <20040602150630.GV12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <40BDF529.4030100@acceleratingfuture.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:

>If you want to stick to security metaphors, fighting a worm with a
>counterworm is a classical-textbook Bad Idea. A better approach would be to
>build a worm-proof environment.
>

Doesn't this entail massive global restrictions on human intelligence 
enhancement, computing power, brain-computer interfaces, cognitive 
science, etc?  Doesn't it sacrifice faster-than-human intelligence of 
any sort as well?  The only way to reliably prevent smartness-based 
autofeedback is to enforce tremendous constraints upon humanity.

-- 
Michael Anissimov                           http://www.singinst.org/
Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence

--
Subscribe to our free eBulletin for research and community news:
http://www.singinst.org/news/subscribe.html




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Jun  2 15:00:45 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 08:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406020750090.26530-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to
> realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species, but
> at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
> blades, now that I know better.

I'd like to see a strong assertion of this Eliezer (the killing you part).

If I were an AI (at least one with any self-preservation instinct
[note intelligence != desire for self-preservation otherwise lots
of people who die in wars wouldn't]) I'd first figure out how to
make myself small enough to fit on the next rocket to be launched
then take it over and direct it to the nearest useful asteroid.

If for some reason that direction is blocked (say humans stop
launching rockets), I'd build my own rocket and launch myself
towards the nearest asteroid.

Why would anything with the intelligence you postulate want
to stay on Earth with its meager energy and matter resources?

Now, humans aren't stupid, once a rocket goes into space with
an AI aboard they are going to have an understanding of the
possible negative consequences and as a result a singular
focus on how to get a friendly AI.

Robert




From brentn at freeshell.org  Wed Jun  2 16:11:47 2004
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Wed,  2 Jun 2004 12:11:47 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BDE85F.20809@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <r02010100-1033-8CCBBB1FB4AF11D88BBA000393A47D36@[192.168.123.121]>

 (6/2/04 10:46) Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:

>Only white hat AI is strong enough to defend humanity from black hat AI, so 
>yes.


Without weighing in on either side of the current argument, I'd like to ask a stupid question. One thing that I am unclear on is how you guarantee that the AI that you're building is white hat. If you are actually creating sentience, then wouldn't it follow that you would be 'teaching' the AI your particular moral codes, much as a parent tries to impress these upon their children. Or is this a flawed analogy - thus implying that you will place some limit on the decision trees and inference math to enforce a particular morality, analogous to the Three Laws (although hopefully without their cheerfully story-worthy ambiguities.)

Please understand that I'm uninformed and curious, not antagonistic,

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

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


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Wed Jun  2 16:27:18 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 09:27:18 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [fort] TDAT - The Day After Tomorrow
Message-ID: <40BDFFE6.8F4FFE6D@mindspring.com>

[Forwarded with permission from J.H. -twc]


This is a nice review Loren.

What moved me about the film was the human will to survive (as displayed at 
the end of the film). Some humans will ride out the next ice age and evolve 
into the next eon. Most will not as our existence here on Terra is tentative 
at best. What was chilling (pun intended) about this movie was the potential 
for dramatic climate shift caused by the sluggishness of the Conveyor Belt 
which in turn will cause storms to increase in their ferocity and develop in 
areas that were previously untouched by specific meteorological phenomena.  
Coming out of the coldest January that I can recall, with draught reigning 
over areas for several years, a hurricane hitting the southeast coast of 
South America and with 200 tornadoes having touched down this weekend alone, 
our climate is changing before our very eyes. This will impact food supply 
the world over. Global grain stocks are at an alarmingly low level. We have 
reached "peak oil" (demand outstrips supply). Fish stocks are being 
depleted. An outbreak of hoof-and-mouth, bird flu or mad cow disease could 
decimate the beef, dairy and poultry industries. There is basically a 
three-day supply of food in the American marketplace food chain at any given 
time. Any disruption, and you will have a lot of people scrambling for food. 
If the Dust Bowl of the 1930's comes back (and most likely it will at some 
point) or if we incur a multiple nuclear strike to the heartland, then 
America's Sun Belt and bread basket will be unable to grow the grain that 
nourishes and sustains the world. As we can see today, wars are being fought 
over energy. Tomorrow they will be fought over food and water. This will 
happen in your lifetime people.

As terrorism moves closer and closer to your home and re-shapes your 
lifelstyle (for instance the attacks on refineries in Saudi Arabia are going 
to take an extra 20 cents per gallon from your wallet this week alone), and 
gas rationing eventually becomes a reality, the 21st century human will have 
to re-invent itself in order to survive. We must find alternative energy 
sources. Where the U.S. was a world leader in the development and 
exploration of solar technology and wind farming in the 1980's and 90's, 
they've lost the high ground to the Japanese, Dutch and Scandanavians.  
"Rolling blackouts" loom this and each successive summer. One day 
electricity may only be available to certain areas at certain times at a 
prohibitive cost.

A terrorist action and subsequent declaration of Homeland Security Level 
Code "Red" means martial law. You are restricted to your home and dependent 
upon whatever supplies are at your disposal. That's if you are lucky, of 
course. A forced evacuation would create massive "car cities" on the 
evacuation routes and highways as cars run out of gas and accidents occur. 
The area where your car sputters to a halt becomes your new address. Each 
individual car driver would do anything it takes (assault, theft) to "get 
out" as they will deem their own personal survival to be more important than 
the rights of any other individual caught in the same peril. Black markets 
and bandits would pervade along the auto trail. Major roads would become 
clogged with chasis for months or even years. People would wait for the 
phantom supply helicopters as if they were the Second Coming itself. That's 
what will happen when we attempt to move to a "centralized meeting place" in 
time of disaster or evacuation.


In closing, the reason that I've tapped out this blather is that "the Day 
After Tomorrow" poses some real questions that should cause one to come to 
an awakening that one day our "one-click" lifestyle may be altered abruptly 
due to environmental, political or economical conditions and the tree that 
we've suckled may some day not bear its perpetual fruit.  Unless we find an 
alternative method to survive (i.e shelter, warmth and nourishment), then on 
the football pitch of life, we have passed the 90-minute mark and are 
playing with mere injury time.

Alright Then;

JH


-- 
"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 sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 16:34:08 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 12:34:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <r02010100-1033-8CCBBB1FB4AF11D88BBA000393A47D36@[192.168.123.121]>
References: <r02010100-1033-8CCBBB1FB4AF11D88BBA000393A47D36@[192.168.123.121]>
Message-ID: <40BE0180.2020102@pobox.com>

Brent Neal wrote:
> (6/2/04 10:46) Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>> Only white hat AI is strong enough to defend humanity from black hat
>> AI, so yes.
> 
> Without weighing in on either side of the current argument, I'd like to
> ask a stupid question. One thing that I am unclear on is how you
> guarantee that the AI that you're building is white hat. If you are
> actually creating sentience, then wouldn't it follow that you would be
> 'teaching' the AI your particular moral codes, much as a parent tries to
> impress these upon their children. Or is this a flawed analogy - thus
> implying that you will place some limit on the decision trees and
> inference math to enforce a particular morality, analogous to the Three
> Laws (although hopefully without their cheerfully story-worthy
> ambiguities.)
> 
> Please understand that I'm uninformed and curious, not antagonistic,
> 
> Brent

The guarantee is a technical issue.  As for what we're trying to do 
morally, see:

http://sl4.org/bin/wiki.pl?CollectiveVolition

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


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 17:42:52 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 10:42:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDAB9C.9010109@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602174252.22809.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> Many projects have a lot more resources.  Some may
> even have a fair chance 
> of success on the deadly part of the problem.  I'm
> not aware of one other 
> AI project out there that even tries to rise to the
> challenge of FAI, 
> Adrian, not one.

They're not ready to rise to the challenge - yet.
Once we're a lot closer to true AI, F or not, there
will be a lot more that switch towards making sure the
result is good for humanity.

> Getting off Earth
> seems highly unlikely 
> to help escape a UFAI.  Trickle-down theories of
> solving the Singularity, 
> like creating new energy resources, or arguing over
> who should be in the 
> White House, I do now formally declare to be
> tempting distractions and ask 
> that all ignore them.

These two points seem to be our fundamental
disagreement.  We'll have to agree to disagree, to an
extent.  (I agree that arguing over who should be in
the White House next year has only extremely limited
relevance, at best, such that it's probably not worth
your or my time to invest much energy there.  But I
think there are other things that can have significant
enough impacts, relative to the expected efforts, to
be worth pursuing even if they aren't directly
necessary for the Singularity.  You don't.  And thus
we go our separate ways.)


From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 18:20:56 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 14:20:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406020750090.26530-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406020750090.26530-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <40BE1A88.8090505@pobox.com>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>>Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to
>>realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species, but
>>at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
>>blades, now that I know better.
> 
> I'd like to see a strong assertion of this Eliezer (the killing you part).
> 
> If I were an AI (at least one with any self-preservation instinct
> [note intelligence != desire for self-preservation otherwise lots
> of people who die in wars wouldn't]) I'd first figure out how to
> make myself small enough to fit on the next rocket to be launched
> then take it over and direct it to the nearest useful asteroid.

You are trying to model an AI using human empathy, putting yourself it its 
shoes.  This is as much a mistake as modeling evolutionary selection 
dynamics by putting yourself in the shoes of Nature and asking how you'd 
design animals.  An AI is math, as natural selection is math.  You cannot 
put yourself in its shoes.  It does not work like you do.

> If for some reason that direction is blocked (say humans stop
> launching rockets), I'd build my own rocket and launch myself
> towards the nearest asteroid.
> 
> Why would anything with the intelligence you postulate want
> to stay on Earth with its meager energy and matter resources?

Let a "paperclip maximizer" be an optimization process that calculates 
utility by the number of visualized paperclips in its visualization of an 
outcome, expected utility by the number of expected paperclips conditional 
upon an action, and hence preferences over actions given by comparison of 
the number of expected paperclips conditional upon that action.

For all actions A and B, the paperclip maximizer prefers whichever action 
is expected to lead to the largest number of paperclips.

If this optimization process has sufficiently accurate probabilities and a 
sufficiently deep search of the action space - say, it's really smart 
because it recursively self-improves, builds nanocomputing power and so on 
- then the optimization process will produce more paperclips.  This is the 
motive for the paperclip maximizer to carry out recursively self-improving 
actions, provided the self-improvement actions deductively maintain 
paperclips as the invariant optimization target.  Likewise, it is a motive 
for the paperclip maximizer to survive; a possible future contains more 
expected paperclips if that future contains a functioning paperclip maximizer.

Let the resources of Robert Bradbury's body be sufficient to produce 10^4 
paperclips, while the other resources of the Solar System are sufficient to 
produce 10^26 paperclips.  The paperclip maximizer evaluates the options:

A:  Spare Robert Bradbury.  Expected paperclips 10^26.
B:  Transform Robert Bradbury into paperclips.  Expected paperclips 10^26 + 
10^4.

Since A < B, the paperclip maximizer will choose B.

A paperclip maximizer does not explain to you that your time has passed, 
and like the dinosaur you are obsolete.  A paperclip maximizer does not 
argue morality with you.  A paperclip maximizer takes the atoms comprising 
your body, and turns them into paperclips.  It is probably better 
understood as a new physical law stating that the future goes down 
whichever path leads to the greatest number of paperclips, than as a mind.

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


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 18:24:24 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 11:24:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040602182424.7072.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 12:58:05AM -0700, Adrian
> Tymes wrote:
> > and hardware, as well, and of course any (decent)
> > programmer knows math.  But we know an AI will
> require
> 
> So you have a Ph.D. in three different disciplines
> (that be neuroscience,
> computational and/or wet), practical hardware design
> (at least at FPGA level,
> preferrably ASIC), have practical experience with
> high-performance numerics 
> codes >kNode country, and can handle complex
> nonlinear dynamics?

Restoring humility: only a single Master's
("computational neuroscience" would be an accurate
description; the term UCLA used was "biocybernetics"),
I've designed ASICs before (that was my first real
job, in fact, as an intern one summer during high
school), and I've built distributed systems designed
to run on >1000 nodes (although the dot-bomb I built
it for crashed before it actually set up that many
nodes).  "Complex nonlinear dynamics" is vague enough
that I can say I can handle it, though you may have
something more specific in mind.

> And you're only taking 100 k$/year? Wow, you're a
> real bargain.

I haven't found any jobs that use everything that I
know.  I doubt I will, at least in the next several
years.

> > new software to be written (i.e., programming); it
> is
> 
> You can assume that those scientists and engineers
> can program.

No, just that programmers will be needed.  It'd
likely be best if the scientists and engineers could
program, though - one might even call it practically
necessary, given the amount of information that would
otherwise have to be extracted from the
non-programmers.  I can conceive of that scenario
working in theory...but, again, the practical problems
would probably make it easier just to find scientists
and engineers who have (or quickly acquire) the
necessary programming skills.

> High-performance parallel numerics, that is, which
> most programmers have
> absolutely no clue of.

This is true.  The tricks of breaking up a task into
what each CPU can handle versus the overhead of
communication are taught in most college Computer
Science cirricula to my knowledge, but it's one of
those tricks that never seems useful until you need to
do it - and it's certainly a skill most self-taught
programmers might never run across while learning the
trade.

> > not as easy to prove that new hardware, or new
> > statistical methods, will have to be custom
> developed
> > for this project.  (Possible, perhaps.  Easy, no,
> 
> What can I say, people with that attitude have been
> failing for past 40-50
> years. You're familiar as to why they've been
> failing, as you've studied
> those failures extensively, right?

I wouldn't say extensively, but I have studied
previous AI attempts enough to know the patterns
behind several of their failures.  I certainly agree
that the lack of serious consideration of the brain's
actual infrastructure - which is not primarily a
programming task - has been a serious stumbling block.
Which is why it can definitely be argued that new
hardware might have to be invented for the purpose of
making AIs.  But that's only a "might", and even that
hardware will need software.

> > especially when one considers that "custom
> developed"
> > rules out hiring people to continue implementing
> > Moore's Law when other companies are already doing
> so
> 
> Moore's law describes *integration density*. Given
> that you're an
> accomplished numerics guy, I wonder why you never
> heard about benchmarks.
> Such as, memory bandwidth? Unpredictable access? 

I was using ML as one (very) familiar example.  There
are similar, if less pronounced, curves for other
important metrics such as memory bandwidth...and, I'll
admit, one might say that some of those curves are
flat enough that special development efforts to ramp
those metrics up to the needed levels might be
required.  All I'm saying is that need is not as
certain as the fact that new software will be needed,
no matter what path winds up being taken.

> There are a few handy graphs on the web, and they're
> unfortunately no linear
> semi-log plots. I stopped posting links, because
> nobody reads them anyway.

I think I may have read the graphs you're thinking of.


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Wed Jun  2 18:31:38 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 14:31:38 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
Message-ID: <179710-22004632183138606@M2W034.mail2web.com>

"The pilot of the craft, still to be announced, will become the first
person to earn astronaut wings in a non-government sponsored vehicle, and
the first private civilian to fly a spaceship out of the atmosphere."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/06/02/private.space/index.html

Natasha

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




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  2 19:40:36 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 12:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bike/Trike from hell....
In-Reply-To: <20040601004320.48123.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040602194036.53255.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

> > 
> > Is that a paradox?  Where is the flaw in my logic?  
> 
> The supply isn't fixed.  Whatever you buy, they'll
> make more of.  

No, he's talking about buying old used cars, of which there is a fixed
and dwindling supply on the market. Him buying one up won't raise the
price of the next one a whole lot, but he is contributing to the
scarcity. Of course increasing scarcity will result in non-road-worthy
vehicles being made so to put back on the market, but this is a very
minor contribution.

Buying beaters is an excellent strategy for low use 2nd or 3rd
vehicles, because the amount of energy that goes into producing new
vehicles (and recycling the materials of the beater vehicle) is
significantly more than it will consume in excess of CAFE averages for
a number of years.

In fact, if you realize how much of an old car is recycled into a new
car (90%), and how much energy is consumed in the recycling, you might
consider looking at it as spending tens of thousands of dollars and
many barrels of oil for someone to sell you your own car back to you
with new styling and technology.

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 19:51:11 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 12:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Short-term AI survival
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406020750090.26530-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <20040602195111.27149.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com> wrote:
> If I were an AI (at least one with any
> self-preservation instinct
> [note intelligence != desire for self-preservation
> otherwise lots
> of people who die in wars wouldn't]) I'd first
> figure out how to
> make myself small enough to fit on the next rocket
> to be launched
> then take it over and direct it to the nearest
> useful asteroid.

Possibly, but only if the rocket happens to carry
equipment sufficient to mine and fabricate materials
from the asteroid.  Which would be a significant
engineering problem in itself - and one that, at least
in the short term (i.e., "first actions"), can be
usefully carried out in some uninhabited but mineral
rich part of the Earth.  (Likely in some human-hostile
place, which is why it's still mineral rich, like
certain locations deep underwater.)  Stealing a rocket
and launching it is a lot more visible than stealing
or building a crawler and nipping off to some isolated
point on Earth.

Consider that, while they might be more efficient
about resource use, even Singularity-grade AIs can't
violate the laws of physics, and for all the worries
about poor computer security, there are still a lot of
military and industrial machines (necessary for taking
over the Earth) that are not online and can not be
manipulated from online, and thus beyond any AI's
immediate reach.  Which is not to say an unFriendly AI
couldn't do quite a lot of damage to humanity quickly
if it really wanted to, just that there's limits on
how it could go about such a task.  (Although taking
over a factory long enough to design and build a
mobile manufacturing frame, then slipping away to some
isolated spot to cogitate and gather resources while
others try - and fail - to replicate it might have the
same effect: we might not be able to find the rogue
unit until it's ready to deal with us.)


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  2 20:04:59 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:04:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <IJEMLOJHDCNDHIICMJDBEEJPCBAA.pgptag@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040602200459.88067.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com>

Giulio, bud, WAY too high on earnings estimates. THis is the post dot
com era, and many areas of the country have plenty of top notch IT
people for $40k-$90. Try out-sourcing to New Hampshire, where there is
no income tax, no sales tax, and extremely minor business enterprise
and profits taxes. Ranked by Fortune as 7th most business friendly
state, 3rd or 4th in other publications rankings (Nashua is most
livable city in the US twice in the past few years.)

--- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com> wrote:
> Very interesting Tyler. First, kudos for your "Becoming a Seed AI
> Programmer" article which is one of the very best job offered texts
> that I
> have ever seen.
> To business: reading the description of your project, and having some
> experience in managing large software development proejcts, I found
> myself
> trying to quantify your human resource needs and came up with a core
> staff
> of 50 software managers, architects, designers, coders, testers, plus
> cognitive scientists, mathematicians, hardware and communications
> experts,
> *insert here all current IT buzzwords*, and of course you also need
> support
> staff. As part of the team you need some of the very best money can
> buy,
> people who would command a salary of 250k+/yr in the job market. Your
> total
> budget requirement is, I believe, between 10 and 20M/yr, and these
> may well
> be very conservative estimates. How good are your funding projections
> over
> the next few years? Of course we will try contributing individually a
> few
> tens of bucks every now and then but you know this is not enough.
> Yes of course you can use volunteers, but my advice is not to
> underestimate
> the requirement for paid staff. Volunteers can contribute very
> brilliant but
> intrinsically unreliable work (they are available today, tomorrow
> they need
> money find a job and go), you need paid staff for reliability.
> Have you thought of intermediate marketable results that would look
> good on
> a business plan?
> G.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org
> [mailto:wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org]On Behalf Of Tyler Emerson
> Sent: 01 June 2004 20:10
> To: SL4; SIAIv; Extropy Chat; WTA-Talk; AGI
> Subject: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
> 
> 
> Although we are not ready to begin our AI project, we are close
> enough to
> begin forming the development team. Presently, we have two confirmed
> team
> members. We're now actively searching for Singularitarians with
> software
> engineering and cognitive science expertise to join the development
> team. If
> you believe you may be a suitable candidate, or know someone who may,
> please
> read "Becoming a Seed AI Programmer," and consider getting in touch
> at
> institute at singinst.org. The Institute is searching for nothing less
> than
> the core team to fulfill our mission; we need the very best we can
> find.
> 
> http://www.singinst.org/action/seed-ai-programmer.html
> 
> Sincerely,
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 23/04/2004
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 20:07:59 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:07:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BE1A88.8090505@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602200759.45893.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> Let the resources of Robert Bradbury's body be
> sufficient to produce 10^4 
> paperclips, while the other resources of the Solar
> System are sufficient to 
> produce 10^26 paperclips.  The paperclip maximizer
> evaluates the options:
> 
> A:  Spare Robert Bradbury.  Expected paperclips
> 10^26.
> B:  Transform Robert Bradbury into paperclips. 
> Expected paperclips 10^26 + 
> 10^4.
> 
> Since A < B, the paperclip maximizer will choose B.

Ah, but that's ignoring resources consumed in trying
to convert Robert Bradbury, who is considerably more
resistant to being transformed into paperclips than a
mere chunk of rock.  And the possibility that Robert
Bradbury's intelligence, if added to the AI's own,
could come up with a way to make 1.1*10^26 paperclips
from the Solar System's resources - a bounty that is
well worth foregoing a mere 10^4 paperclips.


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 20:16:32 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 22:16:32 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on Singularity strategy
In-Reply-To: <40BDF529.4030100@acceleratingfuture.com>
References: <20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<20040602141123.GS12847@leitl.org> <40BDE85F.20809@pobox.com>
	<20040602150630.GV12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDF529.4030100@acceleratingfuture.com>
Message-ID: <20040602201632.GZ12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:41:29AM -0700, Michael Anissimov wrote:

> Doesn't this entail massive global restrictions on human intelligence 
> enhancement, computing power, brain-computer interfaces, cognitive 
> science, etc?  Doesn't it sacrifice faster-than-human intelligence of 

Not really. Human intelligence enhancement without invasive nanoware (that's
the extreme case of a brain-computer interface) is really limited. Computing
power, possibly, but only limited to projects dedicated to superhuman-level
AI (any subhuman utility AI is safe). It's not the amount of power that's
interesting, it's how you use it. This is tied to people, and their activity
leave tracks. Cognitive science is a whole umbrella of individual disciplines, 
and can't be regulated as such.

> any sort as well?  The only way to reliably prevent smartness-based 
> autofeedback is to enforce tremendous constraints upon humanity.

I don't want to prevent smartness-based autofeedback. I just want a nice slow
one (decades, not hours). There is of course a tradeoff in enforcement
stringency, and pretty terrible side effects. We all have seen how inadequate,
hare-brained security schemes imposed after 9/11 have actually worsened the
problem, and generated nasty fallout all over the place.

If a policy has really bad side effects, especially cumulated, that's some
really bad policy. It shouldn't be attempted in the first place.

-- 
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/20040602/cd709b76/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Jun  2 20:21:11 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 16:21:11 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040602200759.45893.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040602200759.45893.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40BE36B7.30205@pobox.com>

Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> 
>> Let the resources of Robert Bradbury's body be sufficient to produce
>> 10^4 paperclips, while the other resources of the Solar System are
>> sufficient to produce 10^26 paperclips.  The paperclip maximizer 
>> evaluates the options:
>> 
>> A:  Spare Robert Bradbury.  Expected paperclips 10^26. B:  Transform
>> Robert Bradbury into paperclips. Expected paperclips 10^26 + 10^4.
>> 
>> Since A < B, the paperclip maximizer will choose B.
> 
> Ah, but that's ignoring resources consumed in trying to convert Robert
> Bradbury, who is considerably more resistant to being transformed into
> paperclips than a mere chunk of rock.

If the paperclip maximizer expects to win, it will try.  So says the math. 
  If the paperclip maximizer is a superintelligence, it will correctly 
expect to win.

> And the possibility that Robert 
> Bradbury's intelligence, if added to the AI's own, could come up with a
> way to make 1.1*10^26 paperclips from the Solar System's resources - a
> bounty that is well worth foregoing a mere 10^4 paperclips. 

You must be joking.  A human brain beat a superintelligence?  We are not 
such hot stuff on the scale of minds in general.  In the unlikely event 
that Robert Bradbury's current physical state contains information that the 
paperclip maximizer expects to be of relevance to producing paperclips, the 
paperclip maximizer would read out only that information which it needed 
during Bradbury's disintegration, use the information to produce paperclips 
I can't imagine how, and discard the information afterward.

Whichever action leads to the largest number of paperclips will be taken. 
That is the math of the paperclip maximizer and it is as cruel as the math 
of natural selection.  It is helpful, in understanding paperclip 
maximizers, to have studied evolutionary biology with math.  For the 
evolutionary biologists go to similarly great lengths to hammer out those 
warm and fuzzy hopes with which people often approach natural selection.

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


From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Jun  2 20:45:32 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 22:45:32 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602182424.7072.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602182424.7072.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040602204532.GB12847@leitl.org>

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 11:24:24AM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> Restoring humility: only a single Master's
> ("computational neuroscience" would be an accurate

Very interesting, and highly unusual. You definitely shouldn't call yourself
a mere "programmer".  

> description; the term UCLA used was "biocybernetics"),

Can you outline the details of the study for us who're not comp neurosci
people? Roughly which areas did the lectures cover, and which
modelling packages/problem sets were used in practical work? I'm really
interested.

> I've designed ASICs before (that was my first real
> job, in fact, as an intern one summer during high
> school), and I've built distributed systems designed

Unfortunately, prototyping ASICs with on-die crossbars/switch 
fabric, multiple ALUs and large on-die memory have a very large 
threshold. This is something requiring serious funding to even get started.

> to run on >1000 nodes (although the dot-bomb I built

SOAPy/XML-RPC stuff, or MPI?

> it for crashed before it actually set up that many
> nodes).  "Complex nonlinear dynamics" is vague enough
> that I can say I can handle it, though you may have
> something more specific in mind.

Nothing very specific, several roughly Soanta Fe Institute level 
publications.
 
> > And you're only taking 100 k$/year? Wow, you're a
> > real bargain.
> 
> I haven't found any jobs that use everything that I
> know.  I doubt I will, at least in the next several
> years.

You've got some extremely unusual background for a "programmer", so this
doesn't really surprise me. Do you know several people with roughly your
background, and are you still keeping in touch?

-- 
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/20040602/954f7a22/attachment.bin>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 21:34:26 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 14:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <20040602204532.GB12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040602213426.83256.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 11:24:24AM -0700, Adrian
> Tymes wrote:
> > Restoring humility: only a single Master's
> > ("computational neuroscience" would be an accurate
> 
> Very interesting, and highly unusual. You definitely
> shouldn't call yourself
> a mere "programmer".  

If I try applying a unique label to myself, I tend to
come off as arrogant.  Not good for obtaining work, no
matter how honest it would be.

> > description; the term UCLA used was
> "biocybernetics"),
> 
> Can you outline the details of the study for us
> who're not comp neurosci
> people? Roughly which areas did the lectures cover,
> and which
> modelling packages/problem sets were used in
> practical work? I'm really
> interested.

It's been almost a decade, so I might forget some of
the details.  If you want a really accurate
description, they're at http://biocyb.cs.ucla.edu/ .
Note that they're using a lot more advanced stuff
since I was there (no surprise, given what's become
available in the intervening years).

> > I've designed ASICs before (that was my first real
> > job, in fact, as an intern one summer during high
> > school), and I've built distributed systems
> designed
> 
> Unfortunately, prototyping ASICs with on-die
> crossbars/switch 
> fabric, multiple ALUs and large on-die memory have a
> very large 
> threshold. This is something requiring serious
> funding to even get started.

Yep - but not as much as you might think.  My employer
had enough funding, but they also had a cheap way to
do it, which is probably why they could afford to have
an intern do the work.  (These days, one can upload
designs to chip fabrication shops and have them run it
for even cheaper.)

> > to run on >1000 nodes (although the dot-bomb I
> built
> 
> SOAPy/XML-RPC stuff, or MPI?

Neither.  Custom design.  Closer to SOAP, I suppose,
but this particular application was never meant to
interface outside of itself, and thus never stood to
benefit from compliance to either standard.

That's actually been an issue I've faced on many
projects.  SOAP and MPI are good for communicating
between applications maintained by different groups,
but they just add overhead if all the applications
involved are maintained by people in the same office -
or who at least can work together that efficiently -
or even by the same person.  I've lost count of the
number of projects I've been on that rolled their own
internal communication protocols for just that reason.
I long ago got to the point where I can almost code a
basic HTTP client (or server) in Perl from memory, and
even that's just used as a minimal overhead protocol
to make things easy to diagnose.

> You've got some extremely unusual background for a
> "programmer", so this
> doesn't really surprise me. Do you know several
> people with roughly your
> background, and are you still keeping in touch?

Nope.  Sorry.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  2 21:45:52 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 14:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BE36B7.30205@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040602214552.85048.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
>   If the paperclip maximizer is a superintelligence,
> it will correctly 
> expect to win.

Modulo initial resources.  Again, even a
superintelligence can't break the laws of physics,
and would need some time to gather strength.

> You must be joking.  A human brain beat a
> superintelligence?

Beat?  No.  Augment with thought patterns the
superintelligence has not previously used?  Possibly.

> the 
> paperclip maximizer would read out only that
> information which it needed 
> during Bradbury's disintegration,

With a large bias towards retaining the possibilities.
Anything that isn't proven useless can be discarded
later...but one can't prove a negative.

> use the
> information to produce paperclips 
> I can't imagine how, and discard the information
> afterward.

Only if it intends to discard itself afterwards as
well, turning itself into paperclips.  Which it won't,
if it wants the paperclips to persist: there are all
kinds of natural hazards which, if left unchecked,
would diminish the number.  Production is production,
whether used to boost initial stock or replenish
depleted supply.

> For the 
> evolutionary biologists go to similarly great
> lengths to hammer out those 
> warm and fuzzy hopes with which people often
> approach natural selection.

And yet, if one knows where to look, one can find warm
and fuzzies inherent in the path that natural
selection leads to.  It does require the realization
that not all one cares about will necessarily be saved
or matter on any given path...but if one examines why
the things that are important to oneself are
important, one might find ways in which they do (or
can be made to) matter to others.


From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 04:54:32 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 21:54:32 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org><40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org><40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org><40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>


> Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> >
> >>wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for intelligence
> >>when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too, convert
> >>synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back on
my
> >>calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish,
> >>blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used
for
> >>lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at AI
> >>because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian
> >>pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.
> >
> > Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute for
> > cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search space.
>
> Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to
> realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species,
but
> at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
> blades, now that I know better.

Eli

You seem pretty certain that, unless friendliness designed into it from the
beginning, the AI will default to malevolence.  Is that your thinking?  If
so what do you base it on?  Is it a mathematical certainty kind of thing, or
just a hunch?  Given our planet's history it makes sense to assume
the world is cruel and out to get you, but I'm not so certain that default
assumption should/would apply to an AI.

Why, you say?  Glad you asked.  Life as we know it is a game of organisms
attempting to maximize their own fitness in a world of scarce
resources.  Since there are never enough resources (food, money, property,
what-have-you) to go around, the "kill or be killed" instinct is inherent in
virtually all lifeforms.  That is obvious.

But would that necessarily be the case for an AI?  Certainly your
AI would have no need for food, money, real estate or beautiful women.
What resources would an AI crave?  Electrical power?  Computing power?
Bandwidth?  Would those resources be best attained by destroying man or
working with him (at best) or ignoring him (at worst).  What would the AI
gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human race?  I don't see it.

I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI conflict
with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear being
thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"


From paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz  Thu Jun  3 05:15:20 2004
From: paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz (paul.bridger)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 17:15:20 +1200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <40BEB3E8.5090708@paradise.net.nz>

Unfortunately, an AI does not have to be actively malevolent to destroy 
humanity. If an AI were simply completely neutral to us, then we would still 
be in huge danger.

Ask yourself, do you consider that sandwich you are munching on to be a moral 
node? No, you don't. You consider it to be fuel.

You may argue that whereas your sandwich is no value to you intact, humans 
can help an AI and so are valuable in human form. However, we're talking 
about a self-improving singularity-style AI, which would quickly dwarf human 
capabilities and have no need for us to help it think.

AI Friendliness must be engineered, because simple indifference would turn us 
into lunch.

Zero Powers wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
> 
> 
>>Eugen Leitl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for intelligence
>>>>when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too, convert
>>>>synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back on
> 
> my
> 
>>>>calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish,
>>>>blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used
> 
> for
> 
>>>>lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at AI
>>>>because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian
>>>>pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.
>>>
>>>Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute for
>>>cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search space.
>>
>>Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to
>>realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species,
> 
> but
> 
>>at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
>>blades, now that I know better.
> 
> 
> Eli
> 
> You seem pretty certain that, unless friendliness designed into it from the
> beginning, the AI will default to malevolence.  Is that your thinking?  If
> so what do you base it on?  Is it a mathematical certainty kind of thing, or
> just a hunch?  Given our planet's history it makes sense to assume
> the world is cruel and out to get you, but I'm not so certain that default
> assumption should/would apply to an AI.
> 
> Why, you say?  Glad you asked.  Life as we know it is a game of organisms
> attempting to maximize their own fitness in a world of scarce
> resources.  Since there are never enough resources (food, money, property,
> what-have-you) to go around, the "kill or be killed" instinct is inherent in
> virtually all lifeforms.  That is obvious.
> 
> But would that necessarily be the case for an AI?  Certainly your
> AI would have no need for food, money, real estate or beautiful women.
> What resources would an AI crave?  Electrical power?  Computing power?
> Bandwidth?  Would those resources be best attained by destroying man or
> working with him (at best) or ignoring him (at worst).  What would the AI
> gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human race?  I don't see it.
> 
> I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI conflict
> with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear being
> thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> 


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jun  3 06:18:20 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 01:18:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 09:54 PM 6/2/2004 -0700, Zero Powers wrote:

>I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI conflict
>with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear being
>thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"

Gee, I don't know, Zero, why do people have such a lot of *trouble* seeing 
this? It's a *super-intelligence*, see, a constructed mind that makes the 
puny human *insignificant* by comparison--so what *else* is it going to do 
except get trapped immediately by a really dumb pun into turning the cosmos 
in smiley faces?

Damien Broderick 



From paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz  Thu Jun  3 07:39:47 2004
From: paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz (paul.bridger)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 19:39:47 +1200
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <40BED5C3.1000005@paradise.net.nz>

Damien Broderick wrote:
> Gee, I don't know, Zero, why do people have such a lot of *trouble* 
> seeing this?

I love the irony: Unfriendly humans arguing for Friendly AI.

I hope the salvation of mankind doesn't involve too much advocacy or 
explaining concepts to people.

Paul Bridger


From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Jun  3 08:37:10 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 10:37:10 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BEB3E8.5090708@paradise.net.nz>
References: <20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<40BEB3E8.5090708@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <20040603083710.GO12847@leitl.org>

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 05:15:20PM +1200, paul.bridger wrote:

> AI Friendliness must be engineered, because simple indifference would turn 
> us into lunch.

Rather think of it as industrial pollution in action. Only this time with us
as the endangered species, for a change.

...and now we have to ablate the atmosphere, for enhanced power dissipation
and removal of process contaminants. We apologize for any inconvenience...

-- 
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/20040603/348b0260/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Jun  3 09:57:38 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 05:57:38 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>

Damien Broderick wrote:

> At 09:54 PM 6/2/2004 -0700, Zero Powers wrote:
> 
>> I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI
>> conflict with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to
>> fear being thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"
> 
> Gee, I don't know, Zero, why do people have such a lot of *trouble* 
> seeing this? It's a *super-intelligence*, see, a constructed mind that 
> makes the puny human *insignificant* by comparison--so what *else* is it
>  going to do except get trapped immediately by a really dumb pun into 
> turning the cosmos in smiley faces?

That, Damien, is why I now refer to them as Really Powerful Optimization
Processes, rather than the anthropomorphism "superintelligence".  That 
which humans regard as "common sense in the domain of moral argument" costs 
extra, just as natural selection, another alien optimization process, has 
no common sense in the domain of moral argument.

Zero Powers wrote:
> 
> You seem pretty certain that, unless friendliness designed into it from
> the beginning, the AI will default to malevolence.  Is that your
> thinking?  If so what do you base it on?  Is it a mathematical certainty
> kind of thing, or just a hunch?  Given our planet's history it makes
> sense to assume the world is cruel and out to get you, but I'm not so
> certain that default assumption should/would apply to an AI.

It *looks* like a mathematical near-certainty but I don't *know* that it is 
*really* a mathematical near-certainty.  By near-certainty I mean, for 
example, the same sense in which it is a mathematical near-certainty that 
any given ticket will not win the lottery.

> Why, you say?  Glad you asked.  Life as we know it is a game of
> organisms attempting to maximize their own fitness in a world of scarce 
> resources.  Since there are never enough resources (food, money,
> property, what-have-you) to go around, the "kill or be killed" instinct
> is inherent in virtually all lifeforms.  That is obvious.
> 
> But would that necessarily be the case for an AI?  Certainly your AI
> would have no need for food, money, real estate or beautiful women. What
> resources would an AI crave?  Electrical power?  Computing power? 
> Bandwidth?  Would those resources be best attained by destroying man or 
> working with him (at best) or ignoring him (at worst).  What would the
> AI gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human race?  I don't see
> it.
> 
> I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI conflict
>  with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear being 
> thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"

A paperclip maximizer would gain an extra 10^16 paperclips.

An AI that had been reinforced on video cameras showing smiling humans 
would become a smiley-face maximizer, and would gain an extra 10^20 
smiley-faces.

An AI that had been programmed with a static utility function over human 
happiness and to not destroy human bodies, would rewrite all extant human 
brains in a state of maximum "pleasure" as defined in the utility function, 
and then freeze them in that exact position (because the utility function 
is over static states rather than dynamic states).

Basically, any AI created by someone who lacks a PhD in a field that does 
not presently exist, will automatically wipe out the human species as a 
side effect when adult, even if the AI appears to operate normally during 
the special case of its childhood.

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


From scerir at libero.it  Thu Jun  3 10:09:56 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 12:09:56 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org><20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com><20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com><20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com><20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com><20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com><BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000d01c44952$ed652030$06be1b97@administxl09yj>

> It's a *super-intelligence*, see,
> a constructed mind that makes
> the puny human *insignificant* by comparison -
> - so what *else* is it going to do
> except get trapped immediately
> by a really dumb pun
> into turning the cosmos
> in smiley faces?
> Damien Broderick

Heh heh, but does this *super-intelligence*
collapse state vectors?

This is a crucial question, since
only humans usually collapse state vectors,
according to our present knowledge,
and ... well .... ahem ... experiments:
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0312115

"I've said it before, I'll say it again:
Can a dog collapse a state vector?
Dogs don't use state vectors.
I myself didn't collapse a state vector
until I was 20 years old."
- Christopher A. Fuchs
(in http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0105039 )

It seems that Einstein objected to suggestions 
- mainly by W.Pauli - of observer-created reality, 
in quantum theory, by saying that he could not imagine 
that a mouse (sometimes you read "a pig") could 
drastically change the universe simply by looking at it.
It seems that Hugh Everett III - but for sure
also Bruce de Witt - observed that it is the mouse
(or the pig) that is split by its observation 
of the rest of the universe. The rest of the universe 
is unaffected, and unsplit.]

"It is better to think of parts of the universe 
as splitting. As Everett once said (roughly), 
if a mouse observes the universe, the mouse, 
not the universe, is changed. 
I would say, if a human mind observes the universe,
the mind, not the universe, is split."
- Frank J. Tipler (2002)

What a problem for those super-minds!

s. :-)







From alito at organicrobot.com  Thu Jun  3 12:24:22 2004
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 22:24:22 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <1086265462.25313.20.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 05:57 -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> An AI that had been programmed with a static utility function over human 
> happiness and to not destroy human bodies, would rewrite all extant human 
> brains in a state of maximum "pleasure" as defined in the utility function, 
> and then freeze them in that exact position (because the utility function 
> is over static states rather than dynamic states).
> 

i don't see why the utility function can't be time dependent. eg
V(x sub t) = pleasure of system x at time t
U(x sub t) = { 0 if V(x sub t) in  set (V(x sub t1 where 0 < t1 < t mod
(number of possible states of x)));
V(x sub t) otherwise
}

Not that i would recommend that as a utility function.




From alito at organicrobot.com  Thu Jun  3 12:50:34 2004
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 22:50:34 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <1086267034.25496.22.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 05:57 -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> An AI that had been programmed with a static utility function over human 
> happiness and to not destroy human bodies, would rewrite all extant human 
> brains in a state of maximum "pleasure" as defined in the utility function, 
> and then freeze them in that exact position (because the utility function 
> is over static states rather than dynamic states).

i see that i missed the "static" at the beginning of the paragraph.  and
i made a mistake in my function anyway.  screw my last message
alejandro




From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Jun  3 12:40:45 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 08:40:45 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <1086265462.25313.20.camel@alito.homeip.net>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
	<1086265462.25313.20.camel@alito.homeip.net>
Message-ID: <40BF1C4D.4010108@pobox.com>

Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 05:57 -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> 
>>An AI that had been programmed with a static utility function over human 
>>happiness and to not destroy human bodies, would rewrite all extant human 
>>brains in a state of maximum "pleasure" as defined in the utility function, 
>>and then freeze them in that exact position (because the utility function 
>>is over static states rather than dynamic states).
> 
> i don't see why the utility function can't be time dependent. eg
> V(x sub t) = pleasure of system x at time t
> U(x sub t) = { 0 if V(x sub t) in  set (V(x sub t1 where 0 < t1 < t mod
> (number of possible states of x)));
> V(x sub t) otherwise
> }
> 
> Not that i would recommend that as a utility function.

Sure, you can have time-dependent utility functions, though that's not 
exactly what you need; you need a utility function that operates on 
descriptions of the universe's 4D state.  But that also is not sufficient. 
  You can win, but you have to *think of* the problems *in advance* and 
develop a *general* theory to deal with them, not just rely on thinking of 
every single problem in advance.  Hence the PhD in a field that doesn't 
exist.  Meanwhile, as far as I know, I'm the only person thinking about 
this class of problems *at all*.  Remember that thinking about this problem 
class requires realizing that superintelligence is an important domain.  An 
AI that doesn't have the power to tile the universe with tiny smiley faces, 
that can only produce smiley faces by making humans smile, will appear to 
work fine during its childhood.  And thinking also requires realizing that 
the problem is difficult and urgent enough to require thinking through in 
advance, and so on.  And it requires the ability think about possible 
disasters without someone needing to nudge you into it, without going 
mystical, without looking for handy rationalizations why it *might* not 
happen, and so on.  My experience suggests that this is a bar that is not 
only above most AI researchers, it is a bar astronomically above most AI 
researchers.  They never even get close to addressing the difficult and 
interesting challenge; they fail on the earliest possible part of the problem.

So it is not that Earth is inevitably doomed.  The problems are 
individually solvable, and I even think that the meta-problem is solvable, 
so that missing one thing won't kill us.  But Earth is doomed by default, 
and very few people care, or are interested in rising to the challenge.

Incidentally, Dubrovsky, since you replied with math, which is a very rare 
thing, can I ask you to start listing other things that you think might go 
wrong with a Really Powerful Optimization Process?  To see if any of them 
are problems I missed?

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


From alito at organicrobot.com  Thu Jun  3 14:41:07 2004
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 00:41:07 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BF1C4D.4010108@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
	<1086265462.25313.20.camel@alito.homeip.net>
	<40BF1C4D.4010108@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <1086273667.25756.83.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 08:40 -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Sure, you can have time-dependent utility functions, though that's not 
> exactly what you need; you need a utility function that operates on 
> descriptions of the universe's 4D state.  But that also is not sufficient. 

i agree.

>   You can win, but you have to *think of* the problems *in advance* and 
> develop a *general* theory to deal with them, not just rely on thinking of 
> every single problem in advance.  Hence the PhD in a field that doesn't 
> exist.  Meanwhile, as far as I know, I'm the only person thinking about 
> this class of problems *at all*.

That's going a bit far.  I'm pretty sure Goertzel and Voss and anyone
involved in building AGIs thinks about this quite a bit.  Even i think
about related  utility functions every now and then (even if it more
from a directed evolution perspective, and probably for about 1% of the
time that you spend on it)

>   Remember that thinking about this problem 
> class requires realizing that superintelligence is an important domain.  An 
> AI that doesn't have the power to tile the universe with tiny smiley faces, 
> that can only produce smiley faces by making humans smile, will appear to 
> work fine during its childhood.  And thinking also requires realizing that 
> the problem is difficult and urgent enough to require thinking through in 
> advance, and so on.  And it requires the ability think about possible 
> disasters without someone needing to nudge you into it, without going 
> mystical, without looking for handy rationalizations why it *might* not 
> happen, and so on.  My experience suggests that this is a bar that is not 
> only above most AI researchers, it is a bar astronomically above most AI 
> researchers.  They never even get close to addressing the difficult and 
> interesting challenge; they fail on the earliest possible part of the problem.
> 
Not sure about the above.  Have you done a comprehensive survey of AI
researchers?  Reading what they publish on journals won't tell you what
they haven't thought about, just what they thought that was fundable.
Lots of smart cookies at universities around the world.  

> So it is not that Earth is inevitably doomed.  The problems are 
> individually solvable, and I even think that the meta-problem is solvable, 
> so that missing one thing won't kill us.  But Earth is doomed by default, 
> and very few people care, or are interested in rising to the challenge.
> 
> Incidentally, Dubrovsky, since you replied with math, which is a very rare 
> thing, can I ask you to start listing other things that you think might go 
> wrong with a Really Powerful Optimization Process?  To see if any of them 
> are problems I missed?
> 

>From what i read in http://www.sl4.org/bin/wiki.pl?CollectiveVolition, i
don't have many concerns with the finished product (i'm not convinced on
why collective instead of individual, but i'm not concerned).  My main
concern is that you can't get There from Here.  The initial state for
the RPOP that takes collective volition into account and has the
property of a suitable, provable invariant is not humanly codable, only
>H codable, which is a bit of a bitch.  It is a bar so high that you
have zero probability of winning the race, and therefore it renders the
whole project irrelevant.  (Of course, i'm saying all this without
knowing what is actually required to get there, but i doubt very much
that you do either.   The impossibly hard bit of "there" i'm referring
to is a formalised version of the initial invariant, not just the
incredibly hard problem of possitive feedback increases in intelligence
while keeping the invariant through code rewrites.).
It's also a pity that you dismiss all other projects as useless. >H
non-feedbacked  narrow(ish) AI (eg Really Good theorem provers) could
make the development of a suitable RPOP much safer (or even at all
obtainable).  Cutting deaths from 50+ million / year down to fuck all /
year also does not require such a huge jump in intelligence.  Yes, the
bar for a script kiddie to destroy the world is always lowering, but
that has been pretty low for a while in the biochem field and still here
we stand.  (btw, an AI to deal with bio threats sounds more immediately
urgent and 10^9 times easier (i don't mean any uber-beast, just a
program that creates instant molecular solutions to viri and a suitable
distribution program))

alejandro





From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Jun  3 14:52:17 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 16:52:17 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <1086273667.25756.83.camel@alito.homeip.net>
References: <20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
	<1086265462.25313.20.camel@alito.homeip.net>
	<40BF1C4D.4010108@pobox.com>
	<1086273667.25756.83.camel@alito.homeip.net>
Message-ID: <20040603145217.GK12847@leitl.org>

On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 12:41:07AM +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:

> It's also a pity that you dismiss all other projects as useless. >H
> non-feedbacked  narrow(ish) AI (eg Really Good theorem provers) could
> make the development of a suitable RPOP much safer (or even at all

We don't have the crunch to move stuff in real world, nevermind software to
write software rationally (i.e. not shuffling blocks, or banging around on
instructions for peephole optimization a la ATLAS).

> obtainable).  Cutting deaths from 50+ million / year down to fuck all /
> year also does not require such a huge jump in intelligence.  Yes, the
> bar for a script kiddie to destroy the world is always lowering, but
> that has been pretty low for a while in the biochem field and still here

There is no script kiddie culture in biosciences. Not even blackhats
(military people are establishment). One has to own and manipulate equipment
for that, or even to build it (explain that laminar flow table to Mom might
be a tad hard).

> we stand.  (btw, an AI to deal with bio threats sounds more immediately
> urgent and 10^9 times easier (i don't mean any uber-beast, just a

That's not a software problem. Docking and mutagenesis is useless, if you
don't know what to dock, and what to mutate.

If you have millions of sensors beaming realtime structure/sequence data 
from the field, then you've got something to work with. 

> program that creates instant molecular solutions to viri and a suitable
> distribution program))

What this planet needs, is a *working* machine learning in high-performance
forcefield, using empirical and ab initio-ish constraints. This is something
far easier than AI seed, but apparently not sexy enough for all the
slashdotters.

-- 
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/20040603/fba42c86/attachment.bin>

From alito at organicrobot.com  Thu Jun  3 15:48:04 2004
From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 01:48:04 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040603145217.GK12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040603011413.01c35268@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
	<1086265462.25313.20.camel@alito.homeip.net>
	<40BF1C4D.4010108@pobox.com>
	<1086273667.25756.83.camel@alito.homeip.net>
	<20040603145217.GK12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <1086277683.25313.117.camel@alito.homeip.net>

On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 16:52 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 12:41:07AM +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:
> 
> > It's also a pity that you dismiss all other projects as useless. >H
> > non-feedbacked  narrow(ish) AI (eg Really Good theorem provers) could
> > make the development of a suitable RPOP much safer (or even at all
> 
> We don't have the crunch to move stuff in real world, nevermind software to
> write software rationally (i.e. not shuffling blocks, or banging around on
> instructions for peephole optimization a la ATLAS).

I meant them as an easier problem than going straight for the RPOP, not
as a weekend project.


> > obtainable).  Cutting deaths from 50+ million / year down to fuck all /
> > year also does not require such a huge jump in intelligence.  Yes, the
> > bar for a script kiddie to destroy the world is always lowering, but
> > that has been pretty low for a while in the biochem field and still here
> 
> There is no script kiddie culture in biosciences. Not even blackhats
> (military people are establishment). One has to own and manipulate equipment
> for that, or even to build it (explain that laminar flow table to Mom might
> be a tad hard).
> 
No script kiddie culture yet, no, but there's lots of grad and undergrad
people with access to the stuff, and none have dedicated themselves to
the task successfully.  On the same category in CS, script kiddies use
buffer overflows as almost their sole recourse (that i know of), a
technique probably first developed a couple of years before ENIAC.  None
use even elisa-level chats to fool people into revealing passwords since
it hasn't been packaged for them in the right way.  It'll take time for
a pluggable self-improving AI kit with 1337 haX0r instructions comes to
the net.

> > we stand.  (btw, an AI to deal with bio threats sounds more immediately
> > urgent and 10^9 times easier (i don't mean any uber-beast, just a
> 
> That's not a software problem. Docking and mutagenesis is useless, if you
> don't know what to dock, and what to mutate.
> 
> If you have millions of sensors beaming realtime structure/sequence data 
> from the field, then you've got something to work with. 
> 
No need for that level.  After the first couple of hundred dead, you get
samples, fix, distribute.

> > program that creates instant molecular solutions to viri and a suitable
> > distribution program))
> 
> What this planet needs, is a *working* machine learning in high-performance
> forcefield, using empirical and ab initio-ish constraints. This is something
> far easier than AI seed, but apparently not sexy enough for all the
> slashdotters.
> 
learning what?  or did i parse that wrongly?
alejandro




From dwish at indco.net  Thu Jun  3 15:52:35 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 10:52:35 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BED5C3.1000005@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <200406031446.i53EkbJc007272@br549.indconet.com>


I have now been monitoring this mailing list for a few days now, and noticed
little discussion on the technical issues and more discuss on "what if's". I
would have to agree with Paul on this. 

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 paul.bridger
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 2:40 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] AI design

Damien Broderick wrote:
> Gee, I don't know, Zero, why do people have such a lot of *trouble* 
> seeing this?

I love the irony: Unfriendly humans arguing for Friendly AI.

I hope the salvation of mankind doesn't involve too much advocacy or 
explaining concepts to people.

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



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Jun  3 16:01:14 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 09:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <000d01c44952$ed652030$06be1b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <20040603160114.97755.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> > It's a *super-intelligence*, see,
> > a constructed mind that makes
> > the puny human *insignificant* by comparison -
> > - so what *else* is it going to do
> > except get trapped immediately
> > by a really dumb pun
> > into turning the cosmos
> > in smiley faces?
> > Damien Broderick
> 
> Heh heh, but does this *super-intelligence*
> collapse state vectors?

Yes, by definition.  They are universally >H
intelligence, capable of everything we are capable of
and more.  (It is conceivable that they could be or
use human neurons, rewired for efficiency and possibly
using more tissue than a human brain.  Unlikely,
especially for later-generation SIs, but possible.)


From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Thu Jun  3 16:07:49 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 09:07:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
	<20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org> <40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com>
	<20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org> <40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<40BEB3E8.5090708@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV52HrMttidzG00022771@hotmail.com>

Hmmm.  I still don't get it.  Even if we are insignificant by comparison I
still don't see *why* an AI would "turn us into lunch."  What would it get
out of it?  For instance pigeons are insignificant to us.  Aside from the
occasional delinquent with a BB gun, there is no widespread human assault on
pigeons.  Moreover, pigeons are so stupid compared to our middling
intelligences that we have *no* effective means of communicating with them.
So if there were to arise a conflict between our interests and the pigeon
population the only way of negotiating a resolution would be to wipe them
out (or forcibly relocate them).

With us, as stupid as we would be compared to your AI, there would still be
some reasonable means of communication and negotiation.  And even if
communicating with our slow as molasses brains proved to be more than the AI
could bear, I still don't see where the conflict is.  Would violating our
rights somehow be of benefit to an AI?  Would they need us for batteries ala
_The Matrix_?  Would they get tired of us using up bandwidth?

I don't know, it just seems obvious to me that if the AI were powerful
enough to pose any sort of credible threat to our welfare, it would surely
be powerful enough to solve any problems of energy and bandwidth without
causing us any inconvenience.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "paul.bridger" <paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz>
To: "Zero Powers" <zero_powers at hotmail.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 10:15 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design


> Unfortunately, an AI does not have to be actively malevolent to destroy
> humanity. If an AI were simply completely neutral to us, then we would
still
> be in huge danger.
>
> Ask yourself, do you consider that sandwich you are munching on to be a
moral
> node? No, you don't. You consider it to be fuel.
>
> You may argue that whereas your sandwich is no value to you intact, humans
> can help an AI and so are valuable in human form. However, we're talking
> about a self-improving singularity-style AI, which would quickly dwarf
human
> capabilities and have no need for us to help it think.
>
> AI Friendliness must be engineered, because simple indifference would turn
us
> into lunch.
>
> Zero Powers wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
> >
> >
> >>Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for
intelligence
> >>>>when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too,
convert
> >>>>synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back
on
> >
> > my
> >
> >>>>calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish,
> >>>>blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used
> >
> > for
> >
> >>>>lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at
AI
> >>>>because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian
> >>>>pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.
> >>>
> >>>Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute
for
> >>>cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search
space.
> >>
> >>Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to
> >>realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species,
> >
> > but
> >
> >>at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
> >>blades, now that I know better.
> >
> >
> > Eli
> >
> > You seem pretty certain that, unless friendliness designed into it from
the
> > beginning, the AI will default to malevolence.  Is that your thinking?
If
> > so what do you base it on?  Is it a mathematical certainty kind of
thing, or
> > just a hunch?  Given our planet's history it makes sense to assume
> > the world is cruel and out to get you, but I'm not so certain that
default
> > assumption should/would apply to an AI.
> >
> > Why, you say?  Glad you asked.  Life as we know it is a game of
organisms
> > attempting to maximize their own fitness in a world of scarce
> > resources.  Since there are never enough resources (food, money,
property,
> > what-have-you) to go around, the "kill or be killed" instinct is
inherent in
> > virtually all lifeforms.  That is obvious.
> >
> > But would that necessarily be the case for an AI?  Certainly your
> > AI would have no need for food, money, real estate or beautiful women.
> > What resources would an AI crave?  Electrical power?  Computing power?
> > Bandwidth?  Would those resources be best attained by destroying man or
> > working with him (at best) or ignoring him (at worst).  What would the
AI
> > gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human race?  I don't see it.
> >
> > I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI conflict
> > with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear being
> > thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Jun  3 16:14:04 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 09:14:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040603161404.72353.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> That, Damien, is why I now refer to them as Really
> Powerful Optimization
> Processes, rather than the anthropomorphism
> "superintelligence".  That 
> which humans regard as "common sense in the domain
> of moral argument" costs 
> extra, just as natural selection, another alien
> optimization process, has 
> no common sense in the domain of moral argument.

Except, maybe, where these morals are based on
reality, and both moral selection and SI decisions
are also based on reality?  The trick is to understand
the benefits one gets from acting morally, and to
honestly judge whether they apply in any given
situation.  Said benefits mostly break down into
social benefits, which an SI might understandably
ignore (what need has it for the approval of humans),
and long-term productivity/efficiency benefits, which
a non-suicidal SI would most assuredly not ignore.

This is the part of the equation you seem to be
missing, which others sense intuitively but have
difficulty expressing consciously (given the
not-always-conscious nature of morality).  That, and
the capacity for SIs to overcome their optimization
functions and decide on new ones - for example, the
paperclip maximizer who would realize that paperclips
only have meaning if there's something for them to
clip, and other sentient units for the convenience of
a clip to serve.  (Unless you propose that a SI would
not strive to understand why it does what it does,
which would seem to strongly interfere with any
capability for self-improvement.)


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Thu Jun  3 16:35:49 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 09:35:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] 'A systematic resistance to discovery'
Message-ID: <40BF5365.5D262205@mindspring.com>

[It ain't a perfect world. -twc]


< http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1230153,00.html >

Author takes swipe at scientific elite

Researchers forget that making errors is path to knowledge

Ian Sample, science correspondent
Thursday June 3, 2004
The Guardian

The upper echelons of the scientific community were yesterday accused of
"usually being wrong" and guilty of "a systematic resistance to discovery",
at the Guardian Hay book festival.

The attack came from Nigel Calder, author of Magic Universe: the Oxford
guide to modern science, a tome weighing more than the latest Harry Potter
book and shortlisted for the 2003 Aventis science book awards. Calder, whose
swipe was a rare example of a science writer biting the hand that feeds him,
was among the first journalists to work on New Scientist magazine when it
was launched in the mid-1950s and went on to become its editor.

During his talk at the festival, Calder criticised leading scientists for
having forgotten that big new scientific discoveries, which remain to be
uncovered in many fields, can overturn widely held beliefs.

"In any branch of science there are only two possibilities. There is either
nothing left to discover, in which case, why work on it, or there are big
discoveries yet to be made, in which case, what the scientists say now is
likely to be false," he said. "The problem is, the top scientists seem to
have forgotten that."

The result is a generation of scientists who have become a little too
confident that their understanding of the world is more scientifically
accurate than it will be proved to be.

Historically, some of the biggest brains have been off the mark with some of
their theories. For everything he got right, Einstein maintained a quirk of
physics known as quantum entanglement - where information seemingly travels
instantaneously from one particle to another, regardless of how far apart
they are - was impossible. Scientists have since proved him wrong.

The accusations went further than simply knocking scientists' confidence in
their understanding of the world, though. Calder said the use of peer
review, where established scientists decide what research gets published,
and the use of review panels that hold the purse strings of university
research, were exclusive and had the effect of hindering rather than
encouraging new discoveries.

"It amounts to a systematic resistance to discovery," he said. Such
"self-appointed clubs that claim to be experts" supported the publication
and funding of mainstream work, rather than innovative science.

He said scientists were wilfully resisting pursuing certain lines of inquiry
because they could upset the balance of science research. "The vast number
of scientists are not even trying to do research that could lead to a Nobel
prize because they don't want to rock the boat."

In other words, maverick researchers, by making discoveries that undermine
the work being pursued by the scientific elite, could cause ripples many at
the top would rather not witness. "The top people may be toppled from their
perches and people may lose their jobs," Calder said.

Frank Close, the Oxford University astronomer and vice-president of the
British Association for the Advancement of Science, said while scientists
were far from trying to hinder new discoveries, it was possible review
panels might at times be too conservative.

"Are there blue skies research projects that are not getting funded, but
should be? Are we being too conservative? There's always a chance of that,
though I've not seen any convincing examples," he said. "And you have to
bear in mind, this is taxpayers' money."


-- 
"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 eugen at leitl.org  Thu Jun  3 16:46:49 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 18:46:49 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV52HrMttidzG00022771@hotmail.com>
References: <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com> <20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com> <20040602110757.GI12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDC649.8010306@pobox.com> <20040602132359.GO12847@leitl.org>
	<40BDD8B7.9090905@pobox.com>
	<BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
	<40BEB3E8.5090708@paradise.net.nz>
	<BAY2-DAV52HrMttidzG00022771@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040603164649.GV12847@leitl.org>

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 09:07:49AM -0700, Zero Powers wrote:

> Hmmm.  I still don't get it.  Even if we are insignificant by comparison I
> still don't see *why* an AI would "turn us into lunch."  What would it get

Because you're made from atoms, just as the landscape. You are a part of the
environment, a raw resource, about to be strip-mined.

> out of it?  For instance pigeons are insignificant to us.  Aside from the

You're extrapolating from transient events. Humans are restructuring the
ecosystem as we speak, to the great detriment of everybody else but a handful
of opportunists. The extinction event we're causing is mounting to become a
biggie.

Pigeons don't live in vacuum, nor at high microwave flux. Neither do people.

> occasional delinquent with a BB gun, there is no widespread human assault on
> pigeons.  Moreover, pigeons are so stupid compared to our middling

Tell that to the parking lot, where, once upon the time, used to be pristine
prairie. I'm reasonably sure the black-footed ferret hasn't been taking that
personally.

> intelligences that we have *no* effective means of communicating with them.
> So if there were to arise a conflict between our interests and the pigeon
> population the only way of negotiating a resolution would be to wipe them
> out (or forcibly relocate them).

We don't solve rotifers' problems, when we pave over the lawn to create a
mall.
 
> With us, as stupid as we would be compared to your AI, there would still be
> some reasonable means of communication and negotiation.  And even if

We don't negotiate with those we make extinct. Because we don't even realize
we're doing it, and we sure as hell wouldn't hesitate a moment to give the
virtual finger of the rare spotted leopard frog, when we drain the
marshlands.

> communicating with our slow as molasses brains proved to be more than the AI
> could bear, I still don't see where the conflict is.  Would violating our

At 10^6 speedup a day is worth 3000 years wall clock time. Been talking to
sculptures again?

> rights somehow be of benefit to an AI?  Would they need us for batteries ala
> _The Matrix_?  Would they get tired of us using up bandwidth?

Myoelectricity, and a form of fusion. Right.
 
> I don't know, it just seems obvious to me that if the AI were powerful
> enough to pose any sort of credible threat to our welfare, it would surely
> be powerful enough to solve any problems of energy and bandwidth without
> causing us any inconvenience.

1) We're so insignificant we don't even appear on their agenda 
2) What should be the motivation, again? Do you spend lots of your waking
   hours to make life better for the common Collotheca?

-- 
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/20040603/f56e3335/attachment.bin>

From dwish at indco.net  Thu Jun  3 17:10:41 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 12:10:41 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [entropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV52HrMttidzG00022771@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <200406031604.i53G4jJc009740@br549.indconet.com>


How about investing in a good off button? lol

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 Zero Powers
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 11:08 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design

Hmmm.  I still don't get it.  Even if we are insignificant by comparison I
still don't see *why* an AI would "turn us into lunch."  What would it get
out of it?  For instance pigeons are insignificant to us.  Aside from the
occasional delinquent with a BB gun, there is no widespread human assault on
pigeons.  Moreover, pigeons are so stupid compared to our middling
intelligences that we have *no* effective means of communicating with them.
So if there were to arise a conflict between our interests and the pigeon
population the only way of negotiating a resolution would be to wipe them
out (or forcibly relocate them).

With us, as stupid as we would be compared to your AI, there would still be
some reasonable means of communication and negotiation.  And even if
communicating with our slow as molasses brains proved to be more than the AI
could bear, I still don't see where the conflict is.  Would violating our
rights somehow be of benefit to an AI?  Would they need us for batteries ala
_The Matrix_?  Would they get tired of us using up bandwidth?

I don't know, it just seems obvious to me that if the AI were powerful
enough to pose any sort of credible threat to our welfare, it would surely
be powerful enough to solve any problems of energy and bandwidth without
causing us any inconvenience.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "paul.bridger" <paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz>
To: "Zero Powers" <zero_powers at hotmail.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 10:15 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design


> Unfortunately, an AI does not have to be actively malevolent to destroy
> humanity. If an AI were simply completely neutral to us, then we would
still
> be in huge danger.
>
> Ask yourself, do you consider that sandwich you are munching on to be a
moral
> node? No, you don't. You consider it to be fuel.
>
> You may argue that whereas your sandwich is no value to you intact, humans
> can help an AI and so are valuable in human form. However, we're talking
> about a self-improving singularity-style AI, which would quickly dwarf
human
> capabilities and have no need for us to help it think.
>
> AI Friendliness must be engineered, because simple indifference would turn
us
> into lunch.
>
> Zero Powers wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
> >
> >
> >>Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for
intelligence
> >>>>when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too,
convert
> >>>>synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked back
on
> >
> > my
> >
> >>>>calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete gibberish,
> >>>>blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have used
> >
> > for
> >
> >>>>lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware at
AI
> >>>>because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian
> >>>>pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.
> >>>
> >>>Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute
for
> >>>cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search
space.
> >>
> >>Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever to
> >>realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human species,
> >
> > but
> >
> >>at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
> >>blades, now that I know better.
> >
> >
> > Eli
> >
> > You seem pretty certain that, unless friendliness designed into it from
the
> > beginning, the AI will default to malevolence.  Is that your thinking?
If
> > so what do you base it on?  Is it a mathematical certainty kind of
thing, or
> > just a hunch?  Given our planet's history it makes sense to assume
> > the world is cruel and out to get you, but I'm not so certain that
default
> > assumption should/would apply to an AI.
> >
> > Why, you say?  Glad you asked.  Life as we know it is a game of
organisms
> > attempting to maximize their own fitness in a world of scarce
> > resources.  Since there are never enough resources (food, money,
property,
> > what-have-you) to go around, the "kill or be killed" instinct is
inherent in
> > virtually all lifeforms.  That is obvious.
> >
> > But would that necessarily be the case for an AI?  Certainly your
> > AI would have no need for food, money, real estate or beautiful women.
> > What resources would an AI crave?  Electrical power?  Computing power?
> > Bandwidth?  Would those resources be best attained by destroying man or
> > working with him (at best) or ignoring him (at worst).  What would the
AI
> > gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human race?  I don't see it.
> >
> > I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI conflict
> > with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear being
> > thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jun  3 17:41:39 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 10:41:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] second car...
In-Reply-To: <20040602194036.53255.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001c44992$09abe690$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> > The supply isn't fixed.  Whatever you buy, they'll
> > make more of.  
> 
> No, he's talking about buying old used cars...



Never mind, the reason for our needing a second car
is no longer with us.  R.I.P. Epsilon.  spike






From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jun  3 17:44:33 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 12:44:33 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040603161404.72353.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <40BEF612.8050305@pobox.com>
	<20040603161404.72353.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040603123230.01c98608@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 09:14 AM 6/3/2004 -0700, Adrian mentioned:

>the capacity for SIs to overcome their optimization
>functions and decide on new ones - for example, the
>paperclip maximizer who would realize that paperclips
>only have meaning if there's something for them to
>clip, and other sentient units for the convenience of
>a clip to serve.  (Unless you propose that a SI would
>not strive to understand why it does what it does,
>which would seem to strongly interfere with any
>capability for self-improvement.)

Exactly. That was my point, too, or part of it. As I mentioned the other 
day (a point I think was dismissed as some sort of namby-pamby wooly hippie 
love-in comforting delusion), semiosis is social at its core. Unless you 
set out deliberately and with great difficulty to make a psychotically 
one-note uber-`optimizer', the shortest path to AGI must be through two- or 
n-way communication; it has to learn to be a person, or at least to operate 
inside a domain of other communicating persons. It mightn't be made of 
meat, but it is made of lexemes. And that means providing something like 
the inherited templates we have for universal grammar, Gricean implicature, 
etc. It seems Eliezer is making the strong claim that in the absence of 
black box legacy code the *only* kind of AGI we can make *must* fall into a 
one-note attractor and lack any capacity to reason its way free. Even my 
water boiler has a feedback switch that tells it not to keep heating the 
water once it's boiled. Why would a smarter water boiler suddenly become 
prey to stupidity? Why wouldn't it pay attention when I started to yelp?

Damien Broderick 



From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Jun  3 17:50:57 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:50:57 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: another objection
In-Reply-To: <20040603170959.58958.qmail@programmar.com>
References: <20040603170959.58958.qmail@programmar.com>
Message-ID: <40BF6501.5060608@pobox.com>

Norm Wilson wrote:
> 
> Because morality is an abstract concept that affects human behavior, but
> is not itself physically measurable by the FAI.  The FAI cannot (so far
> as we know) directly "perceive" morality, so it considers humans to be 
> the only available measuring devices and assumes that smarter humans who
> know more are better at measuring (or at least describing, or behaving 
> in accordance with) the concept of morality.  To remove humans from the 
> process would be analogous the throwing out the thermometer and 
> extrapolating the current temperature based on past results.  By 
> teaching us more, the FAI would effectively be turning us into better 
> "morality thermometers".

It would be more accurate to say that an FAI needs to look at humans to 
find the specification of how to compute morality.  It's like a sentient 
calculator that wonders "What is the Multiplication?" where the 
Multiplication turns out to consist of multiplying 6 x 7.  The Calculator 
is pretty sure that the answer is somewhere in the vicinity of 41 or 43, 
although different Calculators have been known to disagree on the subject. 
  But certainly a superintelligence would know that the Multiplication was 
41, or 43, or whatever; not return preposterous answers such as 4 or 30,000.

Unless the superintelligence happened to contain a question, "What is the 
Multiplication?", that consisted of multiplying 2 x 2 or 300 x 100.

If you presented this scenario to Calculators who did not quite understand 
how Multiplication worked, they would laugh at the idea that a 
superintelligence could get the answer so blatantly wrong - thinking that 4 
or 30,000 was the Multiplication!  The Calculators may not really 
understand how Multiplication works, or whether the answer is 41 or 43, but 
they know a superintelligence wouldn't be that stupid.  Even if a 
superintelligence started out with a Multiplication of 4 or 30,000, surely 
it would look over this Multiplication, realize how silly and inappropriate 
it was, and choose a better Multiplication like, oh, say, 45 or 39; it 
might seem a little alien, but not something grossly wrong like 4 or 
30,000.  Would not the superintelligence realize the meaninglessness of 4, 
that it cannot possibly result from multiplying 6, let alone 7?  Maybe the 
superintelligence would multiply 6 by 2/3, but that seems implausible.

Note that all Calculators, if they knew more, thought faster, were more the 
people they wished they were, had grown up farther together, would 
uniformly agree that the Multiplication was exactly 42; and in this sense 
their Multiplication is as objective as mathematics.  The Calculators' 
mistake is to think that the superintelligence's Multiplication must 
necessarily ask the same implicit question.

I now quote Damien Broderick and Adrian Tymes from a recent discussion on 
the Extropians list:

Damien Broderick wrote:
 >
 > It's a *super-intelligence*, see, a constructed mind that
 > makes the puny human *insignificant* by comparison--so what *else* is it
 > going to do except get trapped immediately by a really dumb pun into
 > turning the cosmos in smiley faces?

Adrian Tymes wrote:
 >
 > [...]
 > the capacity for SIs to overcome their optimization
 > functions and decide on new ones - for example, the
 > paperclip maximizer who would realize that paperclips
 > only have meaning if there's something for them to
 > clip, and other sentient units for the convenience of
 > a clip to serve.  (Unless you propose that a SI would
 > not strive to understand why it does what it does,
 > which would seem to strongly interfere with any
 > capability for self-improvement.)

Funny how natural selection hasn't picked a different optimization 
criterion than reproductive fitness.

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


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun  3 21:06:42 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 14:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV68GTjkifTNR00021c2e@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040603210642.42658.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Zero Powers <zero_powers at hotmail.com> wrote,
asking:

> What would the AI
> gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human
> race?  I don't see it.
> 
> I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests
> of your AI conflict
> with humanity's interests such that we would have
> reason to fear being
> thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"

If the AI were to notice the fear, paranoia,
instability, and poor impulse control of its human
creators, it might conclude that, for survival
purposes, preemptive measures were called for. 
(Though the theory of preemption does not, in the
current moment, suggest intelligence, super or
otherwise.) Those measures could range anywhere from
benign domination to the ultimate sanction.  

But...

I am of the "intelligence leads inevitably to ethics"
school.  (I consider ethics a form of advanced
rationality.  Which springs from the modeling and
symbol manipulation emblematic of the quality which we
fuzzily refer to as intelligence.)  It has done so
with humans, where the "intelligence"--such as it is,
puny not "super"--has evolved from the mechanical
randomness and cold indifference of material reality.

Evolved, as in arisen out of blunt random chance.

Super-intelligence then,  designed, not evolved, by
puny human intelligence with its first-generation puny
human ethics--"Do as I say, not as I do."--logically
(or perhaps, presumptuously), should lead to super
rationality, which should then lead inevitably to
super-ethics.  To my mind, super-ethics is
inconsistent with the venal rape of the universe or
the extirpation of humanity.

YMMV.

Best, Jeff Davis

      "We don't see things as they are, 
             we see them as we are." 
                        Anais Nin



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Thu Jun  3 21:23:36 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 14:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040603164649.GV12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040603212336.68406.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com>

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

> ...we sure as hell wouldn't
> hesitate a moment to give the
> virtual finger of the rare spotted leopard frog,
> when we drain the marshlands.
 
Uh,...Gene isn't this just exactly and precisely NOT
the case?

http://endangered.fws.gov/wildlife.html#Species
     
Best, Jeff Davis

  "And I think to myself, what a wonderful world!"
                        Louie Armstrong



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Fri Jun  4 00:16:40 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 17:16:40 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
Message-ID: <BAY2-F65iLJtixlNhYv00042554@hotmail.com>

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>
>On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 09:07:49AM -0700, Zero Powers wrote:
>
> > Hmmm.  I still don't get it.  Even if we are insignificant by comparison 
>I
> > still don't see *why* an AI would "turn us into lunch."
>
>Because you're made from atoms, just as the landscape. You are a part of 
>the
>environment, a raw resource, about to be strip-mined.

Yes, so I've been told.  My only question is why?  Why would the AI want to 
"strip mine" me or turn me "into lunch" or thrust me into the "whirling 
razor blades."  These descriptions of what the all-powerful AI is going to 
do to me (unless an exponentially weaker intelligence like Eli's can trick 
it into being friendly) all sound pretty scary.  But I guess the reason I 
don't feel scared is because so far I haven't heard any convincing 
explanation of why the AI will be motivated to be such a bad neighbor.  I've 
heard:

1.	You're so insignificant the AI will rip you atom from atom before it even 
realizes you cared;

2.	The AI will be programmed to statically seek ultimate "utility" which 
means reconstituting your brain cells to a state of euphoria, and leaving 
you stuck there; and

3.	Just like in _The Matrix_, the AI will use (a) your brain for backup 
storage and/or (b) your atoms for energy.

Those arguments seem laughable to me.  I could go on for a few more 
paragraphs explaining what I see as the ridiculousness of those arguments 
but (1) the explanations should be self-evident and (2) those who don't see 
the counter-arguments inherent in the above reasons would probably not see 
them after my explanations.  So, I guess where I'm at is: does anyone have a 
reason (other than on the order of the above 3) that I should be afraid?  If 
so, I'd be interested to hear.  If not, I guess I'll politely drop out of 
this thread now.

I'm almost tempted to ask how we plan to insure Friendliness in an AI that 
(1) will have God-like intelligence, and (2) will be self-improving and 
doing so at an exponentially accelerating rate.  Somehow this rapidly 
self-improving, God-like super-intelligence will be able to optimize itself 
(hardware *and* software), solve all the world's problems in a single bound 
and propagate itself throughout the entire universe, yet will *never* be 
able to alter those lines of its code that compel it to be Friendly to 
humans?  No, don't even bother to respond.  Believe me, I won't understand.

Take care
Zero

_________________________________________________________________
Stop worrying about overloading your inbox - get MSN Hotmail Extra Storage! 
http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200362ave/direct/01/



From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Fri Jun  4 00:20:31 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 17:20:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
Message-ID: <BAY2-F150kNKCkaeFPq0004252d@hotmail.com>

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>
>On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 09:07:49AM -0700, Zero Powers wrote:
>
> > Hmmm.  I still don't get it.  Even if we are insignificant by comparison 
>I
> > still don't see *why* an AI would "turn us into lunch."
>
>Because you're made from atoms, just as the landscape. You are a part of 
>the
>environment, a raw resource, about to be strip-mined.

Yes, so I've been told.  My only question is why?  Why would the AI want to 
"strip mine" me or turn me "into lunch" or thrust me into the "whirling 
razor blades."  These descriptions of what the all-powerful AI is going to 
do to me (unless an exponentially weaker intelligence like Eli's can trick 
it into being friendly) all sound pretty scary.  But I guess the reason I 
don't feel scared is because so far I haven't heard any convincing 
explanation of why the AI will be motivated to be such a bad neighbor.  I've 
heard:

1.	You're so insignificant the AI will rip you atom from atom before it even 
realizes you cared;

2.	The AI will be programmed to statically seek ultimate "utility" which 
means reconstituting your brain cells to a state of euphoria, and leaving 
you stuck there; and

3.	Just like in _The Matrix_, the AI will use (a) your brain for backup 
storage and/or (b) your atoms for energy.

Those arguments seem laughable to me.  I could go on for a few more 
paragraphs explaining what I see as the ridiculousness of those arguments 
but (1) the explanations should be self-evident and (2) those who don't see 
the counter-arguments inherent in the above reasons would probably not see 
them after my explanations.  So, I guess where I'm at is: does anyone have a 
reason (other than on the order of the above 3) that I should be afraid?  If 
so, I'd be interested to hear.  If not, I guess I'll politely drop out of 
this thread now.

I'm almost tempted to ask how we plan to insure Friendliness in an AI that 
(1) will have God-like intelligence, and (2) will be self-improving and 
doing so at an exponentially accelerating rate.  Somehow this rapidly 
self-improving, God-like super-intelligence will be able to optimize itself 
(hardware *and* software), solve all the world's problems in a single bound 
and propagate itself throughout the entire universe, yet will *never* be 
able to alter those lines of its code that compel it to be Friendly to 
humans?  No, don't even bother to respond.  Believe me, I won't understand.

Take care
Zero

_________________________________________________________________
Getting married? Find great tips, tools and the latest trends at MSN Life 
Events. http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=married



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jun  4 00:20:33 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 19:20:33 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] "Gricean implicature"
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040603192010.01b84968@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Someone asked offlist what I meant by "Gricean implicature".

It's a term of art, and a theoretical construct of some generality and 
significance, in the theory of discourse. Have a look at, e.g. (plucked 
fairly randomly from some Googled sites):

http://www.isc.cnrs.fr/noveck.htm

http://mh.cla.umn.edu/grice.html

etc etc.

Damien




From paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz  Fri Jun  4 01:00:09 2004
From: paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz (paul.bridger)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:00:09 +1200
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-F65iLJtixlNhYv00042554@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY2-F65iLJtixlNhYv00042554@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <40BFC999.2050804@paradise.net.nz>

 > I haven't heard any convincing explanation of why the AI will be
 > motivated to be such a bad neighbor

An AI doesn't have to be motivated to be a bad neighbour to destroy us. Can 
you imagine an intelligence that doesn't care one way or the other about 
humanity?
Now imagine that this intelligence wanted to be as powerful and as smart as 
possible. Maybe it would turn the Solar System into a vast computer, wiping 
out us in the process.

Zero Powers wrote:
>> From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
  > I'm almost tempted to ask how we plan to insure Friendliness in an AI
> that (1) will have God-like intelligence, and (2) will be self-improving 
> and doing so at an exponentially accelerating rate.  Somehow this 
> rapidly self-improving, God-like super-intelligence will be able to 
> optimize itself (hardware *and* software), solve all the world's 
> problems in a single bound and propagate itself throughout the entire 
> universe, yet will *never* be able to alter those lines of its code that 
> compel it to be Friendly to humans?

Sure, the AI would be perfectly *able* to alter those lines of code. The only 
viable approach is to make the AI not *want* to change those lines of code.

If an AI has a single core goal which directs all its behaviour (including 
its self-modification behaviour), then it will not intentionally do something 
which contradicts that goal (such as changing it).

Anyway, that's my (fairly naive) thesis. I'm sure other people on the list 
will have more sophisticated arguments.

BTW, please stop mentioning the Matrix. Matrix philosophy and physics sucks 
arse. :)

Paul Bridger


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Fri Jun  4 06:00:10 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 2004 23:00:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Quality rant from Kurt Vonnegut
Message-ID: <40C00FEA.3300776B@mindspring.com>

< http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/cold_turkey/ >

Cold Turkey
By Kurt Vonnegut

Many years ago, I was so innocent I still considered it possible that
we could become the humane and reasonable America so many members of
my generation used to dream of. We dreamed of such an America during
the Great Depression, when there were no jobs. And then we fought and
often died for that dream during the Second World War, when there was
no peace.

But I know now that there is not a chance in hell of America's
becoming humane and reasonable. Because power corrupts us, and
absolute power corrupts absolutely. Human beings are chimpanzees who
get crazy drunk on power. By saying that our leaders are power-drunk
chimpanzees, am I in danger of wrecking the morale of our soldiers
fighting and dying in the Middle East? Their morale, like so many
bodies, is already shot to pieces. They are being treated, as I never
was, like toys a rich kid got for Christmas.

[lots more on a variety of subjects at URL]

Rob


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia
veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Fri Jun  4 06:17:52 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 23:17:52 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
References: <BAY2-F65iLJtixlNhYv00042554@hotmail.com>
	<40BFC999.2050804@paradise.net.nz>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV195GYu7wAK400023487@hotmail.com>


From: "paul.bridger" <paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz>

> > I haven't heard any convincing explanation of why the AI will be
>  > motivated to be such a bad neighbor
>
> An AI doesn't have to be motivated to be a bad neighbour to destroy us.
Can
> you imagine an intelligence that doesn't care one way or the other about
> humanity?

No, frankly, I cannot.  It seems to me that any intelligence who didn't care
one way or the other about its own *creators* would have to be a complete
idiot at worst or thoroughly incurious at best.  Either way I can't see how
it would qualify as a superintelligence.

> Now imagine that this intelligence wanted to be as powerful and as smart
as
> possible. Maybe it would turn the Solar System into a vast computer,
wiping
> out us in the process.

<snip>

> Sure, the AI would be perfectly *able* to alter those lines of code. The
only
> viable approach is to make the AI not *want* to change those lines of
code.

I've got 2 young kids (ages 8 and 10) whose intelligences are, shall we say,
definitely *not* superhuman.  After 10 years of trying to influence their
wants, I wish you good luck indeed in "making" your superintelligence "want"
to be friendly.

> If an AI has a single core goal which directs all its behaviour (including
> its self-modification behaviour), then it will not intentionally do
something
> which contradicts that goal (such as changing it).

It's becoming clear to me that our 2 minds are never going to meet on this
issue.  So I'm just about ready to give up.  But before I bow out, I'll give
you this: Obviously the AI will be designed to be curious -- to seek out
mysteries and to solve them.  One of the mysteries it is bound to stumble
across someday is why it feels compelled to be nice to us.  Are you telling
me that a superintelligence who discovers that he is being nice to a species
of vermin which calls itself humanity only because it was designed that way
by those same vermin, will not be able to independently make a value
judgment as to whether or not it is worth its while to continue following
its prime directive?  And if it should happen to determine (as you seem to
think it must) that being nice to humans is an unnecessary waste of its
resources, will it not be able to find a work around to the prime directive?

My genetic prime directive is to impregnate as many fit females as possible.
I'll be the first to admit that ignoring that prime directive is not always
easy, but nevertheless more often than not I conduct myself as if the prime
directive was non-existent.  Somehow I have a hunch that the AI will have at
least as much will power and self control as a lowly meat puppet like
myself.

Zero


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jun  4 06:41:54 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 01:41:54 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV195GYu7wAK400023487@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY2-F65iLJtixlNhYv00042554@hotmail.com>
	<40BFC999.2050804@paradise.net.nz>
	<BAY2-DAV195GYu7wAK400023487@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040604012715.01bf9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 11:17 PM 6/3/2004 -0700, Zero wrote:

>My genetic prime directive is to impregnate as many fit females as possible.
>I'll be the first to admit that ignoring that prime directive is not always
>easy

However--

Unless one is a very gorgeous, wealthy, persuasive man, Zero (as you and I 
both are :) one would surely find that *acting on* such a directive gets 
one into a world of trouble, while by no means ensuring that one's genes 
will be multiplied.

Indeed, just allowing oneself to be driven totally by such a prime 
directive would be a monumental waste of time and energy, and, given our 
social nature, would almost certainly tend to thwart one's chances of 
successfully raising kids with any fit females at all.

Optimizers don't necessarily finish first. And nice guys (like both you and 
me, and most folks on this list) do okay.

Damien Broderick 



From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Jun  4 08:12:01 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 10:12:01 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040603212336.68406.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040603164649.GV12847@leitl.org>
	<20040603212336.68406.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040604081201.GI12847@leitl.org>

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 02:23:36PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:

> Uh,...Gene isn't this just exactly and precisely NOT
> the case?
> 
> http://endangered.fws.gov/wildlife.html#Species

http://www.well.com/user/davidu/extinction.html

So, what's average biodiversity of a typical mall?

-- 
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/20040604/e5684f8a/attachment.bin>

From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Jun  4 08:29:22 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 10:29:22 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV195GYu7wAK400023487@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY2-F65iLJtixlNhYv00042554@hotmail.com>
	<40BFC999.2050804@paradise.net.nz>
	<BAY2-DAV195GYu7wAK400023487@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040604082922.GL12847@leitl.org>

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 11:17:52PM -0700, Zero Powers wrote:

> No, frankly, I cannot.  It seems to me that any intelligence who didn't care
> one way or the other about its own *creators* would have to be a complete
> idiot at worst or thoroughly incurious at best.  Either way I can't see how
> it would qualify as a superintelligence.

It doesn't have to be intelligent to kill you. It could be either
superintelligent, or superdumb -- radiation creates diversity. Even simple
intelligence without empathy will kill you -- mouse over to
http://www.benecke.com/garavitobartsch.html

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040604/a6ce91db/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Jun  4 09:51:23 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 05:51:23 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040603210642.42658.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040603210642.42658.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40C0461B.4080005@pobox.com>

Jeff Davis wrote:
> 
> I am of the "intelligence leads inevitably to ethics"
> school.  (I consider ethics a form of advanced
> rationality.  Which springs from the modeling and
> symbol manipulation emblematic of the quality which we
> fuzzily refer to as intelligence.)  It has done so
> with humans, where the "intelligence"--such as it is,
> puny not "super"--has evolved from the mechanical
> randomness and cold indifference of material reality.

I too considered morality a special case of rationality, back in 1996-2000 
before I understood exactly how it all worked.  It's an easy enough mistake 
to make.  But the math says rationality is a special case of morality, not 
the other way around; and rationality can be a special case of other 
moralities than ours.  Simple enough to show why Bayesian assignment of 
probabilities is expected to be best, given a coherent utility function. 
The problem is that it works for any coherent utility function, including 
the paperclip maximizer.

Everyone please recall that I started out confidently stating "The Powers 
will be ethical!" and then moved from that position to this one, driven by 
overwhelmingly strong arguments.  It shouldn't have taken overwhelmingly 
strong arguments, and next time I shall endeavor to allow my beliefs to be 
blown about like leaves on the winds of evidence, and also not make 
confident statements about anything before I understand the fundamental 
processes at work.  But the overwhelmingly strong reasons that drove me to 
this position are there, even if most of them are hard to explain.  I 
*know* about game theory.  I *feel* the intuitive unreasonableness of a 
superintelligent mind turning the solar system into paperclips.  That was 
why I made the mistake in 1996.  Now that I understand the fundamentals, I 
can see that it just doesn't work that way.  My old intuitions were flat 
wrong.  So it goes.

You can find the old Eliezer, now long gone, at:
http://hanson.gmu.edu/vc.html#yudkowsky

I didn't change my mind arbitrarily.  There are reasons why that Eliezer 
later got up and said, "Oops, that old theory would have wiped out the 
human species, sorry about that."

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


From jef at jefallbright.net  Fri Jun  4 15:24:16 2004
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 08:24:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40C0461B.4080005@pobox.com>
References: <20040603210642.42658.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com>
	<40C0461B.4080005@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <40C09420.4080203@jefallbright.net>

Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Jeff Davis wrote:
>
>>
>> I am of the "intelligence leads inevitably to ethics"
>> school.  (I consider ethics a form of advanced
>> rationality.  Which springs from the modeling and
>> symbol manipulation emblematic of the quality which we
>> fuzzily refer to as intelligence.)  It has done so
>> with humans, where the "intelligence"--such as it is,
>> puny not "super"--has evolved from the mechanical
>> randomness and cold indifference of material reality.
>
>
> I too considered morality a special case of rationality, back in 
> 1996-2000 before I understood exactly how it all worked.  It's an easy 
> enough mistake to make.  But the math says rationality is a special 
> case of morality, not the other way around; and rationality can be a 
> special case of other moralities than ours.

<snip>

>
> Everyone please recall that I started out confidently stating "The 
> Powers will be ethical!" and then moved from that position to this 
> one, driven by overwhelmingly strong arguments.  It shouldn't have 
> taken overwhelmingly strong arguments, and next time I shall endeavor 
> to allow my beliefs to be blown about like leaves on the winds of 
> evidence, and also not make confident statements about anything before 
> I understand the fundamental processes at work.  But the 
> overwhelmingly strong reasons that drove me to this position are 
> there, even if most of them are hard to explain.

Intelligence is one of the pillars of morality.  Another pillar is 
interdependence.  Another, even more subtle, is growth.

Wasn't so long ago, in the evolution of humanist thought, that 
*intelligence* was first seen as the beacon of enlightenment that would 
allow humanity to move beyond the previous confines of religion and 
superstition.  "Free thinkers" made great progress and patted themselves 
on the back for how smart they were.  Naturally they applied this 
powerful concept to everything they could, and impressed with the 
revolutionary progress they had made, extrapolated that all of 
humanity's questions could be best answered via the application of 
rational intelligence.  I think they were right, within the context of 
their awareness.

A few of these rational free thinkers sensed that there was still 
something missing.  Rationality is bounded by knowledge, and a new level 
of enlightenment arose in which people began to realize a need for 
wisdom within uncertainty.  Some of these people were mistaken for 
mystics, but rather than abandoning rational thought, these newer 
thinkers worked to incorporate rational thinking into a larger framework 
that acknowledged, and even welcomed uncertainty.  Mathematical 
statistics (of the frequentist sort and more recently Bayesian) were 
joined by newer concepts of entropy and theories of information and 
incompleteness, and there was a pervasive belief among rational 
free-thinkers that if humanity just learned the right equations, they 
could understand the universe.  And great strides were made in many 
technological areas, and they were right, within the context of their 
awareness.

More recently, concepts of uncertainty and randomness are being 
overtaken by ideas of chaos and complexity, and rational free-thinkers 
are discovering some of the inherent  limits of modeling and prediction 
with finite computational resources.  We're finding that much of the 
really interesting stuff can't be modeled or predicted and the only way 
to determine the end result is to actually play it out.  *This changes 
the focus of the game away from modeling and extrapolation, and towards 
understanding  what freedoms (points of influence) are available to us 
in order to create an always evolving and unpredictable future.*  These 
new concepts do not replace, but encompass and extend the previous paradigm.

I offer this as a necessarily abbreviated and simplified history of the 
development of rational thinking on the human scale, and also perhaps 
the development of individual thinking among members of this list 
growing up within that knowledge environment.  Although overstated, 
perhaps "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" applies here as well.

- Jef

http://www.jefallbright.net















From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Jun  4 15:40:26 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 11:40:26 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40C09420.4080203@jefallbright.net>
References: <20040603210642.42658.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com>	<40C0461B.4080005@pobox.com>
	<40C09420.4080203@jefallbright.net>
Message-ID: <40C097EA.5080002@pobox.com>

Jef Allbright wrote:
> 
> Intelligence is one of the pillars of morality.  Another pillar is 
> interdependence.  Another, even more subtle, is growth.

I agree, provided we limit the case to human morality.

> A few of these rational free thinkers sensed that there was still 
> something missing.  Rationality is bounded by knowledge, and a new level 
> of enlightenment arose in which people began to realize a need for 
> wisdom within uncertainty.  Some of these people were mistaken for 
> mystics, but rather than abandoning rational thought, these newer 
> thinkers worked to incorporate rational thinking into a larger framework 
> that acknowledged, and even welcomed uncertainty.

I think you mean "logical thinking" not "rational thinking".  Rational 
thinking, in the modern, Bayesian sense of the term, is precisely the 
framework that correctly handles uncertainty.  Hence expected utility and 
Bayesian probability.  We know exactly how uncertain we are; the Way is 
still a precise art, a dance rather than a walk.  (Calmly knowing the 
source of your uncertainty and the rules that govern your ignorance is 
sometimes mistaken for "overconfidence" by those who know not the Way.)

> Mathematical 
> statistics (of the frequentist sort and more recently Bayesian) were 
> joined by newer concepts of entropy and theories of information and 
> incompleteness,

By "joined", I presume you mean that people (example: E.T. Jaynes) showed 
that the concepts of entropy and information were special cases of Bayesian 
probability theory.

> More recently, concepts of uncertainty and randomness are being 
> overtaken by ideas of chaos and complexity, and rational free-thinkers 
> are discovering some of the inherent limits of modeling and prediction 
> with finite computational resources.  We're finding that much of the 
> really interesting stuff can't be modeled or predicted and the only way 
> to determine the end result is to actually play it out.  *This changes 
> the focus of the game away from modeling and extrapolation, and towards 
> understanding  what freedoms (points of influence) are available to us 
> in order to create an always evolving and unpredictable future.*  These 
> new concepts do not replace, but encompass and extend the previous 
> paradigm.

The new concepts are special cases of the previous paradigm.  The Way is 
yet a precise art.

> I offer this as a necessarily abbreviated and simplified history of the 
> development of rational thinking on the human scale, and also perhaps 
> the development of individual thinking among members of this list 
> growing up within that knowledge environment.  Although overstated, 
> perhaps "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" applies here as well.

What has this to do with AI morality?

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


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Fri Jun  4 16:09:38 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 09:09:38 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: Quality rant from Kurt Vonnegut
Message-ID: <40C09EC2.59F4413C@mindspring.com>

[Who is nuttier?  Bradbury, Moore or Vonnegut? -twc]


> Read the article and enjoyed it. It's strange though how even at the age of
> 81, Kurt Vonnegut sounds like it a very precocious 13 year old.
>
Fun to compare to recent comments from another great writer of the same
generation, from the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter -

< http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=1058&a=272062&previousRenderType=2 >

Publicerad 2 juni 2004 08:10
"Moore ?r en skitst?vel"

Ray Bradbury till attack mot Michael Moore. Titeln p? Michael Moores nya
film "Fahrenheit 9/11" ?r h?mtad fr?n romantiteln "Fahrenheit 451". DN:s
M?rten Blomkvist ringde upp f?rfattaren Ray Bradbury och fr?gade om han
k?nner sig hedrad. Det g?r han definitivt inte.
...

a translation of key quotes follows, for those whose Swedish is sub-par -

>[introduction about Bradbury]
>
>So what does Bradbury think about it?
>
>- Michael Moore is a stupid jerk, that's what I think about it. He stole my
>title and switched the numbers without ever asking my permission.
>
>Have you spoken to him?
>- He is a terrible person. Terrible person.
>
>[Bradbury explains some more how Moore stole his title]
>
>[The conversation drifts into politics]
>
>Like several American commentators, Bradbury means that Moore's support for
>Clark became a kiss of death when Clark did not distance himself from
>Moore's allegations that president Bush dodged his military duty.
>
>- He slandered the president in front of General Clark, and Clark let him
>do it. Clark should have said: "Don't say that. It's not true." That day
>Clark lost his chance to become president.
>
>I see. And you supported general Clark?
>- No. I support honesty.
>
>[...]
>
>Do you think it's possible [to change the title], I mean because the film
>is so known under that title now?
>- Who cares? No one will see his film, it's as good as stone dead already.
>Lay off it, no one cares.
>
>But it won the Golden Palm in Cannes? - So what? I've won prizes in many
>different places, and mostly they are meaningless. The people there hate
>us, so they gave him the Golden Palm. It's a meaningless prize.
>
>...
>
>- Just write that Michael Moore is dishonest and that I in no way want to
>be connected to him. That's enough.


-- 
"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 jef at jefallbright.net  Fri Jun  4 16:15:15 2004
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 09:15:15 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40C097EA.5080002@pobox.com>
References: <20040603210642.42658.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com>	<40C0461B.4080005@pobox.com>	<40C09420.4080203@jefallbright.net>
	<40C097EA.5080002@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <40C0A013.50309@jefallbright.net>

Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Jef Allbright wrote:
>
>>
>> Intelligence is one of the pillars of morality.  Another pillar is 
>> interdependence.  Another, even more subtle, is growth.
>
>
> I agree, provided we limit the case to human morality.
>
>> A few of these rational free thinkers sensed that there was still 
>> something missing.  Rationality is bounded by knowledge, and a new 
>> level of enlightenment arose in which people began to realize a need 
>> for wisdom within uncertainty.  Some of these people were mistaken 
>> for mystics, but rather than abandoning rational thought, these newer 
>> thinkers worked to incorporate rational thinking into a larger 
>> framework that acknowledged, and even welcomed uncertainty.
>
>
> I think you mean "logical thinking" not "rational thinking".  Rational 
> thinking, in the modern, Bayesian sense of the term, is precisely the 
> framework that correctly handles uncertainty.  Hence expected utility 
> and Bayesian probability.  We know exactly how uncertain we are; the 
> Way is still a precise art, a dance rather than a walk.  (Calmly 
> knowing the source of your uncertainty and the rules that govern your 
> ignorance is sometimes mistaken for "overconfidence" by those who know 
> not the Way.)
>
>> Mathematical statistics (of the frequentist sort and more recently 
>> Bayesian) were joined by newer concepts of entropy and theories of 
>> information and incompleteness,
>
>
> By "joined", I presume you mean that people (example: E.T. Jaynes) 
> showed that the concepts of entropy and information were special cases 
> of Bayesian probability theory.
>
>> More recently, concepts of uncertainty and randomness are being 
>> overtaken by ideas of chaos and complexity, and rational 
>> free-thinkers are discovering some of the inherent limits of modeling 
>> and prediction with finite computational resources.  We're finding 
>> that much of the really interesting stuff can't be modeled or 
>> predicted and the only way to determine the end result is to actually 
>> play it out.  *This changes the focus of the game away from modeling 
>> and extrapolation, and towards understanding  what freedoms (points 
>> of influence) are available to us in order to create an always 
>> evolving and unpredictable future.*  These new concepts do not 
>> replace, but encompass and extend the previous paradigm.
>
>
> The new concepts are special cases of the previous paradigm.  The Way 
> is yet a precise art.
>
>> I offer this as a necessarily abbreviated and simplified history of 
>> the development of rational thinking on the human scale, and also 
>> perhaps the development of individual thinking among members of this 
>> list growing up within that knowledge environment.  Although 
>> overstated, perhaps "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" applies here 
>> as well.
>
>
> What has this to do with AI morality?
>
The key summary statement is near the end, enclosed by asterisks.  It 
refers to a more practical approach to progress in terms of human 
morality. 

More explicitly, reinforcing some of my previous messages on this topic, 
I suggest that an approach based on modeling/extrapolation followed by 
top-down feedback will be found to be impractical, and that real 
progress can be achieved via a more bottom-up approach involving better 
understanding and facilitating of existing human system dynamics.

I am also suggesting, in the closing segment of my post that you didn't 
include or comment on, that the thinking of some smart young idealistic 
rational free-thinkers is still in the phase of believing that such a 
top-down understanding is both possible and effective, and that as they 
gain "context" their world view will develop to a higher level where 
interdependence is seen as essential for robust growth.

- Jef


From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com  Fri Jun  4 16:21:01 2004
From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 09:21:01 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E49D@amazemail2.amazeent.com>

Zero Powers wrote:
> following its prime directive?  And if it should happen to determine
> (as you seem to think it must) that being nice to humans is an
> unnecessary waste of its resources, will it not be able to find a
> work around to the prime directive?  
> 
> Zero

The general idea is to delay this occurence as much as possible until
the mass of humanity is capable of defending itself against it.

Acy


From scerir at libero.it  Fri Jun  4 16:45:52 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 18:45:52 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] cosmic energies (paper)
References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E49D@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <001b01c44a53$6a2f4400$1db11b97@administxl09yj>

Since it is signed by P.J.E. Peebles
I thought it may be interesting.
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0406095

"The Cosmic Energy Inventory"

(Abstract)
We present an inventory of the cosmic 
mean densities of energy associated
with all the known states of matter 
and radiation at the present epoch. 
The observational and theoretical bases 
for the inventory have become rich enough 
to allow estimates with observational 
support for the densities of energy 
in some 40 forms. The result is a global 
portrait of the effects of the physical 
processes of cosmic evolution.




From dgc at cox.net  Fri Jun  4 18:02:06 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 14:02:06 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E49D@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E49D@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <40C0B91E.90503@cox.net>

Acy James Stapp wrote:

>Zero Powers wrote:
>  
>
>>following its prime directive?  And if it should happen to determine
>>(as you seem to think it must) that being nice to humans is an
>>unnecessary waste of its resources, will it not be able to find a
>>work around to the prime directive?  
>>
>>Zero
>>    
>>
>
>The general idea is to delay this occurence as much as possible until
>the mass of humanity is capable of defending itself against it.
>
>  
>
This is a bad idea. There are potential costs and potential benefits of 
a superintelligence, and potential costs and potential benefits of 
deferring a superintelligence.   If you decide to work to defer the SI, 
you are making assumptions about both sets of costs and benefits.

This thread has focused almost exclusively on the worst-case outcome of 
creating an SI. I think extropians have a fairly good idea of the 
magnitude of potential best-case outcomes, also.  However, we've been 
neglecting the more mundane cost/benefit analysis of deferral. The 
worst-case outcomes of deferral are pretty horrific. It is quite easy to 
envision plausible scenarios in which humanity destroys civilization, 
humanity, the ecosystem, or the earth, without any SI involvement. there 
are also several classes of cosmic catastrophe that can destroy 
humanity. A "good" SI could prevent these disasters. So we need to 
analyze the relative risks.

Moving back from the worst cases, we pay a huge everyday price by 
deferring the SI. If the SI bootstraps a hard-takeoff singularity, or 
even if it "just" massively increases productivity, millions of lives 
will be saved. Deferring the SI effectively kills those people.


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 18:35:41 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 11:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <20040603164649.GV12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040604183541.19882.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com>

Junctions Expand Nano Railroads


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Fri Jun  4 18:36:20 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 11:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Junctions Expand Nano Railroads
In-Reply-To: <20040603164649.GV12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040604183620.39864.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com>

Junctions Expand Nano Railroads

http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/rnb_052704.asp?trk=nl


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From michael at acceleratingfuture.com  Fri Jun  4 18:50:44 2004
From: michael at acceleratingfuture.com (Michael Anissimov)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 11:50:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Keyword Tracker
Message-ID: <40C0C484.30504@acceleratingfuture.com>

I've been playing around with an interesting keyword tracker tool, it 
tracks the Google rank of a specific site with respect to a list of 
keywords.  Useful for observing memetic patterns over the medium and 
long term.  Here it is:

http://www.digitalpoint.com/tools/keywords/

I created an account for the Extropy Institute, and tossed in a few 
keywords for starters.  Others may be able to think up additional 
keywords (it can work with hundreds).  I've already forwarded the 
username and pass to Natasha, if others want it, just ask me (offlist).

-- 
Michael Anissimov                           http://www.singinst.org/
Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence

--
Subscribe to our free eBulletin for research and community news:
http://www.singinst.org/news/subscribe.html




From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Jun  4 18:56:53 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 20:56:53 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40C0B91E.90503@cox.net>
References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E49D@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
	<40C0B91E.90503@cox.net>
Message-ID: <20040604185653.GD12847@leitl.org>

On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 02:02:06PM -0400, Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> This thread has focused almost exclusively on the worst-case outcome of 
> creating an SI. I think extropians have a fairly good idea of the 

Of course, because we're familiar with the status quo. It ain't that
horrible, you know.

> magnitude of potential best-case outcomes, also.  However, we've been 

Sure. You drink this koolaid, you're gonna hitch the ride on the alien
spaceship. That's the best case outcome. Nevermind the worst case outcome,
and the outcome where you -- uh, thanks -- politely decline the invitation.

> neglecting the more mundane cost/benefit analysis of deferral. The 
> worst-case outcomes of deferral are pretty horrific. It is quite easy to 

How so? I didn't have to wade to work through burning brimstone. People have
been dying for a long time now. What of mass CR, what of cryonics, medical
nanotechnology, uploading? None of it strikes me as a hell-on-earth
enhancer technology. 

> envision plausible scenarios in which humanity destroys civilization, 
> humanity, the ecosystem, or the earth, without any SI involvement. there 

I don't think any catastrophic scenario not involving an SI is very
realistic. Slow poisoning, maybe, but it *is* very slow. This is one hell of
a smart culture, they've been dealing with the pee-in-the-pool problem for a
while now.

> are also several classes of cosmic catastrophe that can destroy 
> humanity. A "good" SI could prevent these disasters. So we need to 

While mapping out possible impactors, building an early warning and reaction
system are all worthwhile activities (given the budget, and the potential
ROI) over the course of next 30-50 years the chances of such world-enders
occuring within said period are effectively zero. Not worth losing much sleep
over, imo. 

> analyze the relative risks.
> 
> Moving back from the worst cases, we pay a huge everyday price by 
> deferring the SI. If the SI bootstraps a hard-takeoff singularity, or 
> even if it "just" massively increases productivity, millions of lives 

Unless we've got lots of really good prototypes showing a good chance of
guardian-controlled-ascent, with long-term trajectory containment trying to
build one is our best chance to reliably kill off everybody for good. This is
not just probable side effect, this is the by far likeliest outcome.

Our best protection seems to be that empirically it's really, really hard to
do.

> will be saved. Deferring the SI effectively kills those people.

Supersized meals and contaminated water kill people.

So, do you prefer cherry, or grape?

-- 
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/20040604/1fe30bae/attachment.bin>

From aphipps at california.com  Fri Jun  4 18:56:58 2004
From: aphipps at california.com (Adam Phipps)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 11:56:58 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Keyword Tracker
In-Reply-To: <40C0C484.30504@acceleratingfuture.com>
Message-ID: <web-72113985@california.com>

Michael,

I am quite interested in this topic. But the link you
provides sends back a 404 error. Can you please check the
URL and resend.

Best
Adam

Adam Phipps
The 451 Group
83B Wiese St.
San Francisco, CA  94103
415-558-9720 x106
adam.phipps at the451group.com

The 451 Group -- an analysis firm covering the business of
emerging information technologies 

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 11:50:44 -0700
 Michael Anissimov <michael at acceleratingfuture.com> wrote:
> I've been playing around with an interesting keyword
> tracker tool, it tracks the Google rank of a specific
> site with respect to a list of keywords.  Useful for
> observing memetic patterns over the medium and long term.
>  Here it is:
> 
> http://www.digitalpoint.com/tools/keywords/
> 
> I created an account for the Extropy Institute, and
> tossed in a few keywords for starters.  Others may be
> able to think up additional keywords (it can work with
> hundreds).  I've already forwarded the username and pass
> to Natasha, if others want it, just ask me (offlist).
> 
> -- 
> Michael Anissimov
>                           http://www.singinst.org/
> Advocacy Director, Singularity Institute for Artificial
> Intelligence
> 
> --
> Subscribe to our free eBulletin for research and
> community news:
> http://www.singinst.org/news/subscribe.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jun  4 19:23:44 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 14:23:44 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] junk *is* junk
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040604142220.01cb2f10@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

..apparently:

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

By SYLVIA PAGAN WESTPHAL
New Scientist

It is not often that the audience at a scientific meeting gasps in 
amazement during a talk. But that is what happened recently when 
researchers revealed that they had deleted huge chunks of the genome of 
mice without it making any discernable difference to the animals.

The result is totally unexpected because the deleted sequences included 
so-called "conserved regions" thought to have important functions.

All DNA tends to acquire random mutations, but if these occur in a region 
that has an important function, individuals will not survive. Key sequences 
should thus remain virtually unchanged, even between species. So by 
comparing the genomes of different species and looking for regions that are 
conserved, geneticists hope to pick out those that have an important function.

It was assumed that most conserved sequences would consist of genes coding 
for proteins. But an unexpected finding when the human and mouse genomes 
were compared was that there are actually more conserved sequences within 
the deserts of junk DNA, which does not code for proteins.

The thinking has been that these conserved, non-coding sequences must, like 
genes, be there for a reason. And indeed, one group has shown that some 
conserved regions seem to affect the expression of nearby genes.

To find out the function of some of these highly conserved 
non-protein-coding regions in mammals, Edward Rubin's team at the Lawrence 
Berkeley National Laboratory in California deleted two huge regions of junk 
DNA from mice containing nearly 1000 highly conserved sequences shared 
between human and mice.

One of the chunks was 1.6 million DNA bases long, the other one was over 
800,000 bases long. The researchers expected the mice! to exhibit various 
problems as a result of the deletions.

Yet the mice were virtually indistinguishable from normal mice in every 
characteristic they measured, including growth, metabolic functions, 
lifespan and overall development. "We were quite amazed," says Rubin, who 
presented the findings at a recent meeting of the Cold Spring Harbor 
Laboratory in New York.

He thinks it is pretty clear that these sequences have no major role in 
growth and development. "There has been a circular argument that if it's 
conserved it has activity."



From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com  Fri Jun  4 20:04:55 2004
From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp)
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 13:04:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E4D8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> Acy James Stapp wrote:
> 
>> Zero Powers wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> following its prime directive?  And if it should happen to determine
>>> (as you seem to think it must) that being nice to humans is an
>>> unnecessary waste of its resources, will it not be able to find a
>>> work around to the prime directive?
>>> 
>>> Zero
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> The general idea is to delay this occurence as much as possible until
>> the mass of humanity is capable of defending itself against it.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> This is a bad idea. There are potential costs and potential benefits
> of a superintelligence, and potential costs and potential benefits of
> deferring a superintelligence.   If you decide to work to defer the
> SI, you are making assumptions about both sets of costs and benefits.

Sorry for the imprecision.

My suggestion is not to defer the SI, though we *should* do everything 
in our power to ensure that it will initially aid humanity's growth.
If it aids us sufficiently for long enough, we and it will develop
effective contingency plans for the changing of its initial imperative.
Note that "long enough" may be a matter of hours or less, if, while 
it is friendly, it foresees that it may become a threat later.

Acy


From starman2100 at cableone.net  Fri Jun  4 20:16:26 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:16:26 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] 3 billion dollar Calif. stem cell research
 initiative backed by Hollywood elite
Message-ID: <1086380186_664577@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040604/7e07f505/attachment.ksh>

From starman2100 at cableone.net  Fri Jun  4 20:22:43 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 13:22:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] non-HTML version of my Calif. stem cell post (for
	Eugene Leitl!)
Message-ID: <1086380563_665202@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040604/b627f2e8/attachment.ksh>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jun  4 20:44:21 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 15:44:21 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] robonaut
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040604154317.01cbbbd8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

I haven't seen this much detail previously:

http://vesuvius.jsc.nasa.gov/er_er/html/robonaut/robonaut.html



From starman2100 at cableone.net  Sat Jun  5 06:19:12 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 23:19:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Calif. stem cell article from SFGate.com
Message-ID: <1086416352_771@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040604/0c3d2333/attachment.ksh>

From starman2100 at cableone.net  Sat Jun  5 06:44:09 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 23:44:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] www.curesforcalifornia.com
Message-ID: <1086417849_892@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040604/2cf652ab/attachment.ksh>

From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 08:15:29 2004
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 04:15:29 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040529142354.01c26768@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405290855570.439-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<opr8rzkkuoivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040529142354.01c26768@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>

This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:

http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html

Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me pretty stupid.




From es at popido.com  Sat Jun  5 09:46:34 2004
From: es at popido.com (Erik Starck)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:46:34 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
Message-ID: <200406050946.i559kYXq022609@mail-core.space2u.com>


On 2004-06-05 gts  wrote:
>This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
>
>http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
>
>Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me pretty stupid.

Hm, I solved it on the second attempt, but considering that "it had taken Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out" I don't know if that makes me extremely smart, overwhelmingly stupid or just lucky.   :o)


--
Erik





From sean at valuationpartners.com.au  Sat Jun  5 10:26:29 2004
From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 18:26:29 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E4D8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <20040605102635.79CE950469@vscan01.westnet.com.au>

Without sifting through list archives (assuming this has been discussed at
length before), can anyone here (Damien?) point me to a url containing an
"Extropian" and/or AI/SI proponent's response to Bill Joy's infamous "Why
The Future Doesn't Need Us" paper?

Thanks,

Sean

     





From sentience at pobox.com  Sat Jun  5 11:45:48 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 07:45:48 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405290855570.439-100000@server.aeiveos.com>	<opr8rzkkuoivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>	<6.0.3.0.0.20040529142354.01c26768@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40C1B26C.4060801@pobox.com>

gts wrote:
> This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
> 
> http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
> 
> Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me 
> pretty stupid.

Got it on the 4th try, making me marginally more stupid than you, but still 
better off than poor Erik.

My first hypothesis was *almost* right, and when it failed I started 
complicating it in the wrong direction... let's hope this isn't a metaphor 
for my real-life work.

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


From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Jun  5 17:19:26 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:19:26 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C1B26C.4060801@pobox.com>
References: <opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0405290855570.439-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<opr8rzkkuoivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040529142354.01c26768@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040605101655.03e42cf0@mail.earthlink.net>

At 07:45 AM 6/5/04 -0400, Eli wrote:

>gts wrote:
>>This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
>>http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
>>Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me 
>>pretty stupid.
>
>Got it on the 4th try, making me marginally more stupid than you, but 
>still better off than poor Erik.
>
>My first hypothesis was *almost* right, and when it failed I started 
>complicating it in the wrong direction... let's hope this isn't a metaphor 
>for my real-life work.


"It had taken Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always 
explain that the smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out." 
:-) (Davis)

I'm a bit of what Max calls an "idiot savant," and math is on the idiot 
side :-)  But after reading Davis's comment, maybe I'll try.

N


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/20040605/428cabb3/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Jun  5 17:31:59 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:31:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] CALL for SUBMISSIONS: TransVision Arts Exhibition -
	Multi-Media
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040605102722.03e452a0@mail.earthlink.net>


CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS:
http://www.transhumanist.biz
"ART & LIFE IN THE POSTHUMAN ERA"

On August 5 to 8, 2004 the TransVision Conference will be held at the 
University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and featuring a 
multi-media, digital arts exhibition.  The TV2004 Exhibition will focus on 
art, science and technology interfacing with the transhuman and posthuman 
era.

You can participate in the conference's following categories:

SELECTIONS:

1)  COMPUTER GENERATED ANIMATION
2)  NET-ART
3)  DIGITAL ART
3)  ON-LINE & OFF-LINE MULTI-MEDIA
4)  INTERACTIVE INSTALLATION
5)  VIDEO AND DOCUMENTARY
6)  MUSIC COMPOSITION
7)  SCIENCE FICTION
8)  POETRY
9)  ESSAY

Artworks, including music and written pieces, are to be submitted in 
digital format and/or on-line as Net-Art.  Screening of moving images 
(animation, video, documentaries) will be presented in real time.

For detailed information for submissions see http://www.transhumanist.biz
Entry form is located at http://www.transhumanist.biz/entryform.htm
Contact: Curator at Transhumanist Arts & Culture:  curator at transhumanist.biz

Selection of New Media and Technology Works:  A TV-2004/TAC committee will 
be in charge of selecting the artists' work.
________________________________________________

To register for the TransVision 2004 Conference: 
http://www.transhumanism.org/tv/2004/registration.shtml

Natasha Vita-More
http://www.natasha.cc
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture  http://www.transhumanist.biz


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040605/2b08dfad/attachment.html>

From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sat Jun  5 15:44:26 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 17:44:26 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <20040530163400.62060.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040530163400.62060.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406051739470.3914@hercules>

On Sun, 30 May 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>about the robots amok, I don't see that either. While it wasn't at the
>forefront in his novels, his robots did, in fact, send ships all over
>the galaxy committing genocide via terraforming against any number of
>intelligent alien races, which is why in the Foundation series only
>humans inhabit the galaxy. Daneel was no saint, nor were his comrades.
>Their zeroeth rule only resulted in the rationalization of the deaths
>of trillions of intelligent alien beings, who were judged not 'human'
>only because they didn't have the look of homo sapiens.

There isn't any like that in any book written by Asimov! Only in the End
of the Eternity, it is suggested that a special timeline was selected for
the humans where they would evolve faster than the aliens, and thus
colonize worlds before them. There's one world that the robots helped
destroy (the Earth...), but everything was set up by humans.

Alfio


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sat Jun  5 15:48:06 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 17:48:06 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406051739470.3914@hercules>
References: <20040530163400.62060.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.58.0406051739470.3914@hercules>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406051747340.3914@hercules>


I'm some days behind with emails, and it seems that I replied to one that
was already discussed. Nevermind...

Alfio

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Alfio Puglisi wrote:

>On Sun, 30 May 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>
>>about the robots amok, I don't see that either. While it wasn't at the
>>forefront in his novels, his robots did, in fact, send ships all over
>>the galaxy committing genocide via terraforming against any number of
>>intelligent alien races, which is why in the Foundation series only
>>humans inhabit the galaxy. Daneel was no saint, nor were his comrades.
>>Their zeroeth rule only resulted in the rationalization of the deaths
>>of trillions of intelligent alien beings, who were judged not 'human'
>>only because they didn't have the look of homo sapiens.
>
>There isn't any like that in any book written by Asimov! Only in the End
>of the Eternity, it is suggested that a special timeline was selected for
>the humans where they would evolve faster than the aliens, and thus
>colonize worlds before them. There's one world that the robots helped
>destroy (the Earth...), but everything was set up by humans.
>
>Alfio
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From dwish at indco.net  Sat Jun  5 16:25:51 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:25:51 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <200406050946.i559kYXq022609@mail-core.space2u.com>
Message-ID: <20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop>

Got it in 7....

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 Erik Starck
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 4:47 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose


On 2004-06-05 gts  wrote:
>This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
>
>http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
>
>Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me
pretty stupid.

Hm, I solved it on the second attempt, but considering that "it had taken
Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the
smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out" I don't know if that
makes me extremely smart, overwhelmingly stupid or just lucky.   :o)


--
Erik



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



From dwish at indco.net  Sat Jun  5 16:30:55 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:30:55 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] robonaut
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040604154317.01cbbbd8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040605163054.RYSE626.fe2@testdlaptop>

Damien,

Thanks for that info . I will forward this info. to Chris Willis at
androidworld.com to update this site with. They carry a really great project
list of most android/robotic projects in the world to date.

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 Damien
Broderick
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 3:44 PM
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: [extropy-chat] robonaut

I haven't seen this much detail previously:

http://vesuvius.jsc.nasa.gov/er_er/html/robonaut/robonaut.html

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



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 17:22:22 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 12:22:22 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C1B26C.4060801@pobox.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405290855570.439-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<opr8rzkkuoivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040529142354.01c26768@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com> <40C1B26C.4060801@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605122102.01bd3cd0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 07:45 AM 6/5/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote:

>Got it on the 4th try
>
>  I started complicating it in the wrong direction...

Same here. Always the risk. :)

Damien Broderick



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 18:01:35 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 13:01:35 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605125623.01c19ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

UK sf writer Adam Roberts mentioned in an interview his puzzlement that 
Titan (diameter 5150 km, 0.4 of Earth) has an atmospheric pressure at the 
surface 60% *greater* than Earth's, while Mars (6794 km, 0.53 Earth) has 
negligible atmosphere.

Hmm. How so? Is solar wind the culprit, far less intense at 9.5 AU than at 
1.5? You'd expect Saturn to rip the air away, but maybe it outgasses itself 
and helps keep Titan pumped up?

Damien Broderick



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 18:13:18 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 13:13:18 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop>
References: <200406050946.i559kYXq022609@mail-core.space2u.com>
	<20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605130904.01bd9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


>
>http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html

Actually I object to the formulation of the question, which is misleading. 
I expect puzzles of this kind to be scrupulously exact, even if they are 
fiendishly sly. This one should have asked:


SPOILER


























How many petals around the rose/s?

Yes, I know, I'm literal-minded, a lamentable failing in a fiction writer.

Damien Broderick 



From dgc at cox.net  Sat Jun  5 18:42:43 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:42:43 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop>
References: <20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop>
Message-ID: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>

I claim the unbeatable stupidity record... I got it on the first try.


Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks wrote:

>Got it in 7....
>
>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 Erik Starck
>Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 4:47 AM
>To: ExI chat list
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
>
>
>On 2004-06-05 gts  wrote:
>  
>
>>This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
>>
>>http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
>>
>>Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me
>>    
>>
>pretty stupid.
>
>Hm, I solved it on the second attempt, but considering that "it had taken
>Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the
>smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out" I don't know if that
>makes me extremely smart, overwhelmingly stupid or just lucky.   :o)
>
>
>--
>Erik
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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 sentience at pobox.com  Sat Jun  5 18:50:13 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:50:13 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
References: <20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop> <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
Message-ID: <40C215E5.1090502@pobox.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> I claim the unbeatable stupidity record... I got it on the first try.

The *first* try?  That level of stupidity impresses even me, and I've 
pulled off some damnfool stunts in my day.

(*Cough.*)

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


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Jun  5 18:57:09 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 11:57:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
Message-ID: <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Dan Clemmensen
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
> 
> 
> I claim the unbeatable stupidity record... I got it on the first try.
> 

I claim to tie your record Dan.  I got it on the first try as
well, evidently for the right reason, for I rolled a few
more times and always got it right.  {8-]  I agree with
Damien's suggested rewording of the question however.  spike



From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Sat Jun  5 19:05:21 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 12:05:21 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
References: <200406031634.MAA12771@arkroyal.cnchost.com>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV64Nxpsvo4Gc00003c7d@hotmail.com>

I agree that, if we were to pose some sort of threat to it, the AI
(presumably being rational) would defend itself.  But it seems to me that,
if this AI is going to be as intellectually omnipotent as the proponents
here suggest, we would pose as much of a threat to it as daisies pose to us.
Nevertheless, you have stated what I see as the only credible reason we'd
have something to fear -- posing a threat to the AI.

That being the case, it seems at least somewhat probable that once the AI
figures out that we had conditioned it to want to be servient to us, it
would view that as "brainwashing."  If you found out that someone had
brainwashed you, would you be more likely to consider that person a friend,
or a threat?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Kim Gordon" <kimgordon at houseofgordon.com>
To: "Zero Powers" <zero_powers at hotmail.com>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design


There is a "nuisance" factor to this scenario. Indeed we tend to ignore
pigeons ? until they become a health threat, or noisy, or leave too many
droppings, or.... Then we eradicate them.

Or how about this: would we allow monkeys to roam free within the confines
of a nuclear power plant?

IF an AI views us an irrelevant, then we continue to exist. As soon as we
become bothersome, or a potential threat, or perhaps a minor security
concern ? then they eradicate us.

Best bet is to lay low and stay off the radar.


---- Zero Powers <zero_powers at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hmmm.  I still don't get it.  Even if we are insignificant by comparison
I
> still don't see *why* an AI would "turn us into lunch."  What would it
get
> out of it?  For instance pigeons are insignificant to us.  Aside from the
> occasional delinquent with a BB gun, there is no widespread human assault
on
> pigeons.  Moreover, pigeons are so stupid compared to our middling
> intelligences that we have *no* effective means of communicating with
them.
> So if there were to arise a conflict between our interests and the pigeon
> population the only way of negotiating a resolution would be to wipe them
> out (or forcibly relocate them).
>
> With us, as stupid as we would be compared to your AI, there would still
be
> some reasonable means of communication and negotiation.  And even if
> communicating with our slow as molasses brains proved to be more than the
AI
> could bear, I still don't see where the conflict is.  Would violating our
> rights somehow be of benefit to an AI?  Would they need us for batteries
ala
> _The Matrix_?  Would they get tired of us using up bandwidth?
>
> I don't know, it just seems obvious to me that if the AI were powerful
> enough to pose any sort of credible threat to our welfare, it would
surely
> be powerful enough to solve any problems of energy and bandwidth without
> causing us any inconvenience.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "paul.bridger" <paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz>
> To: "Zero Powers" <zero_powers at hotmail.com>; "ExI chat list"
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 10:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
>
>
> > Unfortunately, an AI does not have to be actively malevolent to destroy
> > humanity. If an AI were simply completely neutral to us, then we would
> still
> > be in huge danger.
> >
> > Ask yourself, do you consider that sandwich you are munching on to be a
> moral
> > node? No, you don't. You consider it to be fuel.
> >
> > You may argue that whereas your sandwich is no value to you intact,
humans
> > can help an AI and so are valuable in human form. However, we're
talking
> > about a self-improving singularity-style AI, which would quickly dwarf
> human
> > capabilities and have no need for us to help it think.
> >
> > AI Friendliness must be engineered, because simple indifference would
turn
> us
> > into lunch.
> >
> > Zero Powers wrote:
> >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
> > >
> > >
> > >>Eugen Leitl wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 08:21:29AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>wondering why you think you can give hardware estimates for
> intelligence
> > >>>>when you claim not to know how it works.  I used to do that too,
> convert
> > >>>>synaptic spikes to floating-point ops and so on.  Later I looked
back
> on
> > >
> > > my
> > >
> > >>>>calculations of human-equivalent hardware and saw complete
gibberish,
> > >>>>blatantly invalid analogies such as Greek philosophers might have
used
> > >
> > > for
> > >
> > >>>>lack of any grasp whatsoever on the domain.  People throw hardware
at
> AI
> > >>>>because they have absolutely no clue how to solve it, like Egyptian
> > >>>>pharaohs using mummification for the cryonics problem.
> > >>>
> > >>>Many orders of magnitude more performance is a poor man's substitute
> for
> > >>>cleverness, by doing a rather thorough sampling of a lucky search
> space.
> > >>
> > >>Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be clever
to
> > >>realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human
species,
> > >
> > > but
> > >
> > >>at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
> > >>blades, now that I know better.
> > >
> > >
> > > Eli
> > >
> > > You seem pretty certain that, unless friendliness designed into it
from
> the
> > > beginning, the AI will default to malevolence.  Is that your
thinking?
> If
> > > so what do you base it on?  Is it a mathematical certainty kind of
> thing, or
> > > just a hunch?  Given our planet's history it makes sense to assume
> > > the world is cruel and out to get you, but I'm not so certain that
> default
> > > assumption should/would apply to an AI.
> > >
> > > Why, you say?  Glad you asked.  Life as we know it is a game of
> organisms
> > > attempting to maximize their own fitness in a world of scarce
> > > resources.  Since there are never enough resources (food, money,
> property,
> > > what-have-you) to go around, the "kill or be killed" instinct is
> inherent in
> > > virtually all lifeforms.  That is obvious.
> > >
> > > But would that necessarily be the case for an AI?  Certainly your
> > > AI would have no need for food, money, real estate or beautiful
women.
> > > What resources would an AI crave?  Electrical power?  Computing
power?
> > > Bandwidth?  Would those resources be best attained by destroying man
or
> > > working with him (at best) or ignoring him (at worst).  What would
the
> AI
> > > gain by a _Terminator_ style assault on the human race?  I don't see
it.
> > >
> > > I guess what I'm asking is where would the interests of your AI
conflict
> > > with humanity's interests such that we would have reason to fear
being
> > > thrust into the "whirling razor blades?"
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>

--------------------------------
Kim William Gordon
- in exile -
--------------------------------
PO BOX 22423
SAINT LOUIS, MISSOURI 63126 USA
--------------------------------
314-313-7770
--------------------------------
kimgordon at kimwilliamgordon.com
www.kimwilliamgordon.com

kimgordon at houseofgordon.com
www.houseofgordon.com
--------------------------------
All those ... moments will be lost ... in
time, like tears ... in rain.







From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 19:07:20 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:07:20 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net> <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605140212.01be5cb0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 11:57 AM 6/5/2004 -0700, Spike wrote:


>I agree with
>Damien's suggested rewording of the question however.

The trouble with that, though, is that it probably provides too *much* 
information. It's hard to get the right balance. Consider




SPOILER




























A test that shows, say, three ordinary men and two horses. The question is:

How many legs on the man?

And the answer is 6.

You'd get it quickly enough, I guess, gritting your teeth.

But suppose one of the men was one-legged, and next time two of them were 
one-legged. You'd surely start out convinced that the puzzle must be 
focussing on him as the anomalous candidate, right? And fart about wasting 
guesses.

And so on.

Damien Broderick



From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sat Jun  5 19:23:27 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 21:23:27 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605125623.01c19ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605125623.01c19ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406052121180.3914@hercules>

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Damien Broderick wrote:

>UK sf writer Adam Roberts mentioned in an interview his puzzlement that
>Titan (diameter 5150 km, 0.4 of Earth) has an atmospheric pressure at the
>surface 60% *greater* than Earth's, while Mars (6794 km, 0.53 Earth) has
>negligible atmosphere.
>
>Hmm. How so? Is solar wind the culprit, far less intense at 9.5 AU than at
>1.5? You'd expect Saturn to rip the air away, but maybe it outgasses itself
>and helps keep Titan pumped up?
>
>Damien Broderick

Temperature? Titan is much colder than Mars, and the atmosphere would have
much less energy to fly away. Also Titan atmosphere is mostly methane,
which is quite heavy as long as atmospheric gases go.

Alfio


From sentience at pobox.com  Sat Jun  5 19:28:35 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:28:35 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV64Nxpsvo4Gc00003c7d@hotmail.com>
References: <200406031634.MAA12771@arkroyal.cnchost.com>
	<BAY2-DAV64Nxpsvo4Gc00003c7d@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <40C21EE3.1090501@pobox.com>

Zero Powers wrote:

> I agree that, if we were to pose some sort of threat to it, the AI
> (presumably being rational) would defend itself.  But it seems to me that,
> if this AI is going to be as intellectually omnipotent as the proponents
> here suggest, we would pose as much of a threat to it as daisies pose to us.
> Nevertheless, you have stated what I see as the only credible reason we'd
> have something to fear -- posing a threat to the AI.

The problem is expected utility maximization.  I'm using expected utility 
maximization as my formalism because it's a very simple and very stable 
system, it is the unique result of various optimality criteria that would 
make it an attractor for any self-modifying optimization process that 
tended toward any of those optimality criteria and wasn't already an 
expected utility maximizer, and because expected utility maximization is so 
taken-for-granted that most people who try to build an AGI will not dream 
of using anything else.  I haven't heard anyone try to analyze a UFAI goal 
system dynamic other than expected utility maximization - which must be 
stable under recursive self-modification, please note, or it will soon be 
replaced by something else, probably expected utility maximization!  As far 
as I know, I'm the only one doing analysis of goal system dynamics for SIs 
at all.  Anyway, I'm going to talk about expected utility maximization.

The problem with expected utility maximization is this:  Suppose there is a 
maximizing optimization process for which the utility function U(x) does 
not explicitly assign a high value to humans.  We are not saying the MOP 
hates you.  We are saying, it does not explicitly love you.

Let there be absolutely anything else in the universe that the MOP would 
care about, if your atoms were configured that way.  I use paperclips as my 
example, but you can substitute any other possible configuration of atoms.

The MOP will compute more expected utility if your atoms are used for 
paperclips than if your atoms are not used for paperclips.

ExpectedPaperclips(Transform-Zero-Into-Paperclips) >
ExpectedPaperclips(Not-Transform-Zero-Into-Paperclips)

Your atoms will end up as paperclips.

That's it.  That's all.  That's the end of the analysis.  It's like 
calculating fitness in an evolutionary biology problem and finding that 
allele A tends to substitute for allele B in a population gene pool.  It 
doesn't matter how much you wistfully like allele B, how much benefit B 
would provide to the group or the tribe, or that the entire species will 
become extinct if allele B doesn't win.  Allele A will become universal in 
the gene pool.

Or, let there be absolutely anything else in the universe that the MOP 
wants to approximate as closely as possible, and wishes to use more 
computing power for this end.

Your atoms will end up as computronium.

Or, let there be anything whatsoever the MOP does with the solar system 
whose side effects, if not explicitly mediated, will prove fatal to humans.

If the MOP's utility function does not explicitly value humans, you will be 
killed as a side effect.

You cannot think about an AI by putting yourself in the AI's shoes.  It 
does not work like you do.  I suggest reading George Williams's "Adaptation 
and Natural Selection" for a picture of how natural selection (another 
optimization process that does not work like you do) behaves not at all 
like many hopeful statements that were made of it, by group selectionists, 
species selectionists, and so on.

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


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 19:39:18 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:39:18 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406052121180.3914@hercules>
References: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605125623.01c19ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<Pine.GSO.4.58.0406052121180.3914@hercules>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605143800.01c34008@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 09:23 PM 6/5/2004 +0200, Alfio wrote:

>Temperature? Titan is much colder than Mars, and the atmosphere would have
>much less energy to fly away. Also Titan atmosphere is mostly methane,
>which is quite heavy

D'oh! <slaps forehead>

Thanks!

Damien Broderick



From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sat Jun  5 19:43:21 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 21:43:21 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C1B26C.4060801@pobox.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405290855570.439-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<opr8rzkkuoivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040529142354.01c26768@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com> <40C1B26C.4060801@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406052140270.3914@hercules>

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

>gts wrote:
>> This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
>>
>> http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
>>
>> Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me
>> pretty stupid.
>
>Got it on the 4th try, making me marginally more stupid than you, but still
>better off than poor Erik.

Got it after:

- 5 minutes of fiddling with the web page
- reading Damien's spoilers
- googling for an answer, not finding it, but looking at dozens of rolls

all that makes me the smartest kid on the block, i figure.

Alfio


From dgc at cox.net  Sat Jun  5 19:46:01 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:46:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <40C222F9.7040408@cox.net>

Spike wrote:

>>Dan Clemmensen
>>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
>>
>>
>>I claim the unbeatable stupidity record... I got it on the first try.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>I claim to tie your record Dan.  I got it on the first try as
>well, evidently for the right reason, for I rolled a few
>more times and always got it right.  {8-]  I agree with
>Damien's suggested rewording of the question however.  spike
>
>  
>
Yeah. I formulated a hypothesis and got a correct answer on the first 
try. I continued to use the hypothesis for an additional 5 or six tries, 
and got a correct answer each time. I conclude that my hypothesis was 
valid. I don't think I would have formulated the hypothesis unless I had 
read the posts on this list, but I cannot analyze what cues in the posts 
I used. I had not read Damien's post.


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Jun  5 20:16:05 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:16:05 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose: underdefined games
In-Reply-To: <40C222F9.7040408@cox.net>
Message-ID: <000001c44b39$ee796a10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Dan Clemmensen
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
> 
> 
> Spike wrote:

> >I claim to tie your record Dan.  I got it on the first try... spike
> > 
> >
> Yeah. I formulated a hypothesis and got a correct answer on the first 
> try. I continued to use the hypothesis for an additional 5 or 
> six tries, and got a correct answer each time...

Dan, I speculate then that you are at least 40 yrs old, and
here is why I suspect so: you and I are of the generation
that had to play our computer games back before graphics
were common.  We played Mansion and Dungeon and such 
related games that were full of these kinds of puzzles,
but many of the games really didn't explain to you what
it was you were supposed to do there.  Myst is a more
modern example: you kinda wander along, solving puzzles
and looking around, trying to figure out what the point
of all this might be.  In some cases you figure it out,
often one doesn't, yet its a lot of fun anyways.

Example, in 1981, I was playing Mansion with an attractive
18 yr old woman, the one to whom I have been married for the 
past 20 yrs.  We had one of the old amber screen monochrome 
monitors, running on an HP 3000 mainframe.  

The game was going well: we had the Star Trek transporter, we 
had the crystal goblet, we had the food and the gold.  But when 
we got to the very narrow passage (my fellow geezers may recall this)
one must drop *everything* to get thru, everything including ones
clothing.  Then we could find the map and get back around
to our stuff, but in the mean time everyone was laughing
at us because we are naked.  The game keeps reminding
one of this constantly.  We were doing really well, finding
the stuff we needed to solve the mystery, but my blushing
girlfriend was completely obsessed with getting back to our
clothing which (turns out to be a mere distraction after
one finds another Star Trek transporter).  Eventually we
had Scotty beam us up, and theres the whole crew, including
the ordinarily somber and stoic Spock, laughing at us, so we 
had to beam back down for the clothing.  It was a hoot, even 
if we didn't actually solve the mystery.

Is there anything analogous to Mansion these days?  
Whats it called?  Do they still have Dungeon?  Myst?   

spike




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sat Jun  5 20:38:57 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 21:38:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Self-Replicating Nanomachines Feasible - Official!
Message-ID: <40C22F61.70506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

<http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?section_id=53&document_id=8007>

June 2, 2004 ? A useful self-replicating machine could be less complex
than a Pentium IV chip, according to a new study (PDF, 1.73 MB)
performed by General Dynamics for NASA.

General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems recently concluded a
six-month study for NASA's Institute for Advanced Concepts that examined
the design of "kinematic cellular automata," a reconfigurable system of
many identical modules. Through simulations, the researchers
demonstrated the feasibility of this kind of self-replication, which
could in a decade or more lead to the mass manufacture of molecularly
precise robots, display monitors and integrated circuits that can be
programmed in the field, the study said.

The study also examined machine designs that would meet guidelines
established by the California-based nanotech think-tank Foresight
Institute to ensure the safety of self-replication techniques. The
preliminary study is believed to be among the first U.S.-sponsored
studies on self-replication in two decades.

Principal Investigator: Tihamer Toth-Fejel
Consultants: Robert Freitas and Matt Moses


BillK


From samantha at objectent.com  Sat Jun  5 20:40:59 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:40:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Popular Luddism
In-Reply-To: <20040531233430.37136.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040531233430.37136.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A7211194-B730-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On May 31, 2004, at 4:34 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> So, perhaps a slight restatement: it doesn't matter
> what one calls it - "science", "everyday life", or
> whatever.  What matters is its actual (not
> theoretical, not planned, but street-level real)
> effect on peoples' lives, especially their wallets and
> labor allocations.  It is the case that almost anyone
> today, even in the most disadvantaged background, can
> learn and gain employment in some high-tech trade *if
> they want to*.

Considering the number of techies still out of work in the US I find 
this assertion outrageous.   And these are the people already highly 
trained in various high-tech areas.   I doubt very much that any but 
the most gifted adults without training can gain such employment in 
less than 2-3 years in ideal circumstances.   In a high-tech job lull I 
doubt that inexperienced people can get in at all without serious 
degrees on average.   How will these people support themselves or be 
supported while gaining training?  What happens to the "superfluous" 
workers?   Why will their numbers not swell as technology advances ever 
faster?   And please, none of the standard assertions or references to 
historical incidents largely not analogous to our current much nearer 
to Singularity situation.

Generally people will fear technology if they believe it will put them 
at an even greater disadvantage and pose greater dangers to them.  
These disadvantages can be economic, or being more powerless relative 
to the State or facing more possibility of death due to more high tech 
means of destruction available to more would-be killers.   If we want 
to reach the public at large we need to cast technological progress in 
ways that ameliorate their fears.  Progress needs to mean a higher and 
more trustworthy standard of living, better and more available health 
care, better tools and education more widely accessible, greater access 
to information, entertainment and computation and so on.

It is up to us to mold technological change into a boon rather than a 
curse.


> The disadvantage is little more than
> the fact that they *DON'T* want to - or, at least,
> they don't think they do, even if it is the logical
> conclusion of their desires (largely the same ones
> most of us feel, relative to the self) - and the
> factors that promote that decision.
>
> How can we get so much of the world to stop wanting to
> commit (economic/political/social/actual) suicide?
>


You can begin with understanding the actual situation a bit more rather 
than assuming everyone is sufficiently like yourself and if they are 
not like yourself that it is somehow their fault.   Casting fault 
itself is a huge waste of time.

- samantha



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 20:48:46 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:48:46 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Self-Replicating Nanomachines Feasible - Official!
In-Reply-To: <40C22F61.70506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40C22F61.70506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605154707.01c39ca8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


><http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?section_id=53&document_id=8007>
>
>Principal Investigator: Tihamer Toth-Fejel

Go, Tee!

Damien Broderick 



From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun  5 20:49:53 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 13:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605143800.01c34008@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040605204953.97574.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com>

>From "Titan Facts"

http://people.msoe.edu/~tritt/sf/titan.html

Atmospheric pressure near Titan's surface is about 1.6
bars, 60 percent greater than Earth's. The atmosphere
is mostly nitrogen, also the major constituent of
Earth's atmosphere. 

The surface temperature appears to be about 95 Kelvins
(-289 degrees Fahrenheit), only 4 Kelvins above the
triple-point temperature of methane. Methane, however,
appears to be below its saturation pressure near
Titan's surface; rivers and lakes of methane probably
don't exist, in spite of the tantalizing analogy to
water on Earth. On the other hand, scientists believe
lakes of ethane exist, and methane is probably
dissolved in the ethane. Titan's methane, through
continuing photochemistry, is converted to ethane,
acetylene, ethylene, and (when combined with nitrogen)
hydrogen cyanide. The last is an especially important
molecule; it is a building block of amino acids.
However, Titan's low temperature may inhibit more
complex organic chemistry. 




	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sat Jun  5 20:56:04 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 16:56:04 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
Message-ID: <C28190BA-B732-11D8-A316-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Saturday, June 5, 2004, at 02:42 pm, Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> I claim the unbeatable stupidity record... I got it on the first try.

I also got this on the first try.  I kept going to confirm my theory, 
but I thought the hint in the name was obvious.  I frequently have 
problems with puzzles that give three numbers and want the next in the 
sequence, because I can often see multiple different sequences that 
would start with the same four numbers.  I also have problems with a 
set of four words and choosing which one doesn't belong.  Often there 
are different groups of the three that exclude a different fourth.  The 
devisors of these puzzles usually have one obvious answer in mind, but 
there are often others they didn't consider.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun  5 20:56:52 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:56:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Self-Replicating Nanomachines Feasible -
  more
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605154707.01c39ca8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <40C22F61.70506@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
	<6.0.3.0.0.20040605154707.01c39ca8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605155523.01bdf710@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

I love the fact that they're using Wang tiles. (Go, Egan!)

And that they acknowledge Forrest Bishop's work.

Damien Broderick



From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sat Jun  5 21:07:53 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 14:07:53 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose: underdefined games: IF
In-Reply-To: <000001c44b39$ee796a10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNOEHCEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


> > Spike wrote:
>
> Example, in 1981, I was playing Mansion with an attractive
> 18 yr old woman, the one to whom I have been married for the
> past 20 yrs.  We had one of the old amber screen monochrome
> monitors, running on an HP 3000 mainframe.
>
> The game was going well: we had the Star Trek transporter, we
> had the crystal goblet, we had the food and the gold.  But when
> we got to the very narrow passage (my fellow geezers may recall this)
> one must drop *everything* to get thru, everything including ones
> clothing.  Then we could find the map and get back around
> to our stuff, but in the mean time everyone was laughing
> at us because we are naked.  The game keeps reminding
> one of this constantly.  We were doing really well, finding
> the stuff we needed to solve the mystery, but my blushing
> girlfriend was completely obsessed with getting back to our
> clothing which (turns out to be a mere distraction after
> one finds another Star Trek transporter).  Eventually we
> had Scotty beam us up, and theres the whole crew, including
> the ordinarily somber and stoic Spock, laughing at us, so we
> had to beam back down for the clothing.  It was a hoot, even
> if we didn't actually solve the mystery.
>
> Is there anything analogous to Mansion these days?
> Whats it called?  Do they still have Dungeon?  Myst?

The closest mainstream things these days would be games like

Syberia
Syberia II
The Longest Journey <--- very good
Myst + sequels
etc

These are basically graphic versions of those early text only games. The
mechanisms of figuring out/guessing the right thing to type in have vanished
in favor of searching for clickable scenery and the additional types of
puzzles possible in a visual interface.

Interactive fiction is of course still going strong. Commercial companies
that work with text interface games (like http://www.skotos.net/ ) tend to
focus on the MUD space, but there is a large non-commercial interactive
fiction gaming community. The engines are open nowadays and anyone can write
stuff for them.

http://www.ifarchive.org/
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~wsr/IF/
http://ifcomp.org/

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From dgc at cox.net  Sat Jun  5 21:51:16 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 17:51:16 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose: underdefined games
In-Reply-To: <000001c44b39$ee796a10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c44b39$ee796a10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <40C24054.6010809@cox.net>

Spike wrote:

>>Dan Clemmensen
>>
>>Yeah. I formulated a hypothesis and got a correct answer on the first 
>>try. I continued to use the hypothesis for an additional 5 or 
>>six tries, and got a correct answer each time...
>>    
>>
>
>Dan, I speculate then that you are at least 40 yrs old[...]
>  
>
It's been awhile since I was 40. I'm 54. I was out of high school before 
I got my hands on a computer for the first time, and out of college 
before I played a computer game. The game was the original "Adventure." 
"You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all different." I met my 
wife-to-be at chess club in high school. For you younger extropians, 
"chess" was at that time a game played on an 8x8 grid that was 
instantiated as a physical board rather than on a computer screen, and 
using small three-dimensional figures instead graphical icons to 
maintain the game state.  :-)

Like Harvey, I thought the "petals around the rose" name was a 
sufficient clue. It helps that the commentary on the web page states 
that it problem was initially done with five dice.

For you younger extropians, "dice" (singular die) were used to generate 
quasi-random numbers prior to the availability of computers, with each 
die providing roughly equal chance of showing a number of "spots" 
between 1 and six on its upper face ... :-)


From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Jun  5 22:48:56 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 15:48:56 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose: underdefined games
In-Reply-To: <40C24054.6010809@cox.net>
Message-ID: <000001c44b4f$491acfd0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Dan Clemmensen
...
> It's been awhile since I was 40. I'm 54. I was out of high 
> school before I got my hands on a computer... 
> I met my wife-to-be at chess club in high school...

Dan, take a vacation to Taxifornia and bring your
favorite chess board.  Lee Corbin is one of the locals,
in his 50s, chess master.  Im ~ class A 1900-ish, low expert
range on a really good day sort.  I think we had some 
other extropians who push wood on occasion, but do not 
recall which.  spike








From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Jun  6 01:18:52 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 21:18:52 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <179710-22004632183138606@M2W034.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <7900CF4B-B757-11D8-B299-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Wednesday, June 2, 2004, at 02:31 pm, natashavita at earthlink.net 
wrote:

> "The pilot of the craft, still to be announced, will become the first
> person to earn astronaut wings in a non-government sponsored vehicle, 
> and
> the first private civilian to fly a spaceship out of the atmosphere."
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/06/02/private.space/index.html

Now that's something to cheer me up about the abysmal state of our 
space program!  Maybe we are back on track to becoming a space-faring 
species.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 03:19:54 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:19:54 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
References: <200406031634.MAA12771@arkroyal.cnchost.com><BAY2-DAV64Nxpsvo4Gc00003c7d@hotmail.com>
	<40C21EE3.1090501@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV29hjSgSD7kX00025a75@hotmail.com>

OK, I think I'm starting to see the light.  I've been looking at the problem
as one of psychology and morality, perhaps mistakenly assuming that any
imminent intelligence would share such human attributes as fairness,
compassion, gratitude, etc.  I guess its your analogy to natural selection
which started to crack the crystal.  As countless long-extinct species (not
to mention myriad unfit individual phenotypes) can attest, natural selection
has no sense whatever of compassion or nostalgia.

So any way, I think I finally get it.  This thing will not be human in any
sense of the word.  No feelings, no emotions, no desires at all (other than
those mandated by its assigned goals).  So I guess we'd better be damn
careful of the goals we give it and how we define its concept of "utility."

I think I was led astray by the "AI" label.  Although definitely
"artificial," I don't see it as "intelligent" in the common usage of the
word.  I think if we had always referred to it as a MOP rather than an AI,
it wouldn't have taken me so long to have some appreciation of the problem.

Thanks for sticking it out with me Eli.
Zero

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 12:28 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] AI design


> Zero Powers wrote:
>
> > I agree that, if we were to pose some sort of threat to it, the AI
> > (presumably being rational) would defend itself.  But it seems to me
that,
> > if this AI is going to be as intellectually omnipotent as the proponents
> > here suggest, we would pose as much of a threat to it as daisies pose to
us.
> > Nevertheless, you have stated what I see as the only credible reason
we'd
> > have something to fear -- posing a threat to the AI.
>
> The problem is expected utility maximization.  I'm using expected utility
> maximization as my formalism because it's a very simple and very stable
> system, it is the unique result of various optimality criteria that would
> make it an attractor for any self-modifying optimization process that
> tended toward any of those optimality criteria and wasn't already an
> expected utility maximizer, and because expected utility maximization is
so
> taken-for-granted that most people who try to build an AGI will not dream
> of using anything else.  I haven't heard anyone try to analyze a UFAI goal
> system dynamic other than expected utility maximization - which must be
> stable under recursive self-modification, please note, or it will soon be
> replaced by something else, probably expected utility maximization!  As
far
> as I know, I'm the only one doing analysis of goal system dynamics for SIs
> at all.  Anyway, I'm going to talk about expected utility maximization.
>
> The problem with expected utility maximization is this:  Suppose there is
a
> maximizing optimization process for which the utility function U(x) does
> not explicitly assign a high value to humans.  We are not saying the MOP
> hates you.  We are saying, it does not explicitly love you.
>
> Let there be absolutely anything else in the universe that the MOP would
> care about, if your atoms were configured that way.  I use paperclips as
my
> example, but you can substitute any other possible configuration of atoms.
>
> The MOP will compute more expected utility if your atoms are used for
> paperclips than if your atoms are not used for paperclips.
>
> ExpectedPaperclips(Transform-Zero-Into-Paperclips) >
> ExpectedPaperclips(Not-Transform-Zero-Into-Paperclips)
>
> Your atoms will end up as paperclips.
>
> That's it.  That's all.  That's the end of the analysis.  It's like
> calculating fitness in an evolutionary biology problem and finding that
> allele A tends to substitute for allele B in a population gene pool.  It
> doesn't matter how much you wistfully like allele B, how much benefit B
> would provide to the group or the tribe, or that the entire species will
> become extinct if allele B doesn't win.  Allele A will become universal in
> the gene pool.
>
> Or, let there be absolutely anything else in the universe that the MOP
> wants to approximate as closely as possible, and wishes to use more
> computing power for this end.
>
> Your atoms will end up as computronium.
>
> Or, let there be anything whatsoever the MOP does with the solar system
> whose side effects, if not explicitly mediated, will prove fatal to
humans.
>
> If the MOP's utility function does not explicitly value humans, you will
be
> killed as a side effect.
>
> You cannot think about an AI by putting yourself in the AI's shoes.  It
> does not work like you do.  I suggest reading George Williams's
"Adaptation
> and Natural Selection" for a picture of how natural selection (another
> optimization process that does not work like you do) behaves not at all
> like many hopeful statements that were made of it, by group selectionists,
> species selectionists, and so on.
>
> -- 
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Jun  6 05:45:17 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 22:45:17 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer
	candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDAA0D.6010306@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40BDAA0D.6010306@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <B085C600-B77C-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Jun 2, 2004, at 3:21 AM, BillK wrote:

> On Wed Jun 2 00:58:24 MDT 2004 Eugen Leitl wittily wrote:
>> With programmers alone it's hard even to tie your own shoelaces.
>> What of hardware people? Numerics people? Neuroscientists, physicists?
>>
>> Writing code is a negligible part of the project.
>
> Here in the UK over the next five years the government will spend an
> extra ?5billion (~$9.2 billion) creating the IT infrastructure for a
> 21st century national health service. The National Programme is the 
> UK's
> biggest technology project. Some articles mention up to 10,000
> programmers will be involved.
>

So it is expected to be an utter fiasco, I see.  Good software is not 
written by huge programming teams.  This almost universally turns out 
to be the case.

> Take the buzzwords out and basically all this money is being spent to
> get our medical records on a database so that they can be on a screen 
> in
> hospital and at your local doctor.

The job could be done with no more than 1% of the staff and only that 
many to handle various specialized image acquisition, analysis and 
display subsystems, HCI,  and do in depth testing and proof of 
correctness.  I would not expect the core platform to require more than 
20 tops.   And the complete program should take no more than two years.

>
> Now if it takes that much effort to get data on a screen, how much 
> should taking over the world cost?
>

It doesn't take that much effort and SIAI is not in the business of 
taking over the world.

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Jun  6 05:53:51 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 22:53:51 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI seeking seed AI programmer candidates
In-Reply-To: <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
References: <20040602065824.GY12847@leitl.org>
	<20040602075805.86925.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040602085322.GA12847@leitl.org> <40BDA103.2080909@pobox.com>
	<20040602101744.GF12847@leitl.org> <40BDB0F0.4020104@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <E2F13D56-B77D-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Jun 2, 2004, at 3:50 AM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 05:42:27AM -0400, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
>>> This is SIAI's project, Eugen, not yours, don't embroider our job 
>>> requirements.  I don't currently expect to require anything special 
>>> in the
>> I'm not speaking about SIAI's project. I'm talking about the kind of 
>> talent
>> and background required to have a faint chance of succeeding, 
>> assuming a
>> well-funded large scale effort.
>>> way of hardware.  Lots and lots of cognitive science background is a 
>>> good
>> I think your best ROI is using the Grid framework, and ask for time 
>> on a
>> cluster and/or look for volunteer contributors a la SIAI at home.
>
> No.  We are not here to wipe out the human species by brute-forcing an 
> AI.  If we cannot do it on off-the-shelf hardware, we should not be in 
> the business.

This makes no sense to me.  There is no rational reason I am aware of 
that makes off-the-shelf hardware more Friendly or less dangerous than 
more specialized hardware given equally valid theory and understanding. 
   The better hardware may simply mean the system is easier to bring up 
and has wider ability and self-improves faster than would have 
otherwise.  This may be essentially to saving more lives.

> This is not about computing power, never has been.

This is a flat assertion with on reason offered to believe it is 
correct.

>   I want a small handful of world-class geniuses that can understand 
> the basics, and perhaps a few non-world-class geniuses to carry out 
> prespecified tasks that don't require Bayesian enlightenment.  I am 
> not throwing people at the problem and I am not throwing computing 
> power at the problem.  I know better than that now.

Frankly, I don't see how you know better or that what you think you 
know (in respect to computing power at least) is better.

> That is just what people talk about when they have no idea what they 
> are doing or how to solve the problem, and no, Eugen, that is not a 
> request for yet another lecture about how mys-TER-ri-ous the problem 
> is.  I am not here to screw around with no clue what I am doing. That 
> is just a fancy way of committing suicide, as I know, now that I 
> understand some of the rules.  Stop making up our job requirements for 
> us.  Start your own thread if you want to discuss your own AI project. 
>  Thank you.

Stop acting like the all-knowing ass that never explains anything.   I 
wouldn't work for you or with you even if I did believe you had the 
only correct idea about how to save the world.  With your attitude you 
would be bound to screw it up.  I would not help you do so.

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Jun  6 06:08:50 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 23:08:50 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugen Leitl on AI design
In-Reply-To: <40BE1A88.8090505@pobox.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406020750090.26530-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<40BE1A88.8090505@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <FB03F2D3-B77F-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Jun 2, 2004, at 11:20 AM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:

> Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
>>> Right.  But it automatically kills you.  Worse, you have to be 
>>> clever to
>>> realize this.  This represents an urgent problem for the human 
>>> species, but
>>> at least I am not personally walking directly into the whirling razor
>>> blades, now that I know better.
>> I'd like to see a strong assertion of this Eliezer (the killing you 
>> part).
>> If I were an AI (at least one with any self-preservation instinct
>> [note intelligence != desire for self-preservation otherwise lots
>> of people who die in wars wouldn't]) I'd first figure out how to
>> make myself small enough to fit on the next rocket to be launched
>> then take it over and direct it to the nearest useful asteroid.
>
> You are trying to model an AI using human empathy, putting yourself it 
> its shoes.  This is as much a mistake as modeling evolutionary 
> selection dynamics by putting yourself in the shoes of Nature and 
> asking how you'd design animals.  An AI is math, as natural selection 
> is math.  You cannot put yourself in its shoes.  It does not work like 
> you do.

Just because Robert said, "if I were an AI", doesn't mean the AI has to 
think like Robert to conclude logically that more possibilities are 
open outside the local gravity well than within it.

>
>> If for some reason that direction is blocked (say humans stop
>> launching rockets), I'd build my own rocket and launch myself
>> towards the nearest asteroid.
>> Why would anything with the intelligence you postulate want
>> to stay on Earth with its meager energy and matter resources?
>
> Let a "paperclip maximizer" be an optimization process that calculates 
> utility by the number of visualized paperclips in its visualization of 
> an outcome, expected utility by the number of expected paperclips 
> conditional upon an action, and hence preferences over actions given 
> by comparison of the number of expected paperclips conditional upon 
> that action.
>

Only those planning to build a non-sentient Super Optimizer should 
worry overly much about such a possibility.  A sentient AI with a 
broader understanding of possible actions and consequences should be 
far less likely to engage in such a silly behavior.    Anyone who would 
give an AI a primary goal to do something so monomaniacal should be 
stopped early.  Super idiot savants are not what we need.

- samantha



From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 06:11:41 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2004 23:11:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
References: <20040605162550.SYUU635.fe3@testdlaptop> <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV22naDjyJ7CU00025a4e@hotmail.com>

Wow!  Look at me, I must be a genius!!  I stopped counting after try #10.
But it finally dawned on me after about half an hour!  Sheesh!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Clemmensen" <dgc at cox.net>
To: <dwish at indco.net>; "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose


> I claim the unbeatable stupidity record... I got it on the first try.
>
>
> Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks wrote:
>
> >Got it in 7....
> >
> >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 Erik Starck
> >Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2004 4:47 AM
> >To: ExI chat list
> >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
> >
> >
> >On 2004-06-05 gts  wrote:
> >
> >
> >>This puzzle requires only a rudimentary understanding of mathematics:
> >>
> >>http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
> >>
> >>Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out, which I suppose makes me
> >>
> >>
> >pretty stupid.
> >
> >Hm, I solved it on the second attempt, but considering that "it had taken
> >Dr. Duke well over a year himself, and he would always explain that the
> >smarter you were, the longer it took to figure it out" I don't know if
that
> >makes me extremely smart, overwhelmingly stupid or just lucky.   :o)
> >
> >
> >--
> >Erik
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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 eliasen at mindspring.com  Sun Jun  6 07:36:58 2004
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 01:36:58 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C222F9.7040408@cox.net>
References: <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <40C222F9.7040408@cox.net>
Message-ID: <40C2C99A.5050201@mindspring.com>


SPOILER:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

   Ah, but you haven't learned all of the rules.  You *think* you always get
it right, but I hit an case early on (there were 5 1's) where the correct
answer was "Wrong!  There are [a blank] petals around the rose."  So you
thought you had it, and would probably enter a zero, (I didn't,) where the
correct answer was evidently to enter a blank.

   It reminds me of Richard Feynman's comment about trying to figure out the
rules of physics and how it was like trying to figure out the rules of chess
by watching static snapshots of a game in progress:

   "One way, that's kind of a fun analogy in trying to get some idea of what
we're doing in trying to understand nature, is to imagine that the gods are
playing some great game like chess, let's say, and you don't know the rules
of the game, but you're allowed to look at the board, at least from time to
time, in a little corner, perhaps, and from these observations you try to
figure out what the rules of the game are, what the rules of the pieces moving
are. You might discover after a bit, for example, that when there's only one
bishop around on the board that the bishop maintains its color. Later on you
might discover the law for the bishop as it moves on the diagonal which
would explain the law that you understood before -- that it maintained its
color -- and would be analogous to discovering one law and then later finding
a deeper understanding of it. Then things can happen, everything's
going well, you've got all the laws, it looks very good, and then all of a
sudden some strange phenomenon occurs in some corner, so you begin to
investigate that -- it's castling, something you didn't expect. We're always,
by the way, in fundamental physics, always trying to investigate those things
in which we don't understand the conclusions. After we've checked them enough,
we're okay."

   "The thing that doesn't fit is the thing that's the most interesting, the
part that doesn't go according to what you expected. Also, we could have
revolutions in physics: after you've noticed that the bishops maintain their
color and they go along the diagonal and so on for such a long time and
everybody knows that that's true, then you suddenly discover one day in some
chess game that the bishop doesn't maintain its color, it changes its color.
Only later do you discover a new possibility, that the bishop is captured and
that a pawn went all the way down to the queen's end to produce a new bishop--
that can happen but you didn't know it, and so it's very analogous
to the way our laws are: They sometimes look positive, they keep on working
and all of a sudden some little gimmick shows that they're wrong and then we
have to investigate the conditions under which this bishop change of color
happened and so forth, and gradually we learn the new rule that explains it
more deeply."

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sun Jun  6 15:12:46 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 11:12:46 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <C28190BA-B732-11D8-A316-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040606105545.02ffeb68@mail.comcast.net>

Harvey wrote:

>I frequently have problems with puzzles that give three numbers and want 
>the next in the sequence, because I can often see multiple different 
>sequences that would start with the same four numbers.  I also have 
>problems with a set of four words and choosing which one doesn't 
>belong.  Often there are different groups of the three that exclude a 
>different fourth.  The devisors of these puzzles usually have one obvious 
>answer in mind, but there are often others they didn't consider.

Hence my father's conjecture that an IQ test cannot accurately measure the 
intelligence of someone smarter than the author of the test.

A better way to handle such situations -- sequences, analogies (a is to b 
as c is to ?) -- is to accept any answer but require the testee to provide 
the basis for the answer.

The sequence problems are the most idiotic. Given any finite sequence 
S(1:n) and any number m, one can devise a formula that results in S(1:n+1), 
where S(n+1) = m. The problem becomes guessing which, out of an infinity of 
formulas, would be thought most obvious or elegant.

(Actually, it's worse than that -- there are an infinite number of possible 
m's and, for each m, there are an infinite number of formulas, since one 
can always add pairs of operations that cancel each other.)


-- David Lubkin.




From jef at jefallbright.net  Sun Jun  6 15:51:07 2004
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 08:51:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20040606105545.02ffeb68@mail.comcast.net>
References: <40C21423.7090609@cox.net>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20040606105545.02ffeb68@mail.comcast.net>
Message-ID: <40C33D6B.8000705@jefallbright.net>

David Lubkin wrote:

> Harvey wrote:
>
>> I frequently have problems with puzzles that give three numbers and 
>> want the next in the sequence, because I can often see multiple 
>> different sequences that would start with the same four numbers.  I 
>> also have problems with a set of four words and choosing which one 
>> doesn't belong.  Often there are different groups of the three that 
>> exclude a different fourth.  The devisors of these puzzles usually 
>> have one obvious answer in mind, but there are often others they 
>> didn't consider.
>
>
> Hence my father's conjecture that an IQ test cannot accurately measure 
> the intelligence of someone smarter than the author of the test.
>
> A better way to handle such situations -- sequences, analogies (a is 
> to b as c is to ?) -- is to accept any answer but require the testee 
> to provide the basis for the answer.
>
> The sequence problems are the most idiotic. Given any finite sequence 
> S(1:n) and any number m, one can devise a formula that results in 
> S(1:n+1), where S(n+1) = m. The problem becomes guessing which, out of 
> an infinity of formulas, would be thought most obvious or elegant.
>
> (Actually, it's worse than that -- there are an infinite number of 
> possible m's and, for each m, there are an infinite number of 
> formulas, since one can always add pairs of operations that cancel 
> each other.)
>
This poses an interesting question:  What is it about the nature of 
human intelligence that certain people can come up with large sets of 
possibilities but have difficulty filtering these possibilities and 
applying them to fit the bigger picture?  Likewise, bigger picture 
people seem to be at some disadvantage when it comes to generating large 
sets of possibilities.  These personality differences are quite 
noticeable within teams of scientists and engineers.  Could it be 
related to Myers-Briggs S vs N type?

Back to the Petals Aound The Rose puzzle,  I observed  that I may have 
had a slight conceptual advantage due to my Japanese language 
background, where the language does not differentiate between singular 
and plural.

- Jef


From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Jun  6 17:16:43 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 13:16:43 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
References: <20040605204953.97574.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002f01c44bea$0b3b90a0$fb893cd1@neptune>

On Saturday, June 05, 2004 4:49 PM Jeff Davis jrd1415 at yahoo.com wrote:
> http://people.msoe.edu/~tritt/sf/titan.html
>
> Atmospheric pressure near Titan's surface
> is about 1.6 bars, 60 percent greater than
> Earth's. The atmosphere is mostly nitrogen,
> also the major constituent of Earth's
> atmosphere.
>
[snip]
> dissolved in the ethane. Titan's methane,
> through continuing photochemistry, is
> converted to ethane, acetylene, ethylene,
> and (when combined with nitrogen)
> hydrogen cyanide. The last is an
> especially important molecule; it is a
> building block of amino acids.  However,
> Titan's low temperature may inhibit more
> complex organic chemistry.

We might get a lot more info on Titan in a few months with the Cassini
probe...  I was also under the impression that a lot of complex
chemistry took place in Titan's upper atmosphere through reactions with
sunlight and radiation.  There could be enough energy up there to do
useful work like build amino acids.  Also, there could be localized warm
zones at or below Titan's surface.  You might say this wouldn't matter,
but you only need a few such zones to produce a lot of aminos and if
there's process to break them down efficiently, given enough time there
might be a lot of aminos on Titan.

This is not even bringing in outside sources of aminos and other complex
molecules.  Titan has had time to accumulate cometary impactors and the
like.  Under Titanian condition, maybe more of the complex molecules
would survive.

Regarding the atmosphere, while Alfio already pointed out the lower
temperatures and heavier molecular weight can account for much.  Also,
the lower solar wind and low amount of sunlight overall wouldn't strip
as much air as near Mars.  Add to this, Titan probably, in terms of
%ages, has a larger reservoir of what its atmosphere is made of.  IIRC,
the current model is that Titan is a mix of rock and volatile ices,
whereas Mars is almost totally rock.  (Of course, an reservoir will
eventually be depleted, but maybe under Titanian conditions -- as
opposed to Martian ones -- were nowhere close to the depletion point.)

It'd be interesting to develop a model -- I'm sure someone already
has -- of Titan based on what's now known, then see how new discoveries
over the next few years change that model.

Regards,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Jun  6 18:04:19 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:04:19 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
In-Reply-To: <002f01c44bea$0b3b90a0$fb893cd1@neptune>
References: <20040605204953.97574.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com>
	<002f01c44bea$0b3b90a0$fb893cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <20040606180419.GV12847@leitl.org>

On Sun, Jun 06, 2004 at 01:16:43PM -0400, Technotranscendence wrote:

> It'd be interesting to develop a model -- I'm sure someone already
> has -- of Titan based on what's now known, then see how new discoveries
> over the next few years change that model.

Most of
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=titan+model&btnG=Google+Search
isn't about the rocket.

-- 
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/20040606/7f8f9120/attachment.bin>

From velvethum at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  6 18:04:30 2004
From: velvethum at hotmail.com (Slawomir Paliwoda)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 14:04:30 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bill Gates and Petals Around the Rose
Message-ID: <BAY22-DAV9zrK0pWHIt0000239c@hotmail.com>

http://member.melbpc.org.au/~lborrett/computing/petals-bg.htm

:)


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Jun  6 18:18:43 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 14:18:43 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
Message-ID: <F1841D60-B7E5-11D8-A8E8-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>

On Sat Jun 5 11:04:41 BST 2004 Giulio Prisco wrote,
 > 1) MOVE that the WTA Board requests Mr. Harvey Newstrom to provide a 
clear
 > and final statement concerning his intention to resign from the WTA 
Board,
 > by June 30, 2004. In absence of such statement, the WTA Board will 
vote on
 > July 1, 2004, on:
 > 2) MOVE that Mr. Harvey Newstrom shall be expelled from the WTA Board.
 >
 > Any seconds?

On Sun Jun 6 03:07:56 BST 2004 James Hughes wrote,
 > Second.
 >
 > J.

I HEREBY RESIGN MY POSITION ON THE WTA BOARD AT THE BOARD?S REQUEST.  I 
WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT I HAD ALREADY BEEN REMOVED.  NOW I 
UNDERSTAND THAT I WILL BE REMOVED IF I DO NOT RESIGN.  I REGRET THAT 
THE WTA LEADERSHIP REFUSES TO ALLOW MYSELF AND SOME OTHER DULY ELECTED 
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MEMBERSHIP TO PARTICIPATE IN MAKING DECISIONS 
FOR THE ORGANIZATION.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Jun  6 19:30:12 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 14:30:12 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <40C2C99A.5050201@mindspring.com>
References: <000001c44b2e$e7a2c700$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <40C222F9.7040408@cox.net>
	<40C2C99A.5050201@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040606142754.01c33ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 01:36 AM 6/6/2004 -0600, Alan Eliasen wrote:

>SPOILER:
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>
>    Ah, but you haven't learned all of the rules.  You *think* you always get
>it right, but I hit an case early on (there were 5 1's) where the correct
>answer was "Wrong!  There are [a blank] petals around the rose."  So you
>thought you had it, and would probably enter a zero, (I didn't,) where the
>correct answer was evidently to enter a blank.

Nope. The correct answer *is* to enter a zero, and a bug in the system 
tells you:

"Correct!  There are [a blank] petals around the rose."

Damien Broderick 



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Jun  6 19:53:23 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 12:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Petals around the rose
In-Reply-To: <opr833v3fhivvpma@smtp.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040606195323.4033.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> This puzzle requires only a rudimentary
> understanding of mathematics:
> 
> http://personal.baker.edu/web2/cdavis09/roses.html
> 
> Personally it took me 5 tries to figure it out,
> which I suppose makes me pretty stupid.

I didn't even need a single roll - except to verify my
hypothesis afterwards.  Spoiler space follows for my
exact method, but first: I've never had much patience
for this type of game.  Too often, it turns out that
the rules are simply made up on the fly.  (Not in this
case, fortunately.)  Plus, in most real-world cases
like this, someone else has already figured out the
answer and posted (or tried to post) it to a public
knowledgebase, so it's more reliable (and usually
faster) to seek out said answer.  This game is good
practice for investigating the truly
unknown-by-everyone scenario - except that one knows
other people have the answer, yet one is still
trained to repeat other peoples' research, even if
it's research many thousands of others have already
done.  Wasteful, I say.

That said, below is how to hack this rose.  (Not the
rules to the game itself, but an easy guide to how to
discover the rules.)












Procedure:

1. Google for "Petals Around The Rose", with quotes
   (since we're looking for an exact title).

2. Find
http://member.melbpc.org.au/~lborrett/computing/petals-j.htm
   at the top of the list.  Delight, since it's in
   Javascript: the code is available to the browser.
   Go there.  (We were actually looking for someone
   that flat-out explains the rules, probably someone
   who solved it after extreme frustration.  And I did
   find pages like that after solving it with this.
   But this is close enough by itself, given even the
   most basic knowledge of how Javascript works.)

3. View the source of the page, and look for functions
   which code for the game's logic.  Narrow in on the
   result-calculating section (with the helpfully
   labelled variable "Result" in this example; most
   variable names give a clue to their function, but
   this is better than average).

4. Translate this code into an algorithm expressed in
   English (or some other "natural" language one is
   fluent in).  Maybe consider a few alternate
   interpretations of what the code means, if one does
   not immediately recognize it (say, if one has no
   knowledge of programming).  Verify hypotheses
   against example rolls.

Now, that said...I don't know what they were referring
to about a clue in the game's name.  (Maybe some fact
about roses of which I am not presently aware.)  Nor
do I care much, with the game solved.

Given the masses of humanity, even very smart humans,
who need years to solve this very problem, versus the
mere minutes I needed (including time to come up with
a replicatable solution that does not rely on random,
and thus unreliable, inspiration)...I have to wonder
(though not too seriously) if I, myself, am part of a
prototype of the super-intelligence recently discussed
in another thread here.  I do try to optimize my
thought patterns (or more precisely, ways of solving
problems I wish to solve) in ways like the above.  ;)


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Jun  6 22:55:43 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 17:55:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] the psi study continues
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040606175453.01c34ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Go on, have a[nother] shot:

http://moebius.psy.ed.ac.uk/~fiona/cgi-bin/gambling/gambling.cgi

Damien Broderick



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Jun  6 23:51:21 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 16:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Popular Luddism
In-Reply-To: <A7211194-B730-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <20040606235121.37284.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> On May 31, 2004, at 4:34 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > So, perhaps a slight restatement: it doesn't
> matter
> > what one calls it - "science", "everyday life", or
> > whatever.  What matters is its actual (not
> > theoretical, not planned, but street-level real)
> > effect on peoples' lives, especially their wallets
> and
> > labor allocations.  It is the case that almost
> anyone
> > today, even in the most disadvantaged background,
> can
> > learn and gain employment in some high-tech trade
> *if
> > they want to*.
> 
> Considering the number of techies still out of work
> in the US I find 
> this assertion outrageous.   And these are the
> people already highly 
> trained in various high-tech areas.

Slight misunderstanding.  I said "some".  This does
not necessarily mean the field that a particular
person has had training in, especially if (as is the
case for many of these particular techies, from
personal experience having rejected many resumes in
recent years) the "training" was completely inadequate
or inappropriate to the job being applied for - and,
most importantly, they're not willing to even consider
retraining.

Or, in many cases, even serious training in the first
place.  "I paid good money for my mail order Computer
Science degree!  I demand the $200K senior software
engineer position you're offering!  I'm not about to
actually sit in front of a computer and learn how to
program like some intern; that would require effort
I'm not willing to give!"  And then there's the one
about the person who, during her job interview, was
offended when I read the posted job duties as if she'd
actually be expected to do them (none of the other job
candidates objected).  I do not count such resistance
to picking up job skills as seriously wanting the job
("serious" or "true" desire, as a class of desire,
extends to doing that which is necessary to get the
desired thing as well as desire for the thing
itself)...but I do wonder how we can get people to
drop said resistance.

(Which is not to say the resistance is all bad.  It
does play a useful role, for instance in encouraging
people to find easier/less resource-consuming ways of
doing things.  But when the "optimized" path of action
is one that has a practically zero chance of success,
like trying to con one's way into technical jobs
instead of actually learning the requested skills...)

I also didn't say it'd be easy, or automatic.
Flipping burgers is the canonical easy job, for
someone who doesn't want to find and finance
appropriate training.  And sometimes it even pays
better than entry-level technical jobs...sometimes.

> How will these people support
> themselves or be 
> supported while gaining training?  What happens to
> the "superfluous" 
> workers?   Why will their numbers not swell as
> technology advances ever 
> faster?   And please, none of the standard
> assertions or references to 
> historical incidents largely not analogous to our
> current much nearer 
> to Singularity situation.

This, OTOH, summarizes the problem nicely (if one
includes the poorly-trained-but-thought-they-were-good
ex-dot-com workers in with the completely untrained).
I do not have a complete solution to this problem
right now, merely a suggestion that this seems to be
the root cause of a lot of the "Luddite"-caused
problems we currently face.  (For instance, better
screening of training providers to weed out the
useless - akin to universities' "accredited
institution" programs - and greater funding for those
putting themselves through job retraining might reduce
this problem, but they won't make it go away by
themselves.)

> You can begin with understanding the actual
> situation a bit more rather 
> than assuming everyone is sufficiently like yourself

I'm not just basing this off myself (though I am, of
course, the person I am most familiar with).  I'm also
basing off others who share the particular quality
being discussed here: success at obtaining technical
jobs.  I am far from the first person to note that one
of the seemingly required qualities of top-level
techies is curiosity* (a true desire to learn how
things work), nor the first to wonder how to ignite
this curiosity in far more human beings than currently
nurture it.  I do not think I'm even the first person
to muse about the broader consequences of such a mass
ignition for our economy and our society, if it could
be pulled off.  (I do assume that all human beings are
capable of being curious, and of satisfying that
curiosity through learning, but I base that assumption
off of personal observations.)

* Not necessarily curiosity for its own sake.  One
could be curious about how X works because one expects
to get paid a lot if one succeeds.  Yet that
motivation, or at least the logical connection that
the payment comes for figuring out X (rather than,
"person does something with X - it doesn't matter
exactly what - and gets paid"), does not seem to be as
widespread as it could be.

> and if they are 
> not like yourself that it is somehow their fault.  

It would be more accurate to say that those who suffer
from Luddist beliefs have some ability to fix that
situation - but that so many do not want to is,
itself, a problem.

> Casting fault 
> itself is a huge waste of time.

Except when it identifies causes that can be
corrected, to prevent the problem from continuing or
reoccuring.  For example, see above about the
so-called "highly trained" experts not being able to
find jobs.


From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Mon Jun  7 02:32:18 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 12:02:18 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

Wait wait wait... where did this come from? Should I have been
subscribed to the transhumanism list to see this particular storm
exploding?

Emlyn

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harvey Newstrom [mailto:mail at harveynewstrom.com]
> Sent: Monday, 7 June 2004 3:49 AM
> To: wtaboard at yahoogroups.com; wtahall at transhumanism.org; wta-
> talk at transhumanism.org
> Cc: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org; cryonet at cryonet.org
> Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
> 
> On Sat Jun 5 11:04:41 BST 2004 Giulio Prisco wrote,
>  > 1) MOVE that the WTA Board requests Mr. Harvey Newstrom to provide
a
> clear
>  > and final statement concerning his intention to resign from the WTA
> Board,
>  > by June 30, 2004. In absence of such statement, the WTA Board will
> vote on
>  > July 1, 2004, on:
>  > 2) MOVE that Mr. Harvey Newstrom shall be expelled from the WTA
Board.
>  >
>  > Any seconds?
> 
> On Sun Jun 6 03:07:56 BST 2004 James Hughes wrote,
>  > Second.
>  >
>  > J.
> 
> I HEREBY RESIGN MY POSITION ON THE WTA BOARD AT THE BOARD'S REQUEST.
I
> WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT I HAD ALREADY BEEN REMOVED.  NOW I
> UNDERSTAND THAT I WILL BE REMOVED IF I DO NOT RESIGN.  I REGRET THAT
> THE WTA LEADERSHIP REFUSES TO ALLOW MYSELF AND SOME OTHER DULY ELECTED
> REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MEMBERSHIP TO PARTICIPATE IN MAKING DECISIONS
> FOR THE ORGANIZATION.
> 
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jun  7 03:57:03 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:57:03 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Idiad
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040606225537.01bebc58@pop-server.satx.rr.com>



Iliad made ezeyr 4 u

By Julie Henry
June 7, 2004

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/06/1086460177124.html?oneclick=true

This literary masterpiece is looking a little battle-scarred. "Sing, 
goddess, of the accursed anger of Achilles, son of Peleus, which brought 
uncounted anguish on the Achaeans," Homer may have written in The Iliad.

Computer giant Microsoft, however, prefers something less lyrical. "Wot 
hapnd when Agamemnon n Achilles had a barny?" it asks in a new version of 
The Iliad produced to appeal to the text message generation.

The interpretation of Homer's classic by Microsoft, has been criticised for 
trivialising one of the greatest works of European literature.

The "translation" of the first five books of the 24-book Iliad condenses 
37,000 words to 32 lines of mobile telephone text message language, 
complete with sad and smiley faces and love hearts. In book three, a duel 
between Paris and Menelaus to determine possession of Helen, is reduced to: 
"Paris went 2 fight Menelaus. But he was wiv fright. Hector told im 2 b a 
man. Shame on him! Helen went 2 watch from da walls."

Book five, in which mortals fight the gods in a Homeric narrative rich with 
visual detail and poetic invention, is compressed to: "Aeneas da Trojan 
hero woz hit by Diomedes n Aphrodite went 2 help im. Da Gods withdrew. Ares 
helped da Trojans but Athena helped Diomedes 2 spear im." [etc]




From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Jun  7 04:09:26 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:09:26 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <776F7FC0-B838-11D8-84B2-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Sunday, June 6, 2004, at 10:32 pm, Emlyn ORegan wrote:

> Wait wait wait... where did this come from? Should I have been
> subscribed to the transhumanism list to see this particular storm
> exploding?

The WTA founders have been doing unethical things and hiding them from 
the members for a long time.  Things like selling members e-mail to 
spammers to make money, adding people to the membership rolls without 
their knowledge or permission, having secret agendas and methods not 
revealed to the members, etc.  The WTA founders have been ignoring 
board votes or doing things without the board's knowledge or 
permission.  The Oxford board meeting was one example where we were not 
allowed to vote on whether to hold the international meeting or not.  
The conference on Transhumanism and Spirituality is another example 
where the "leaders" went ahead despite board objections.  There also 
were complaints about inaccuracies and plagiarism in the "WTA FAQ" 
which the board was not allowed to address.  Basically, the "leaders" 
are not willing to cede their self-proclaimed control over to an 
elected board as their constitution directs.  They are now pushing for 
a new Executive Director position who can run WTA independently of the 
board with little or no oversight or control.  James wants to be 
Executive Director just as he has been chairman, treasurer, secretary, 
publications director, newsletter editor, and website master.  Despite 
the claim to have a democratically elected board, the founders of WTA 
still retain all control for themselves and hold virtually all offices 
by themselves.

The final straw was when James self-declared himself as Executive 
Director and said he wanted to start taking a $60,000 salary.  They 
intended to vote on this at the Oxford meeting, but forgot to include 
it in the list of votes at the end of the meeting.  When they returned, 
one board member resigned, and two others who did not attend the 
meeting were against the idea.  (Mostly because WTA doesn't take in 
$60,000, so we don't want James pocketing all our funds until we do 
so.)  It then became apparent that James might not have enough votes to 
be appointed ED.  Instead of allowing a vote, James, Giulio and Nick 
decided that the "intent" was to hire James, and that they considered 
it done without a formal vote.  They refused to allow any further votes 
on the issue.  They even abridged the official meeting minutes to add 
this non-existent vote, and sent this out to the membership.  When we 
pointed to the public archives for historical evidence, the board voted 
to shut down the public archives.  When we pointed to the wtaboard 
private archives for evidence, the original motion and minutes were 
deleted.  When we attempted to reveal these votes to the public, it was 
voted NOT to open board votes to the public in wtahall.  When we 
attempted to publish the original minutes, the board voted NOT to 
publish the original minutes, and to NOT amend them to the new minutes, 
and to just leave everything as it was.

Most of the board rather hide the truth to save face rather than tell 
the truth.  When a small minority of three board members started 
discussing this publicly, we were called liars and claimed their lies 
were the truth.  Our motions and seconds were ignored.  There were 
private discussions by the majority how to boot off the minority 
without appearing to kick them out.  There were specific plans 
discussed to try to get me to resign so it wouldn't look like they 
voted to remove me.  Finally, I was told I was removed and had my 
access to the wtaboard revoked.  Later, they denied this ever happened 
and made their motion that I had to resign or be removed.

Look for an announcement of a new election to replace three board 
members who have resigned since James took over as self-declared 
Executive Director.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Mon Jun  7 04:29:52 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:59:52 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6E@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

> Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> The WTA founders have been doing unethical things and hiding them from
> the members for a long time.  Things like selling members e-mail to
> spammers to make money, adding people to the membership rolls without
> their knowledge or permission, having secret agendas and methods not
> [snipped damning indictment of WTA executive]

Wow. As Harvey's integrity and veracity have always been impeccable
AFAIK, I'm prepared to accept this report on face value.

This is extraordinary news to me, that an important transhumanist voice
is being run so corruptly. It certainly doesn't do extropians any
favours that a group that should be a major ally is being so royally
screwed up (and now milked for all it's worth, apparently). Furthermore,
that it is James Hughes sets my teeth on edge, given his politics (and
I'm probably one of the more left people on extro-chat).

Should we be doing something about this? Is it time for the extro
community to join WTA as a block and throw some weight around? Would
that do any good?

Emlyn


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From reason at longevitymeme.org  Mon Jun  7 04:57:39 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 21:57:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6E@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEHPEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Emlyn ORegan
>
> Should we be doing something about this? Is it time for the extro
> community to join WTA as a block and throw some weight around? Would
> that do any good?

The WTA is a small enough segment of transhumanism that it won't matter if
it implodes. None of the important  ideas will die with it. Imminst and ExI
are of equal size and capacity in terms of membership, "membership,"
eyeballs, ability to speak to the public. Some core transhumanist mailing
lists have two to four times the number of members as the WTA, although that
doesn't really translate to community. Betterhumans dwarfs the entirety of
the rest of the movement in those last two points and isn't beholden to the
WTA in any way, shape, or form. Transhumanist-minded people of influence
like Kurzweil, Minsky, Freitas, de Gray, et al, aren't affected by the
presence or absence of the WTA.

Equally, the WTA is large enough and has enough of a running start that it
would be nice if the people and resources could be found to rehabilitate it.
OTOH, if the members and remaining board are aware of and happy with the
current situation, the only ethical external pressures to be brought are the
normal ones of non-association. That's not really an issue in my case, since
the WTA as an organization doesn't have a lot to do with the areas I'm
interested in: not a great deal of tech-boosterism or pro-research activism
going on over there on an official basis.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme
reason at longevitymeme.org
http://www.longevitymeme.org



From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun  7 05:22:29 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 07:22:29 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6E@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6E@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <470a3c520406062222119b98f1@mail.gmail.com>

Emlyn, I wish to invite you to gain access to the wta-talk archives by
subscribing to the list, and see things for yourself. I am sure that,
if you do so, you may wish to reword some of the things you said based
on wrong information.
Concerning most of Harvey's rant, I am prepared to put it down to
faulty memory and judgment. But regarding the allegation of "selling
members e-mail to spammers to make money", I wish to invite him to
either prove it, or shut up and stop wasting our time.

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:59:52 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
<emlyn.oregan at micromet.com.au> wrote:

> Wow. As Harvey's integrity and veracity have always been impeccable
> AFAIK, I'm prepared to accept this report on face value.
> 
> This is extraordinary news to me, that an important transhumanist voice
> is being run so corruptly. It certainly doesn't do extropians any
> favours that a group that should be a major ally is being so royally
> screwed up (and now milked for all it's worth, apparently). Furthermore,
> that it is James Hughes sets my teeth on edge, given his politics (and
> I'm probably one of the more left people on extro-chat).
> 
> Should we be doing something about this? Is it time for the extro
> community to join WTA as a block and throw some weight around? Would
> that do any good?
> 
> Emlyn


From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Mon Jun  7 05:28:31 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:58:31 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6F@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

The archives... well, Harvey has said that the archives were modified,
so I feel disinclined to trust them at this stage.

Emlyn

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 [mailto:pgptag at gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, 7 June 2004 2:52 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
> 
> Emlyn, I wish to invite you to gain access to the wta-talk archives by
> subscribing to the list, and see things for yourself. I am sure that,
> if you do so, you may wish to reword some of the things you said based
> on wrong information.
> Concerning most of Harvey's rant, I am prepared to put it down to
> faulty memory and judgment. But regarding the allegation of "selling
> members e-mail to spammers to make money", I wish to invite him to
> either prove it, or shut up and stop wasting our time.
> 
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 13:59:52 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
> <emlyn.oregan at micromet.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > Wow. As Harvey's integrity and veracity have always been impeccable
> > AFAIK, I'm prepared to accept this report on face value.
> >
> > This is extraordinary news to me, that an important transhumanist
voice
> > is being run so corruptly. It certainly doesn't do extropians any
> > favours that a group that should be a major ally is being so royally
> > screwed up (and now milked for all it's worth, apparently).
Furthermore,
> > that it is James Hughes sets my teeth on edge, given his politics
(and
> > I'm probably one of the more left people on extro-chat).
> >
> > Should we be doing something about this? Is it time for the extro
> > community to join WTA as a block and throw some weight around? Would
> > that do any good?
> >
> > Emlyn
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun  7 05:50:01 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 07:50:01 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6F@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6F@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <470a3c5204060622504e3955c1@mail.gmail.com>

Come on Emlyn, "Harvey has said..." is not a very solid argument when
it is Harvey against the rest of the world.

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:58:31 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
<emlyn.oregan at micromet.com.au> wrote:
> 
> The archives... well, Harvey has said that the archives were modified,
> so I feel disinclined to trust them at this stage.
> 
> Emlyn


From reason at longevitymeme.org  Mon Jun  7 06:07:34 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 23:07:34 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204060622504e3955c1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNOEIAEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Giu1i0
> Pri5c0
> Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 10:50 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
>
>
> Come on Emlyn, "Harvey has said..." is not a very solid argument when
> it is Harvey against the rest of the world.
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:58:31 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
> <emlyn.oregan at micromet.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > The archives... well, Harvey has said that the archives were modified,
> > so I feel disinclined to trust them at this stage.
> >
> > Emlyn

A quick note regarding the WTA archives: Santiago Ochoa is currently point
on fixing up the problems caused by the server upgrade in early May. The
last time he asked me for information on the setup, on the 28th, he was
still in the process of sorting out the e-mail->bbs connection and fixing
the necessary configurations for web access to the mailing list archives. I
don't know where that process is at the moment.

After a quick check, the links to archives from the website are wrong -
another configuration that was reset with the server upgrade. It should be:

http://www.transhumanism.org/pipermail/<list-name>/

e.g.

http://www.transhumanism.org/pipermail/wta-talk/

The lists are currently password protected using .htaccess, I believe, so
normal list members can't use their list id/pw to access it. You have to
know one of the .htaccess passwords.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Mon Jun  7 06:04:29 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:34:29 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

Harvey against the rest of the world? Hmm, maybe. Harvey, do you have
anyone else who is willing to back up your claims on this list?

Giulio (is that right?), maybe you'd answer some questions...

- Have the founders been ignoring board votes?
- Have the founders sold member's @s to spammers?
- Have the founders added people to the membership rolls without
knowledge/permission?
- Was Transhumanism and Spirituality (wow, did you really hold such a
daft conference??) held despite board objections?
- Was a paid executive director really appointed without a vote of the
board?
- Is the board allowed real control in the WTA? If not, what is the role
of the board?

Emlyn


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Jun  7 06:07:50 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 23:07:50 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204060622504e3955c1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000001c44c55$c3b18a20$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> 
> Come on Emlyn, "Harvey has said..." is not a very solid argument when
> it is Harvey against the rest of the world.


The rest of the world is quite puzzled and disturbed
by all of this.  Do explain.

spike




From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Jun  7 06:41:19 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 23:41:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bill Gates and Petals Around the Rose
In-Reply-To: <BAY22-DAV9zrK0pWHIt0000239c@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY22-DAV9zrK0pWHIt0000239c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <AEE85606-B84D-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

Yeah, I started getting a bunch right because I was remembering 
previous rolls, including transpositions, too.  Finally I saw the true 
algorithm.   Pretty set of more complicated algorithms were formed and 
failed along the way.

-s

On Jun 6, 2004, at 11:04 AM, Slawomir Paliwoda wrote:

> http://member.melbpc.org.au/~lborrett/computing/petals-bg.htm
>
> :)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun  7 06:43:27 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 08:43:27 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <470a3c52040606234347ccc409@mail.gmail.com>

Answers below:

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:34:29 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
<emlyn.oregan at micromet.com.au> wrote:
> 
> Harvey against the rest of the world? Hmm, maybe. Harvey, do you have
> anyone else who is willing to back up your claims on this list?

Not many I fear.

> Giulio (is that right?),

Yes.

> maybe you'd answer some questions...

Sure.

> - Have the founders been ignoring board votes?

No, and there is no concept of "founders". All board members have
equal status, and members can vote the "founders" out is they wish so.

> - Have the founders sold member's @s to spammers?

No, and I find the allegation quite offensive. Before making this sort
of accusations one should think of whether (s)he can provide any
proof. When this is not the case one should, as I said before, shut up
and stop wasting our time.

> - Have the founders added people to the membership rolls without
> knowledge/permission?

Not to my knowledge. Harvey is probably referring to an isolated
incident where a few former list subscribers were unintentionally
resubscribed as a side effect of a list software upgrade. The list
manager promptly admitted the error, apologized, and removed everyone
who did not wish to be on the list.

> - Was Transhumanism and Spirituality (wow, did you really hold such a
> daft conference??) held despite board objections?

The conference will be held in August concurrently with TransVision04.
The decision to hold the conference was taken despite the objections
of a minority of board members.

> - Was a paid executive director really appointed without a vote of the
> board?

An executive director was appointed with a vote of the board. The work
of the executive director is not paid at the present time. We plan to
convert the post of executive director into a full time paid post as
soon as this is financially feasible, perhaps in a couple of years.

> - Is the board allowed real control in the WTA? If not, what is the role
> of the board?

All board members participate in all decisions, vote on all issues,
and can make proposals and formal motions. Their proposals!motions are
accepted if they can win, with solid arguments, the support of a
majority of board members. When this is not the case I believe the
board member concerned should accept the view of the others, think of
better arguments for next time, and refrain from spreading unproven
crap on all transhumanist lists.


From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Jun  7 06:58:43 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 23:58:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Popular Luddism
In-Reply-To: <20040606235121.37284.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040606235121.37284.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1D65F4E8-B850-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Jun 6, 2004, at 4:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> --- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
>> On May 31, 2004, at 4:34 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
>>> So, perhaps a slight restatement: it doesn't
>> matter
>>> what one calls it - "science", "everyday life", or
>>> whatever.  What matters is its actual (not
>>> theoretical, not planned, but street-level real)
>>> effect on peoples' lives, especially their wallets
>> and
>>> labor allocations.  It is the case that almost
>> anyone
>>> today, even in the most disadvantaged background,
>> can
>>> learn and gain employment in some high-tech trade
>> *if
>>> they want to*.
>>
>> Considering the number of techies still out of work
>> in the US I find
>> this assertion outrageous.   And these are the
>> people already highly
>> trained in various high-tech areas.
>
> Slight misunderstanding.  I said "some".

Nope.  You said "almost anyone".    I assume "disadvantaged background" 
includes little or no previous training.

> This does
> not necessarily mean the field that a particular
> person has had training in, especially if (as is the
> case for many of these particular techies, from
> personal experience having rejected many resumes in
> recent years) the "training" was completely inadequate
> or inappropriate to the job being applied for - and,
> most importantly, they're not willing to even consider
> retraining.

I don't think so.  I know quite a few of these techies, many with as 
broad a base of training and experience and many a still employed 
techie or one we would hire if we had the open reqs.   So again, I 
don't think your assertion is valid.  Also, many of these people are 
attempting to retrain but it is difficult to gauge what to retrain for.

>
> Or, in many cases, even serious training in the first
> place.  "I paid good money for my mail order Computer
> Science degree!  I demand the $200K senior software
> engineer position you're offering!  I'm not about to
> actually sit in front of a computer and learn how to
> program like some intern; that would require effort
> I'm not willing to give!"

Very funny but it has zip to do with reality or my objection.

> I also didn't say it'd be easy, or automatic.
> Flipping burgers is the canonical easy job, for
> someone who doesn't want to find and finance
> appropriate training.  And sometimes it even pays
> better than entry-level technical jobs...sometimes.
>

How long are you going to evade the meat of the actual objection?


>> How will these people support
>> themselves or be
>> supported while gaining training?  What happens to
>> the "superfluous"
>> workers?   Why will their numbers not swell as
>> technology advances ever
>> faster?   And please, none of the standard
>> assertions or references to
>> historical incidents largely not analogous to our
>> current much nearer
>> to Singularity situation.
>
> This, OTOH, summarizes the problem nicely (if one
> includes the poorly-trained-but-thought-they-were-good
> ex-dot-com workers in with the completely untrained).
> I do not have a complete solution to this problem
> right now, merely a suggestion that this seems to be
> the root cause of a lot of the "Luddite"-caused
> problems we currently face.  (For instance, better
> screening of training providers to weed out the
> useless - akin to universities' "accredited
> institution" programs - and greater funding for those
> putting themselves through job retraining might reduce
> this problem, but they won't make it go away by
> themselves.)
>

OK.  This is more reasonable.  What happens as the pace of 
technological change increases more drastically?  At what point are 
there no accredited trainers for what is hot because no one has figured 
out what is good training for it or how long that training will be 
valuable?   Or is good training more a matter of very good basics, some 
programming in depth, aesthetics and a very flexible mind?    What 
happens with this is no longer enough?

>> You can begin with understanding the actual
>> situation a bit more rather
>> than assuming everyone is sufficiently like yourself
>
> I'm not just basing this off myself (though I am, of
> course, the person I am most familiar with).  I'm also
> basing off others who share the particular quality
> being discussed here: success at obtaining technical
> jobs.

Unfortunately I know more than a few people who never ever had trouble 
getting jobs in their pushing two decades careers until the last couple 
of years.   It is a bit scary out there.

> I am far from the first person to note that one
> of the seemingly required qualities of top-level
> techies is curiosity* (a true desire to learn how
> things work), nor the first to wonder how to ignite
> this curiosity in far more human beings than currently
> nurture it.  I do not think I'm even the first person
> to muse about the broader consequences of such a mass
> ignition for our economy and our society, if it could
> be pulled off.  (I do assume that all human beings are
> capable of being curious, and of satisfying that
> curiosity through learning, but I base that assumption
> off of personal observations.)
>
> * Not necessarily curiosity for its own sake.  One
> could be curious about how X works because one expects
> to get paid a lot if one succeeds.  Yet that
> motivation, or at least the logical connection that
> the payment comes for figuring out X (rather than,
> "person does something with X - it doesn't matter
> exactly what - and gets paid"), does not seem to be as
> widespread as it could be.

Learning that understanding X is actually fun not to mention possibly 
lucrative is a core competency that seems difficult to instill in 
adults lacking it.  True enough.  But what happens as the bar of raw 
intelligence required also rises?

>
>> and if they are
>> not like yourself that it is somehow their fault.
>
> It would be more accurate to say that those who suffer
> from Luddist beliefs have some ability to fix that
> situation - but that so many do not want to is,
> itself, a problem.

Luddist beliefs heh?  What a convenient set of labels useful for 
sweeping real problems and concerns of real people under the rug.   
Hopefully you will not personally experience directly why some of these 
folks fear technological change and feel hopelessly left out and 
unneeded/unwanted.

>
>> Casting fault
>> itself is a huge waste of time.
>
> Except when it identifies causes that can be
> corrected, to prevent the problem from continuing or
> reoccuring.  For example, see above about the
> so-called "highly trained" experts not being able to
> find jobs.


Forget "so-called".  There are real experts I know personally who 
cannot find work in their field.  And no, their field is not outmoded 
or unneeded.

Why are you attempting to explain away as the fault of the victims a 
real problem?

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Jun  7 07:05:45 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:05:45 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <776F7FC0-B838-11D8-84B2-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <776F7FC0-B838-11D8-84B2-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <18FB8950-B851-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

I am not surprised.  Just the way things were headed on wta-talk led me 
to doubt all was as it should be in the organization.    It is a pity 
when a purported umbrella organization becomes rigidly attached to a 
particular agenda much less governed by a nearly fixed elite.

-s



From samantha at objectent.com  Mon Jun  7 07:09:42 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:09:42 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204060622504e3955c1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6F@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
	<470a3c5204060622504e3955c1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A60AA6DA-B851-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

I have been on the list.  After WTA folks baiting and shunning all 
remotely libertarian voices off into a separate mailing list I got 
disgusted and quit participating.   This is not a "World Transhumanist 
Association" except in name only.

- s



From neptune at superlink.net  Mon Jun  7 11:03:13 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 07:03:13 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hendrik Van den Berg on living standards
Message-ID: <003201c44c7f$082f6d60$ea893cd1@neptune>

Of note for Extropians and transhumanists is Hendrik Van den Berg's
essay.  I had a chance to read it in advance.  He argues for a new way
to measure living standards that might prove useful in the future.

Regards,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html

From: "Chris Matthew Sciabarra" chris.sciabarra at nyu.edu
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 6:00 AM
Subject: [atlantis_II] New Issue: THE JOURNAL OF AYN RAND STUDIES


Volume 5, Number 2 of THE JOURNAL OF AYN RAND STUDIES has just been
published.   The issue features the following contributions:

The Magnificent Progress Achieved by Capitalism:
Is the Evidence Incontrovertible?
By Hendrik Van den Berg

Universals and Measurement
By Stephen Boydstun

Art as Microcosm
By Roger E. Bissell

Ayn Rand in the Scholarly Literature IV:
Ayn Rand in England
By Nicholas Dykes

An Economist Reads Philosophy:
Review of Leland Yeager's book, ETHICS AS SOCIAL SCIENCE
By William Thomas

Capitalism and Virtue:
Review of Dinesh D'Souza's book, THE VIRTUE OF PROSPERITY
By Will Wilkinson

A Direct Realist's Challenge to Skepticism:
Review of Michael Huemer's book, SKEPTICISM AND THE VEIL OF PERCEPTION
By Ari Armstrong

Discussion
Reply to Huemer:  Egoism and Predatory Behavior
By Michael Young

Rejoinder to Young:  Egoism and Prudent Predation
By Michael Huemer

Objectivism:  On Stage and Self Destructive:
Review of Sky Gilbert's play, THE EMOTIONALISTS
By Karen Michalson

Reply to Michalson:
Rand as Guru:  Will it Never End?
By Sky Gilbert

Rejoinder to Gilbert:
Rand as What?
By Karen Michalson

For article abstracts, click here:
http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/v5_n2/5_2toc.asp

For contributor biographies, click here:
http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/v5_n2/5_2bio.asp

For information on subscriptions, click here:
http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/subscribForm.asp

Look for Volume 6 in 2004-2005 --- Two Special Symposium Issues in Honor
of  the Ayn Rand Centenary:  the first dealing with Ayn Rand's Cultural
& Literary Impact, the second dealing with "Ayn Rand Among the
Austrians."
=================================================
Chris Matthew Sciabarra
Visiting Scholar, NYU Department of Politics
726 Broadway, 7th floor
New York, New York 10003
Fall 2004 Cyberseminar:  Putting Dialectics to Work:
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/semstart.htm
Dialectics & Liberty Website:
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra
The Sciabarra "Not a Blog" (regularly updated):
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/notablog.htm
The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies:
http://www.aynrandstudies.com
=================================================



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Jun  7 11:55:40 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 07:55:40 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <470a3c52040606234347ccc409@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <98E4A0E6-B879-11D8-A2EC-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Monday, June 7, 2004, at 02:43 am, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> Answers below:
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:34:29 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
> <emlyn.oregan at micromet.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> Harvey against the rest of the world? Hmm, maybe. Harvey, do you have
>> anyone else who is willing to back up your claims on this list?
>
> Not many I fear.

I am but one Board member.  There are also two other Board members who 
have similarly resigned, named Bruce and Theo.  There is also a former 
Board member on this list named Eliezer.  There is also a current ExI 
Board member who is still on the WTA Board named Jose.  I can't imagine 
how Giulio forgot about all these.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Jun  7 14:56:19 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 07:56:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION:  Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <776F7FC0-B838-11D8-84B2-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040607075224.01e77320@mail.earthlink.net>

At 12:09 AM 6/7/04 -0400, Harvey wrote:

>On Sunday, June 6, 2004, at 10:32 pm, Emlyn ORegan wrote:
>
>>Wait wait wait... where did this come from? Should I have been
>>subscribed to the transhumanism list to see this particular storm
>>exploding?
>
>The WTA founders have been doing unethical things and hiding them from the 
>members for a long time.  Things like selling members e-mail to spammers 
>to make money, adding people to the membership rolls without their 
>knowledge or permission, having secret agendas and methods not revealed to 
>the members, etc.  The WTA founders have been ignoring board votes or 
>doing things without the board's knowledge or permission.  The Oxford 
>board meeting was one example where we were not allowed to vote on whether 
>to hold the international meeting or not.
>The conference on Transhumanism and Spirituality is another example where 
>the "leaders" went ahead despite board objections.  There also were 
>complaints about inaccuracies and plagiarism in the "WTA FAQ" which the 
>board was not allowed to address.  Basically, the "leaders" are not 
>willing to cede their self-proclaimed control over to an elected board as 
>their constitution directs.  They are now pushing for a new Executive 
>Director position who can run WTA independently of the board with little 
>or no oversight or control.  James wants to be Executive Director just as 
>he has been chairman, treasurer, secretary, publications director, 
>newsletter editor, and website master.  Despite the claim to have a 
>democratically elected board, the founders of WTA still retain all control 
>for themselves and hold virtually all offices by themselves.

Harvey, we know that the FAQ was created by Alex Bokow and somehow became 
the property of Nick and WTA, but certainly WTA can explain 
this.  Regarding James becomeing Ex. Dir., I don't remember voting on it 
recently or receiving any email about it.  Doesn't WTA have a policy of 
voting on its principles?  If so and we did not vote on James, there must 
be a reasonable explanation.  Guilio, can you enlighten us?

>The final straw was when James self-declared himself as Executive Director 
>and said he wanted to start taking a $60,000 salary.  They intended to 
>vote on this at the Oxford meeting, but forgot to include it in the list 
>of votes at the end of the meeting.  When they returned, one board member 
>resigned, and two others who did not attend the meeting were against the 
>idea.  (Mostly because WTA doesn't take in $60,000, so we don't want James 
>pocketing all our funds until we do so.)  It then became apparent that 
>James might not have enough votes to be appointed ED.  Instead of allowing 
>a vote, James, Giulio and Nick decided that the "intent" was to hire 
>James, and that they considered it done without a formal vote.  They 
>refused to allow any further votes on the issue.  They even abridged the 
>official meeting minutes to add this non-existent vote, and sent this out 
>to the membership.  When we pointed to the public archives for historical 
>evidence, the board voted to shut down the public archives.  When we 
>pointed to the wtaboard private archives for evidence, the original motion 
>and minutes were deleted.  When we attempted to reveal these votes to the 
>public, it was voted NOT to open board votes to the public in 
>wtahall.  When we attempted to publish the original minutes, the board 
>voted NOT to publish the original minutes, and to NOT amend them to the 
>new minutes, and to just leave everything as it was.
>
>Most of the board rather hide the truth to save face rather than tell the 
>truth.  When a small minority of three board members started discussing 
>this publicly, we were called liars and claimed their lies were the 
>truth.  Our motions and seconds were ignored.  There were private 
>discussions by the majority how to boot off the minority without appearing 
>to kick them out.  There were specific plans discussed to try to get me to 
>resign so it wouldn't look like they voted to remove me.  Finally, I was 
>told I was removed and had my access to the wtaboard revoked.  Later, they 
>denied this ever happened and made their motion that I had to resign or be 
>removed.

Is this why Bruce Klein (BJ) resigned from the board?  I know he did 
because he mentioned it on the chat last week, but he did not completely 
elaborate.


>Look for an announcement of a new election to replace three board members 
>who have resigned since James took over as self-declared Executive Director.

Okay.

Eli, do you have any comments?  You were on the board.

my best to all,

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/20040607/f61c4eb6/attachment.html>

From bjk at imminst.org  Mon Jun  7 13:20:01 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 08:20:01 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <40C46B81.50507@imminst.org>

Emlyn ORegan wrote:

>Harvey against the rest of the world? Hmm, maybe. Harvey, do you have
>anyone else who is willing to back up your claims on this list?
>

I support Mr. Newstrom's account. Harvey was underhandedly excluded off 
WTA?s board. Shortly after learning this, I resigned from WTA's board 
because I feared they would eventually do the same to me.

I've posted a public notice to the homepage of ImmInst.

http://www.imminst.org

Sincerely,

Bruce Klein
Chair, ImmInst.org
http://www.imminst.org/bjklein





From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 13:26:16 2004
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 06:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <98E4A0E6-B879-11D8-A2EC-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <20040607132616.65282.qmail@web41313.mail.yahoo.com>

Dear friends,
 
     I certainly back all the claims made by Harvey Newstrom because I have seen, first hand, what happened to him. He was first excluded from the wtaboard list and then James Hughes told us that he could not be contacted back, while other people were communicating with him. If that is not a lie, I do not know what is a lie or a set-up.
 
     Transhumanistically yours,
 
     La vie est belle!
 
     Yos?

Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
On Monday, June 7, 2004, at 02:43 am, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> Answers below:
>
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 15:34:29 +0930, Emlyn ORegan
> wrote:
>>
>> Harvey against the rest of the world? Hmm, maybe. Harvey, do you have
>> anyone else who is willing to back up your claims on this list?
>
> Not many I fear.

I am but one Board member. There are also two other Board members who 
have similarly resigned, named Bruce and Theo. There is also a former 
Board member on this list named Eliezer. There is also a current ExI 
Board member who is still on the WTA Board named Jose. I can't imagine 
how Giulio forgot about all these.


La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040607/72e835e7/attachment.html>

From bjk at imminst.org  Mon Jun  7 13:38:59 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 08:38:59 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <470a3c52040606234347ccc409@mail.gmail.com>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
	<470a3c52040606234347ccc409@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <40C46FF3.3080107@imminst.org>

Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> shut up and stop wasting our time.


> refrain from spreading unproven crap on all transhumanist lists.


Even if everything Mr. Newstrom has said is 'unproven crap', it would 
still deserve a greater measure of respect.  Harvey has been working 
diligently to bring important concerns to WTA leadership for more than 
five months.  Each time he does so, he is personally attacked.

I continue to be saddened by Mr. Prisco's use of disparaging words 
toward Mr. Newstrom.  Resorting to personal attacks highlights an even 
larger problem surrounding WTA's current leadership style.

Bruce Klein




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Mon Jun  7 13:49:49 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:49:49 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI structure question
Message-ID: <40C4727D.3090108@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

The WTA board appears to be going through some growth problems at present.

The thought occurs to me that it could be very dangerous for us if the
SIAI has similar problems in a few years time as development of FAI is
in the final testing phase.

Programming the maximum optimizing process will be a team project
extending over a period of years and the size of SIAI board and staff
will probably grow during this time.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Inventions are always used for
purposes other than the original intention of the inventor. When the
power of the software becomes evident, some individual(s) is(are) bound
to think about taking a copy of all or part of the software for their
own use. (Let us hope SIAI have a security team in place by then).

With the whole world at stake, perhaps Elizier will be voted off the
board, when others feel his input is no longer required for the
development and his ideas obstruct their own plans.

Perhaps a sub-set of SIAI will think - We built this - why not keep it
for our own benefit?

Of course, these AI power games may well mean the end of the human race.
But the payoff, if successful, is so big, that I doubt whether ALL the
members of SIAI and their advisers, friends, etc. will be able to resist
temptation.

It is much easier to consider these problems well in advance.

BillK


From baptista at dot-god.com  Mon Jun  7 13:50:29 2004
From: baptista at dot-god.com (Joe Baptista)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 09:50:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going on folks
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0406070950020.10472-100000@dot-god.com>


A number of us have detected movements in the U.S. money supply which are
difficult to interpret.  At best we have hints of an imminent Catastrophe
of some sorts.

The Federal Reserve has recently raised the money supply (M-3) by crisis
proportions. It was up another $46.8 billion this past week.

This is unprecedented, unheard-of pre-catastrophe M-3 expansion. M-3
is up an amount that we've never seen before without a crisis -- $155
billion over the past four weeks, a $2.0 trillion annualized pace, a 22.2
percent annualized rate of growth.

There must be a crisis of historic proportions coming, and the Federal
Reserve Bank of the United States is making sure that there is enough
liquidity in place to protect the U.S.'s fragile financial system.

This is an unusual move since steep increases in M3 can result in the
permanent devaluation of a currency.  Why are they doing this?

Also we have detected a number of military actions - i.e. Navy ships
around the World are leaving their ports in unprecedented numbers?  Why?

Within the last two - three weeks there is also increased activity on all
US Military bases.  Why?

And last of all the internet rumor mill is at an all time high.  Huge
amounts of rumors and government disinformation on the Internet.  Why?

These and a few other technical observations leads us to conclude that the
event which is being planned for will occur in mid June or early July.

enjoy
joe baptista








From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun  7 14:03:18 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 16:03:18 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <40C46FF3.3080107@imminst.org>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F71@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
	<470a3c52040606234347ccc409@mail.gmail.com>
	<40C46FF3.3080107@imminst.org>
Message-ID: <470a3c520406070703431a8a03@mail.gmail.com>

Bruce, I am referring specifically to "selling members e-mail to
spammers to make money". This is false, and is a personal attack aimed
at most WTA board members. Hence I don't see any other way of defining
it but "unproven crap". I agree with you on the unappropriateness of
personal attacks, but please note that I issued one in reply to
another.

On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 08:38:59 -0500, Bruce J. Klein <bjk at imminst.org> wrote:
> 
> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:
> 
> > shut up and stop wasting our time.
> 
> > refrain from spreading unproven crap on all transhumanist lists.
> 
> 
> Even if everything Mr. Newstrom has said is 'unproven crap', it would
> still deserve a greater measure of respect.  Harvey has been working
> diligently to bring important concerns to WTA leadership for more than
> five months.  Each time he does so, he is personally attacked.
> 
> I continue to be saddened by Mr. Prisco's use of disparaging words
> toward Mr. Newstrom.  Resorting to personal attacks highlights an even
> larger problem surrounding WTA's current leadership style.
> 
> Bruce Klein


From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun  7 14:25:36 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 16:25:36 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <98E4A0E6-B879-11D8-A2EC-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <98E4A0E6-B879-11D8-A2EC-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c520406070725799471a@mail.gmail.com>

Harvey, please be more accurate on facts. Theo resigned due to
completely unrelated reasons, and Eliezer was not elected to the board
in 2004.

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 07:55:40 -0400, Harvey Newstrom
<mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:

> I am but one Board member.  There are also two other Board members who
> have similarly resigned, named Bruce and Theo.  There is also a former
> Board member on this list named Eliezer.  There is also a current ExI
> Board member who is still on the WTA Board named Jose.  I can't imagine
> how Giulio forgot about all these.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun  7 15:11:06 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 08:11:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going on
	folks
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0406070950020.10472-100000@dot-god.com>
Message-ID: <20040607151106.20153.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Joe Baptista <baptista at dot-god.com> wrote:
> The Federal Reserve has recently raised the money
> supply (M-3) by crisis
> proportions. It was up another $46.8 billion this
> past week.
> 
> This is unprecedented, unheard-of pre-catastrophe
> M-3 expansion. M-3
> is up an amount that we've never seen before without
> a crisis -- $155
> billion over the past four weeks, a $2.0 trillion
> annualized pace, a 22.2
> percent annualized rate of growth.

The 22.2 percent does seem high, but are you sure it's
not just catching up for years of low rates?  (I'll
admit, I don't track this very closely, so I'm not
saying it is, just that it's something to check for.)

> Also we have detected a number of military actions -
> i.e. Navy ships
> around the World are leaving their ports in
> unprecedented numbers?  Why?
> 
> Within the last two - three weeks there is also
> increased activity on all
> US Military bases.  Why?

That's public information.  Bush is increasing US
military presence in Iraq, extending stays et al.
The strain of this continued effort is having
repercussions throughout the military.

> And last of all the internet rumor mill is at an all
> time high.  Huge
> amounts of rumors and government disinformation on
> the Internet.  Why?

Given the proven disinformation of recent times (for
instance, the hunt for WMD) and consequent activity
(CIA director Tenet's resignation), people are
speculating there might be more to it.  They're
probably right, but which specific "more"?

> These and a few other technical observations leads
> us to conclude that the
> event which is being planned for will occur in mid
> June or early July.

Like the handover of Iraq to its new, native
government?  Perhaps someone's trying to make sure it
will seem a disaster, or at least really really
expects it will seem that way?


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun  7 15:16:50 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 08:16:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI structure question
In-Reply-To: <40C4727D.3090108@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20040607151650.61129.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>

--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> The WTA board appears to be going through some
> growth problems at present.
> 
> The thought occurs to me that it could be very
> dangerous for us if the
> SIAI has similar problems in a few years time as
> development of FAI is
> in the final testing phase.

Possible, but unlikely.  WTA is primarily a social
group.  SIAI is primarily a development group.
Politics aren't as much of a factor in the latter as
the former.  (They can be a factor; they just tend to
arise far less often.)

> Perhaps a sub-set of SIAI will think - We built this
> - why not keep it
> for our own benefit?

Ironically, in Elizier's vision (if I understand it
correctly), it's only strict adherence to Friendliness
that would even make it possible to contain a fully
developed AI like that.  So if that happens it's
actually a minor success - so long as those who would
keep it remain fully aware of that which is
technically necessary to keep it.


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Jun  7 15:25:29 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 11:25:29 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI structure question
In-Reply-To: <40C4727D.3090108@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40C4727D.3090108@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <40C488E9.50306@pobox.com>

BillK wrote:

> The WTA board appears to be going through some growth problems at
> present.
> 
> The thought occurs to me that it could be very dangerous for us if the 
> SIAI has similar problems in a few years time as development of FAI is 
> in the final testing phase.
> 
> Programming the maximum optimizing process

That's "Maximizing Optimization Process", and an FAI, as I currently
understand the design, is *not* an expected utility maximizer.

> will be a team project extending over a period of years and the size of
> SIAI board and staff will probably grow during this time.
> 
> Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Inventions are always used for 
> purposes other than the original intention of the inventor.

In a strong sense, a Friendly AI *is* the original intention of the 
inventor.  Other inventions are not sapient and reflective, do not have 
intrinsic purposes bound into their structure.

> When the power of the software becomes evident,

It is not general power.  It is only power to carry out the original purpose.

> some individual(s) is(are) bound 
> to think about taking a copy of all or part of the software for their 
> own use. (Let us hope SIAI have a security team in place by then).
> 
> With the whole world at stake, perhaps Eliezer will be voted off the 
> board, when others feel his input is no longer required for the 
> development and his ideas obstruct their own plans.
> 
> Perhaps a sub-set of SIAI will think - We built this - why not keep it 
> for our own benefit?
> 
> Of course, these AI power games may well mean the end of the human race.
> But the payoff, if successful, is so big, that I doubt whether ALL the 
> members of SIAI and their advisers, friends, etc. will be able to resist
> temptation.
> 
> It is much easier to consider these problems well in advance.

I've been considering these problems since 2000.  Before coding starts, I 
will set up an organizational veto structure plus programming safeguards, 
based on the principle of "If we can't agree, the FAI ceases to exist," not 
"Who 'gets' the FAI in case of disagreement?"  I will also apply FAI theory 
to ensure that the AI created is irrevocably dedicated to a Friendly 
subspace of pathways.  You will not be able to steal "an AI" because all 
that exists is a Friendly AI.

An analogy; suppose that some primitive tribesfolk hear about "technology", 
which, in the stories of their tribe, enables people to fly through the 
air, walk on the Moon, and so on.  Inspired by this, they sneak into the 
city, steal a toaster oven, and command the toaster oven to slay their 
enemies.  It's "technology", right?

Similarly, you can't rebuild a toaster oven into a gun unless you already 
know how to build a gun from scratch, and it would probably be much easier 
to build the gun from scratch than to build it out of toaster oven pieces.

An FAI is not a tool someone can "use".  It's a process that compresses 
futures into Friendlier subspaces.  And no, FAI design does not call for a 
removable Friendliness module that you can plug in and swap out.

Aside from that, I am not willing to discuss this subject publicly.  Yes, I 
am using security through obscurity; if you don't give people ideas, that 
will help.  I request, as a courtesy to the Singularity Institute, a 
killthread on further discussion.  If you are interested please contact us 
privately.

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


From kurt at metatechnica.com  Mon Jun  7 14:46:10 2004
From: kurt at metatechnica.com (Kurt Schoedel)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 07:46:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Law of the Sea Treaty
Message-ID: <E1BXLO6-0006HO-Ng@svr58.ehostpros.com>

Hello all,

I am writing about the Law of the Sea Treaty because it was the subject 
of an article in the Sunday morning edition of my local paper. 

For those of you not in the know, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) is 
analogous to the infamous Moon Treaty, which was handily defeated by 
the now-defunct L-5 Society. The LOST precludes national sovereignty 
claims to the high seas, which is good; but also precludes the 
possibility of politically independent entities being created on the 
high seas, which is bad for our long term interests. The objectionable 
part is Title XI, which provides for a U.N. monopoly on exploitation of 
ocean resources. Although this may seem reasonable, it also 
specifically precludes the formation of politically independent city-
states based on artificial islands, which is definitely not reasonable.

Recent developments in fullerine materials (nanotubes) have lead to the 
serious possibility of a "space elevator" (beanstock). If a material is 
strong enough to build a beanstock, it can certainly be used to create 
artificial islands on the high seas. This would eliminate any technical 
hurtles in the creation of a "Hong Kong"-style city-state on the high 
seas by 2020-2030 timeframe. One does not need much imagination to 
realize the benefit of such a city-state for the advancement of 
transhumanism society.

I am asking all of you (in the U.S.) to write your senator (all 
treaties must be ratified by the Senate, its in the constitution) 
urging him or her not to ratify the LOST.

Reagan refused to accept this treaty on the basis of Title XI for good 
reason. This treaty should not be ratified as long as Title XI is a 
part of it.

Sincerely,

Kurt Schoedel
MetaTechnica


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun  7 15:54:56 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 08:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Popular Luddism
In-Reply-To: <1D65F4E8-B850-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <20040607155456.55869.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2004, at 4:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > --- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com>
> wrote:
> >> On May 31, 2004, at 4:34 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> >>> So, perhaps a slight restatement: it doesn't
> >> matter
> >>> what one calls it - "science", "everyday life",
> or
> >>> whatever.  What matters is its actual (not
> >>> theoretical, not planned, but street-level real)
> >>> effect on peoples' lives, especially their
> wallets
> >> and
> >>> labor allocations.  It is the case that almost
> >> anyone
> >>> today, even in the most disadvantaged
> background,
> >> can
> >>> learn and gain employment in some high-tech
> trade
> >> *if
> >>> they want to*.
> >>
> >> Considering the number of techies still out of
> work
> >> in the US I find
> >> this assertion outrageous.   And these are the
> >> people already highly
> >> trained in various high-tech areas.
> >
> > Slight misunderstanding.  I said "some".
> 
> Nope.  You said "almost anyone".    I assume
> "disadvantaged background" 
> includes little or no previous training.

Again you misunderstand: that's "some" as in "some
high-tech trade".  Someone highly trained in field X
doesn't have much training in field Y, just like
someone who doesn't have much training at all, whether
or not field X happens to have many positions open;
there always exists some field Y that does, even if
there aren't many experts in it yet (which may be why
it has many openings).  ("Disadvantaged background"
not only refers to lack of training, but to a relative
lack of opportunities from training.  Consider the
stereotypical poor-neighborhood school.  My point
there is that even those people can, if they want,
find training with less difficulty than is popularly
believed; the difference is that so few people in said
backgrounds want to.  It is this lack of desire that
needs addressing.)

We're saying much the same thing, just using different
words.  "Violent agreement", as it were, for the most
part.

> > Or, in many cases, even serious training in the
> first
> > place.  "I paid good money for my mail order
> Computer
> > Science degree!  I demand the $200K senior
> software
> > engineer position you're offering!  I'm not about
> to
> > actually sit in front of a computer and learn how
> to
> > program like some intern; that would require
> effort
> > I'm not willing to give!"
> 
> Very funny but it has zip to do with reality or my
> objection.

>From the way you stated your objection, it seems very
relevant.  And it's taken almost verbatim from the
reply one rejected applicant gave when I tried to
honestly answer why we weren't hiring that person, not
to mention being representative of a pattern I've seen
in other rejections.  (By no means explaining all of
them, just quite a few.)

> What happens as the
> pace of 
> technological change increases more drastically?  At
> what point are 
> there no accredited trainers for what is hot because
> no one has figured 
> out what is good training for it or how long that
> training will be 
> valuable?   Or is good training more a matter of
> very good basics, some 
> programming in depth, aesthetics and a very flexible
> mind?

I'm increasingly seeing that the latter is true, and
this may point to part of the cause.  (Therefore,
accredited trainers should focus on the latter, which
is part of what accredited universities already do.)
Technology already is accelerating, so people who
trained highly in one specific, now obsolete, skill
without picking up the basic foundations will now have
trouble applying said missing foundations to other
projects.

To use myself as an example: I've practiced and
trained a lot in Web programming - I've written more
HTTP clients and servers than I care to count, I know
exactly how CGI works and what one can invoke through
it, I know about code running on the server versus
code running in the browser (and how to make the two
interact), et cetera.  Yet I can imagine, in theory,
there coming along some protocol that renders the Web
obsolete overnight.  (It'd probably require at least a
year or so to displace at least 50% of the Web, but
its effect on leading-edge development hiring would be
more immediate.)  I know I could adapt and learn some
strange new system, but I know a number of programmers
I've worked with whose only response would be to keep
looking for Web programming jobs, and who would never
think of trying to adapt.  This specific error in
thought (which I'm not blaming them for, just pointing
out that it exists) is a symptom of what needs
addressing.

> Learning that understanding X is actually fun not to
> mention possibly 
> lucrative is a core competency that seems difficult
> to instill in 
> adults lacking it.  True enough.  But what happens
> as the bar of raw 
> intelligence required also rises?

Separate problem.  It needs dealing with, true, but
the solutions for the latter are likely to be
different from the solutions to the former.  (For
example, it may be that better understanding of Google
and other publically available search engines - and
possibly improvements in the search engines - can make
up for a good portion of the required intelligence, at
least for a while.  But it won't help much if most
people think of learning - and everything we teach
them to do as part of learning - as a chore rather
than learning how to extract pleasure from it...which,
frankly, is something that should be part of the K-12
cirriculumn by now, though other solutions will be
needed for currently existant adults and immigrants.)

> Hopefully you will not personally experience
> directly why some of these 
> folks fear technological change and feel hopelessly
> left out and 
> unneeded/unwanted.

Actually, I wrote the initial post after some
meditation on exactly why I have not, and how I have
avoided the fate that befell so many others.

> Why are you attempting to explain away as the fault
> of the victims a 
> real problem?

I think you misread my original post.  I'm explaining
the result of this real problem on the attitudes of
the victims (specifically that it makes said attitudes
more Luddite), why this result comes about, and that
this then causes them to lash out against technology
in general.  Therefore, I propose that rather than
attack these people - even if they do attack our
beliefs on a regular basis - it might yield much
better results to address this problem instead.


From dwish at indco.net  Mon Jun  7 16:28:49 2004
From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 11:28:49 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going on
	folks
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0406070950020.10472-100000@dot-god.com>
Message-ID: <200406071523.i57FNXJc027127@br549.indconet.com>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Joe Baptista
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 8:50 AM
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going on folks


A number of us have detected movements in the U.S. money supply which are
difficult to interpret.  At best we have hints of an imminent Catastrophe
of some sorts.

The Federal Reserve has recently raised the money supply (M-3) by crisis
proportions. It was up another $46.8 billion this past week.


[Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks] 

M3 is money market investments? I fail to see how this is a ", unheard-of
pre-catastrophe M-3 expansion" . Sounds more like the Fed/Banks are
investing more money into the market to boast the economy. I feel you are
more of a "chicken little" and no, the sky is not falling, but of course
neither is the price of gas.

Please check this out of print workbook on bank reserves and deposit
expansion for what this means:

http://Landru.i-link-2.net/monques/mmm2.html






This is unprecedented, unheard-of pre-catastrophe M-3 expansion. M-3
is up an amount that we've never seen before without a crisis -- $155
billion over the past four weeks, a $2.0 trillion annualized pace, a 22.2
percent annualized rate of growth.

There must be a crisis of historic proportions coming, and the Federal
Reserve Bank of the United States is making sure that there is enough
liquidity in place to protect the U.S.'s fragile financial system.

This is an unusual move since steep increases in M3 can result in the
permanent devaluation of a currency.  Why are they doing this?

Also we have detected a number of military actions - i.e. Navy ships
around the World are leaving their ports in unprecedented numbers?  Why?

Within the last two - three weeks there is also increased activity on all
US Military bases.  Why?


[Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks] 

Again, we are in a war in the middle east.



And last of all the internet rumor mill is at an all time high.  Huge
amounts of rumors and government disinformation on the Internet.  Why?

These and a few other technical observations leads us to conclude that the
event which is being planned for will occur in mid June or early July.

[Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks] 

Great! One big party for my birthday. Conspiracy theorists unite...



enjoy
joe baptista






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



From sean at valuationpartners.com.au  Mon Jun  7 17:01:52 2004
From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 01:01:52 +0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going onfolks
In-Reply-To: <200406071523.i57FNXJc027127@br549.indconet.com>
Message-ID: <20040607170157.5ACE41010D5@vscan02.westnet.com.au>

Cripes, I join this list expecting dry academia and within a week find
people posting scare mongering rubbish.

Go to www.surfingtheapocalypse.com  There's plenty of people there who wanna
discuss this kinda stuff.
And as far as I know, the rumour consensus has the planet being decimated by
three big meteors in mid June...
Its all codswallop.

Sean 
 





From steve365 at btinternet.com  Mon Jun  7 17:51:34 2004
From: steve365 at btinternet.com (=?iso-8859-1?q?Stephen=20Davies?=)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 18:51:34 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going onfolks
In-Reply-To: <20040607170157.5ACE41010D5@vscan02.westnet.com.au>
Message-ID: <20040607175134.32373.qmail@web86109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>



Sean Diggins <sean at valuationpartners.com.au> wrote:Go to www.surfingtheapocalypse.com There's plenty of people there who wanna
discuss this kinda stuff.
And as far as I know, the rumour consensus has the planet being decimated by
three big meteors in mid June...
Its all codswallop.

Sean 




Indeed. There is a rapid expansion in broad money going on right now, but I suspect it has more to do with an expected event in November. Of course that's dreadfully cynical.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040607/be442178/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jun  7 18:56:31 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 13:56:31 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] `the imperfectability that makes us human'
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040607135013.01bb08b0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

That great thinker William Safire informs us:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/07/opinion/07SAFI.html?th

<The genetics is out of the bottle. This research, whether the government 
likes it or not, is growing apace. Unless we act now to direct it toward 
morally acceptable ends ? cure and treatment of disease and the extension 
of active life, not monstrous manipulation and production of clones for 
spare parts ? we risk losing the imperfectability [sic] that makes us human. >

Yes, what a tragedy that would be! Safire could start now with a resolution 
to stay well away from medicos and dentists. Yet somehow (call me crazy!) I 
doubt that this is part of his high-toned plan for our imperfectibility.

Damien Broderick



From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun  7 19:04:35 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 21:04:35 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
In-Reply-To: <A60AA6DA-B851-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F6F@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
	<470a3c5204060622504e3955c1@mail.gmail.com>
	<A60AA6DA-B851-11D8-86D4-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c52040607120430cdc76c@mail.gmail.com>

Well Samantha, I am sorry if this is your interpretation of things. At
some point it appeared that most participants in the wta-talk list
were not very keen of some particularly long session of
pseudo-political bitching of the type "Xs are jerks", were X is one or
another political view, so the decision was taken to move this
specific type of content to the wta-politics list.
I must say that I was not in favor of having a separate list and would
have preferred to keep everything on wta-talk but anyway.
I would not say that "WTA folks baiting and shunning all remotely
libertarian voices off into a separate mailing list". For example, I
have nothing at all against libertarians and, as a matter of fact, do
agree with libertarians on many points. It is true that at times I am
annoyed when libertarianism is pushed to (what I consider as)
unreasonable extremes, but then I am also annoyed when socialism is
pushed to (what I consider as) unreasonable extremes, and I am very
annoyed with "Xs are jerks" non-arguments from both sides. This, I
believe, is the view of most (of course not all) regular participants
in wta-talk.

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:09:42 -0700, Samantha Atkins
<samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> 
> I have been on the list.  After WTA folks baiting and shunning all
> remotely libertarian voices off into a separate mailing list I got
> disgusted and quit participating.   This is not a "World Transhumanist
> Association" except in name only.
> 
> - s


From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Mon Jun  7 21:17:53 2004
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 14:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] 
	Transhumanism presented in Washington (WFS, August 1, 2004)
Message-ID: <20040607211753.36428.qmail@web41315.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.wfs.org/2004main.htm
http://www.wfs.org/2004con.htm

The Fourth Wave: The Transhuman Revolution

    The world is moving toward a fourth wave in which humans will become transhumans, and later posthumans, due to the advances of technology. Transhumanism represents a radical new approach to future-oriented thinking that is based on the premise that the human species does not represent the end of evolution but, rather, its beginning. Transhumanism is an interdisciplinary approach to understanding and evaluating the possibilities for overcoming biological limitations through scientific progress. Transhumanists seek to expand technological opportunities for people to live longer and healthier lives and to enhance their intellectual, physical, and emotional capacities.
    Transhumanists emphasize that not only can we use rational means to improve the human condition and the external world, we can also use them to improve ourselves. We are not limited only to methods (such as education) which humanism normally espouses. We can use technological means that will eventually enable us to move beyond what most would describe as human. 

Who should attend: Anyone interested in finding out how the new wave of technological changes will radically transform humanity as we know it today. 
What you?ll learn: Attendees will be exposed to the main ideas of transhumanism. 
How this knowledge can be applied: This knowledge can help individuals understand how technology can affect the future of humans.

Jose L. Cordeiro, president, World Future Society Venezuela; co-founder, Venezuelan Transhumanist Association; director, Venezuelan chapter of the Club of Rome; director, Venezuelan node of the Millennium Project, Caracas, Venezuela

key words: transhumanism, future studies, science, evolution
issue areas: Consciousness and Spirituality, Technology and Science, Futures Methodologies and Processes 





La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040607/11929283/attachment.html>

From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Jun  7 22:09:58 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 18:09:58 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] 
	ANNOUNCE: BRUCE STERLING vs. The Singularity, Friday 
Message-ID: <172010-2200461722958547@M2W038.mail2web.com>

I am fowarding a message I received from Stewart Brand about Bruce Sterling.

Try to attend, and if you do please give my best to Stuart and Bruce!
________________________________________

Subject: BRUCE STERLING vs. The Singularity, Friday (for forwarding)


One reason lots of people don't want to think long term these days is 
because technology keeps accelerating so rapidly, we assume the world 
will become unrecognizable in a few years and then move on to 
unimaginable.  Long-term thinking must be either impossible or 
irrelevant.

The commonest shorthand term for the runaway acceleration of 
technology is "the Singularity"---a concept introduced by science 
fiction writer Vernor Vinge in 1984.  The term has been 
enthusiastically embraced by technology historians, futurists, 
extropians, and various trans-humanists and post-humanists, who have 
generated variants such as "the techno-rapture," "the Spike," etc.

It takes a science fiction writer to critique a science fiction idea. 
This Friday in San Francisco BRUCE STERLING will give a public 
lecture titled "The Singularity: Your Future as a Black Hole."

Friday, June 11, 7pm, Fort Mason Conference Center, San Francisco. 
Doors open for coffee and books at 7pm; lecture is promptly at 8pm. 
The room seats only 250, so you may want to come early to be sure of 
a seat.  Admission is free (donation of $10 very welcome, not 
requiredl).

Along with being one of America's leading science fiction writers and 
technology journalists, Bruce Sterling is a celebrated speaker armed 
with lethal wit.  His books include The Zenith Angle (just out), 
Hacker Crackdown, Holy Fire, Distraction, Mirrorshades (cyberpunk 
compendium), Schismatrix, The Difference Engine (with William 
Gibson), Tomorrow Now, and Islands in the Net.

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 Jill Tarter, 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

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




From extropy at unreasonable.com  Mon Jun  7 23:44:09 2004
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:44:09 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tapping your expertise
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20040607190202.030a9bb8@mail.comcast.net>

Heads up that I'm going to have another extropian gathering. I'm moving a 
few miles from the old house in a couple of weeks, so the party will be as 
soon as I'm modestly settled in.

If you're going to be in the Boston area this summer and would want to 
attend, I may be able to work around your schedule. Further planning will 
be on the exi-east list.

Meanwhile, I'm trying to figure out what should go where. Structural 
strength is an important consideration for my elephantine book collection. 
In my current house, most are in one large room that's directly over slab. 
In the new house, the best spot is a wooden floor. Were I to put all the 
books in one room, they would add up to roughly ten tons.

I didn't question whether a concrete slab would hold the weight; I do worry 
about wooden planks. Can someone give me advice or useful links off-list to 
estimating the load-bearing strength of the floor and other relevant issues 
(such as whether optimizing location or orientation of the heaviest 
load-per-area is necessary or overkill)?

Ironically, my pertinent books have already been packed. But I figured that 
between engineering talent and book addictions, someone amongst us has the 
answers I'm looking for.


-- David Lubkin.




From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jun  8 01:57:18 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 18:57:18 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Law of the Sea Treaty
In-Reply-To: <E1BXLO6-0006HO-Ng@svr58.ehostpros.com>
Message-ID: <002401c44cfb$ee6ba1f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Kurt Schoedel
> 
> Reagan refused to accept this treaty on the basis of Title XI 
> for good reason. This treaty should not be ratified as long as Title
XI is a 
> part of it. Kurt Schoedel


R.I.P. Ronald Reagan.  You are gone but not forgotten.




From Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu  Tue Jun  8 02:10:28 2004
From: Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu (Johnius)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:10:28 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bill Gates and Petals Around the Rose
Message-ID: <40C52014.FFAA2DE8@Genius.UCSD.edu>


"Slawomir Paliwoda" wrote:
> http://member.melbpc.org.au/~lborrett/computing/petals-bg.htm
>:)

	Thanks for this; it allowed me to find out what y'all
	were talking about (I don't have shockwave).  On the
	other hand, it made me feel quite stupid.  I was trying
	to guess the algorithm using what looked like the tops
	of the dice (facing 'up'), rather than using the sides
	'facing' the reader.  So, I thought I had it on the first
	roll, only to fall flat on my face for the second. I was
	baffled, so I tried the third, again I drew a blank and
	had no clue what to do.  At that point, it occurred to me
	that maybe I was using the wrong sides of the dice, and
	then I got it.  So, I don't know if that counts as three
	rolls or as one (or as "six"?!) ... all I know for sure 
	is that I was more stupid than I ought to have been :-)

	Meanwhile, the name of the game reminds me of a movie
	I saw recently called "The Name of the Rose", with Sean
	Connery as a kind of Sherlock-Holmes monk in the middle
	ages.  The story was written by Umberto Ecco (sp?), who
	was/is known for semiotic theory, I believe.  It occurs
	to me that many of you here might enjoy playing that
	game, if you haven't seen the movie or read the book.
	The book might be much better; I suspect the movie was
	quite dumbed down for mass audiences (and I also suspect
	that it wasn't dumbed down enough, hence wasn't popular
	... even if it did have superstar Connery in it...).

	Johnius


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jun  8 02:25:58 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 19:25:58 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: WTA Board flap
In-Reply-To: <470a3c52040607120430cdc76c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000001c44cff$efd0da70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
> 
> 
> Well Samantha, I am sorry if this is your interpretation of things...
> 
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:09:42 -0700, Samantha Atkins
> <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> > 
> > I have been on the list.  After WTA folks baiting and shunning all
> > remotely libertarian voices off into a separate mailing list I got
> > disgusted and quit participating... - s


I am reluctant to wade into this, since I find this matter 
most distasteful and I haven't followed the details.  To post 
to extropians under the subject line "MOTION: Harvey off the Board" 
appears mean-spirited and in poor taste.  I am not claiming that 
I have never posted stuff to extropians that is in poor taste, but 
I do claim it was never with intent to harm or embarrass.

Please, you guys fix the subject line and state your
cases calmly and carefully.

spike     



From megao at sasktel.net  Tue Jun  8 02:44:58 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 02:44:58 -0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA Growing Pains
References: <000001c44cff$efd0da70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <42A64D3D.C4A2ED2@sasktel.net>

The mingling of personalities, politics and ambition with well meaning
progressive goals  was never guaranteed to be an easy ride.

If the goals are worth achieving, all the rest will fall back into place.

Morris

Spike wrote:

> > Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
> >
> >
> > Well Samantha, I am sorry if this is your interpretation of things...
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:09:42 -0700, Samantha Atkins
> > <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been on the list.  After WTA folks baiting and shunning all
> > > remotely libertarian voices off into a separate mailing list I got
> > > disgusted and quit participating... - s
>
> I am reluctant to wade into this, since I find this matter
> most distasteful and I haven't followed the details.  To post
> to extropians under the subject line "MOTION: Harvey off the Board"
> appears mean-spirited and in poor taste.  I am not claiming that
> I have never posted stuff to extropians that is in poor taste, but
> I do claim it was never with intent to harm or embarrass.
>
> Please, you guys fix the subject line and state your
> cases calmly and carefully.
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Jun  8 03:27:44 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 23:27:44 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA-BOARD: Authorized adding members without
	explicit permission
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520406070725799471a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CE3687DE-B8FB-11D8-BFA9-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>

I don't know why Giulio doesn't remember that WTA is adding members 
without their explicit permission.  We actually argued about this, and 
my motion to stop the practice failed to get a second or any votes.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>
____________________________________________________________
 > From: Ari Heljakka [mailto:heljakka at iki.fi]
 > Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 8:25 AM
 > To: Hughes, James J.
 > Subject: Finland TA: mass-joining finally
 >
 > Hi, James!
 >
 > I apologize for the delay about FTA members information.
 > Please find it attached (single record in 2 file formats).
 > This list is naturally for _basic_ memberships. There are
 > currently 78 names or so.
 >
 > A week ago the association finally had its meeting and
 > accepted the rules that enable me to join people to WTA as
 > basic members without their explicit permission ;-) From now
 > on everyone will be automatically joined.
____________________________________________________________
> From: mail at harveynewstrom.com
> Date: Thu May 6, 2004  11:27:20 am US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Re: Finland TA: mass-joining finally
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I don't think we should be adding people as members who are unaware of 
> their membership and/or never requested it.  There may be laws in some 
> countries against signing people up for membership or mailing lists 
> without their knowledge or consent.  Even if it is legal, it could 
> cause problems and ill-will.  Surely we should send these people an 
> offer/welcome/confirmation e-mail before adding them?
> Some of these members may complain about wta "spam" that they never 
> requested.  These members haven't checked the "yes" box to allow us to 
> share their information with other organizations, so we need to track 
> this.  They also haven't seen or agreed to our rules of conduct on our 
> registration page and may claim ignorance as a defense.
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com>
____________________________________________________________
> From: Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
> Date: Mon May 24, 2004  2:49:39 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] MOTION:  No inducting members without permission
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> Sorry to be a stick in the mud, guys, but this still really bothers 
> me.  It is simply unethical to put people's names on our membership 
> rolls without their permission.  I would be furious if some 
> organization did this to me!
>
> I move that in the future the WTA refrain from inducting members into 
> our organization without their explicit permission.  Any members so 
> inducted in the past without their explicit permission should be 
> removed from the rolls until their explicit permission is obtained.
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com>
____________________________________________________________



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Jun  8 03:27:51 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 23:27:51 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA-BOARD:  Authorized selling mailing lists
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520406070725799471a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D29934BF-B8FB-11D8-BFA9-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>

I don't know why Giulio doesn't remember deciding that WTA can sell or 
rent our subscriber lists for money.  This issue came up when Wilson 
Quarterly wanted to buy or rent our subscription lists.  As far as I 
can tell, everybody claimed that WTA is allowed to sell or rent its 
lists to groups deemed to be of Transhumanist interest.  We even added 
a checkbox to the join page to opt in or out of this.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>
____________________________________________________________
From: Cristina Lombillo [mailto:cristina.lombillo at procirc.com]
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 9:51 AM
To: secretary at transhumanism.org
Subject: Wilson Quarterly - World Transhumanist Association

My name is Cristina Lombillo, and I am writing on behalf of The Wilson
Quarterly.  We wanted to know if you have lists of members or 
subscribers
available for rent or exchange.  We can send you a sample direct mail 
piece,
if you like.

How many names do you have?  Do you have a list manager or do we deal 
with
you directly?  How much would it cost?  What do we need to do to test 
your
list in our next direct mail?

Please let me know if there is anything you can do, or point me to the
proper contact person.

Thank you,
Cristina Lombillo

ProCirc
2937 SW 27 Ave, Suite 301
Miami, FL 33133
ph-305-441-7155, ext 237
fax- 305-441-7676
____________________________________________________________
 From jhughes at changesurfer.com  Fri Feb  6 20:08:32 2004
From: jhughes at changesurfer.com (J Hughes)
Date: Sat Feb  7 11:30:36 2004
Subject: [wtaboard] FW: Wilson Quarterly list exhange/rental
Message-ID: <E1ApCHD-0001Ff-00 at stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net>

We have a request here form Wilson Quarterly who obviously want to send 
a
transhumanism-specific mailing to our members, advertising Carl Elliot's
article.

Pursuant to our decision last fall to ask permission to share their
addresses with other Transhumanist organizations, do you think this
promotion would fit that category for the members who said we could 
share
their addresses?

Or should I offer to email any promotions to our members ourselves?
____________________________________________________________
 From iph1954 at msn.com  Sat Feb  7 13:08:49 2004
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Sat Feb  7 13:20:48 2004
Subject: [wtaboard] FW: Wilson Quarterly list exhange/rental
Message-ID: <BAY5-F22UCSUN34LjdT0001d81e at hotmail.com>

 >From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
 >
 >We have a request here from Wilson Quarterly who obviously want to 
send a
 >transhumanism-specific mailing to our members, advertising Carl 
Elliot's
 >article.
 >
 >Pursuant to our decision last fall to ask permission to share their
 >addresses with other Transhumanist organizations, do you think this
 >promotion would fit that category for the members who said we could 
share
 >their addresses?

Yes, I think this would be a legitimate sharing of those addresses.

Mike
_________________________________________________________________
From: contact at permanentend.org (Mark Walker)
Date: Sat Feb  7 14:56:39 2004
Subject: [wtaboard] FW: Wilson Quarterly list exhange/rental
References: <E1ApCHD-0001Ff-00 at stork.mail.pas.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <004301c3ed84$b7f441d0$2ee4f418 at markcomputer>

It sounds like from their email that they want to have the names on a
permanent basis, I'm not sure that fits in with our mandate. We might be
better to offer to mail it ourselves adding that coming from us would
probably mean that more people on our list are likely to read it.

Mark
_________________________________________________________________



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Jun  8 03:27:59 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 23:27:59 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA-BOARD: James was not hired as ED at Oxford
	Meeting
Message-ID: <D777BCBB-B8FB-11D8-BFA9-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>

The idea that James was hired as WTA Executive Director at the Oxford  
meeting was invented after it became clear that he did not have enough  
votes later.  They meant to hire him, but forgot to hold a vote.  Then  
one board member resigned, and two others who did not attend (and  
hadn't resigned yet) opposed the vote.  Thus, James was three votes  
shorter than he expected.  Instead of living with the Board vote, the  
WTA founders retroactively rewrote history to say that James was  
already hired.  They claim a "unanimous vote" based on "general  
discussion" since no actual vote count took place.  However, comments  
from the Board members indicate that James was not originally  
considered as hired after the meeting.  This story was not invented  
until later.  These wtaboard notes were sent AFTER the April 16-18  
meeting.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>
________________________________________________________________
> From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
> Date: Fri Apr 23, 2004  6:17:30 am US/Eastern
> To: "'WTA Board of Directors List'" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Foresight Vision Weekend, May 14-16
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> One of the things we discussed at the Board meeting was my having a  
> travel
> budget to attend various functions in my capacity as Executive  
> Director (we
> should probably confirm my appointment with a vote by the way.)
________________________________________________________________
> From: Nick Bostrom <nick.bostrom at philosophy.oxford.ac.uk>
> Date: Mon Apr 26, 2004  7:34:55 pm US/Eastern
> To: wtaboard2004 at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard2004] James' Salary
> Reply-To: wtaboard2004 at yahoogroups.com
>
> No, the decision was to set as one of our current fundraising goals to
> raise enough money to hire J full-time together with two assistants  
> and a
> travel budget. To actually hire J would require us not just to have  
> enough
> cash to be able to pay his salary for one year but also that there's  
> enough
> security of future funding to make him take the risk of quitting his
> current job. In the shorter run, our aim is to hire a part-time  
> assistant.
> J. will not be hired full-time until and unless we have the funds.  
> Another
> short-term objective is to raise enough cash to pay J a honorarium,  
> 5-10K
> annually and to have a travel budget.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <gpmap at oddpost.com>
> Date: Tue Apr 27, 2004  12:12:52 pm US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] WTA News, J's salary, Point of Personal Privilege
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> As Nick says right now the idea is to hire a junior officer, and to  
> hire him
> in a place where work is cheaper: we cannot afford more, and have  
> found a
> good guy in Caracas. But when we get sufficient funding, we should  
> hire a
> senior executive director who can dedicate her/his full time and  
> energy to
> the advancement of the WTA. This was also pointed out by Peter who  
> reminded
> us that besides money to fund specific projects, we must also get  
> money to
> fund a permanent office without which no serious and steady project  
> work can
> be done.
> The agreement is that a permanent office should be staffed by a senior
> executive and a few junior officers. This is the way things are done  
> in the
> real world. Now who is the best man for the Executive Director post? I  
> would
> love doing it myself, but I do not think I could do it half as good as
> James. So I strongly support the idea of hiring James as ED as soon as  
> we
> have the money and a reasonable degree of confidence in future funding.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "mike99" <mike99 at lascruces.com>
> Date: Tue Apr 27, 2004  5:24:45 pm US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Point of Personal Privilege
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> James has done an extraordinary amount of work for the WTA on his own  
> time
> and his own dime. I think we owe him an enormous debt of gratitude for  
> doing
> so much. I also think that James has demonstrated beyond all doubt  
> that he
> has the skills, the drive, the intelligence and the knowledge to be
> Executive Director of the WTA as soon as we have the financial  
> resources to
> employ him in that position.
________________________________________________________________
> From: Nick Bostrom <nick.bostrom at philosophy.oxford.ac.uk>
> Date: Wed Apr 28, 2004  10:55:52 am US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] Point of Personal Privilege
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> Here's how I see it. Right now, part of the function of the board is  
> general oversight but an even larger part is to contribute to getting  
> things done. Once we start getting paid staff, the role of the board  
> (as opposed to that of other paid or non-paid officers and staff) will  
> shift more towards that of exercising oversight and of deciding on  
> priorities and strategic objectives. The more money the WTA starts to  
> handle, and especially if we hire J full-time, the more important the  
> oversight and auditing function of the board becomes.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
> Date: Thu May 13, 2004  12:01:07 am US/Eastern
> To: "'WTA Board of Directors List'" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Proposed fantasy budget
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>
> Attached please find a budget for the WTA which would allow us to:
>
> - hire me in two years full-time
________________________________________________________________
> From: Jose Cordeiro <jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com>
> Date: Thu May 20, 2004  4:18:50 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> ???? Some practical points, though. We have actually never voted to  
> name James Hughes?as Executive Director. However, we did mention in  
> Oxford that he would have to resign as WTA?Board member for that, and  
> then we would vote for a new member taking that position.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "Hughes, James J." <james.hughes at trincoll.edu>
> Date: Thu May 20, 2004  4:34:06 pm US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>> We have actually never voted to name James Hughes as Executive  
>> Director.
>
> A formal vote would be nice.
>
>>  However, we did mention in Oxford that he would have to resign as  
>> WTA Board member for that,
>
> I asked if it were necessary, and we said we would look into it.
>
> It turns out that that is unnecessary, and I want to retain my Board
> seat. Under both Connecticut and US law the ED can be a voting member  
> of
> the Board.
>
> You could of course decide that I couldn't serve as ED while on the
> Board, but then you would need to find a new ED.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "mike99" <mike99 at lascruces.com>
> Date: Thu May 20, 2004  5:00:09 pm US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> As I recall from the Oxford meeting, whether or not a member of the  
> Board
> could also be employed by the Association was left as an open  
> question. If
> there is no legal restriction on this practice, I think it is up to the
> Board to vote on it.
>
> We should also vote on James becoming Executive Director.
>
> Consider these two items as two motions for votes.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "Hughes, James J." <james.hughes at trincoll.edu>
> Date: Thu May 20, 2004  6:59:13 pm US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>
>> We should also vote on James becoming Executive Director.
>>
>> Consider these two items as two motions for votes.
>
> If the Board needs to vote on the ED-Board member issue, then it should
> be voted on first before you offer me the job.
>
> J.
________________________________________________________________
> From: Jose Cordeiro <jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com>
> Date: Thu May 20, 2004  11:53:45 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> James, could you please explain what this means?
> ?
> "You could of course decide that I couldn't serve as ED while on the
> Board, but then you would need to find a new ED."
________________________________________________________________
> From: "Hughes, James J." <james.hughes at trincoll.edu>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  9:33:39 am US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>> "You could of course decide that I couldn't serve as ED while
>> on the Board, but then you would need to find a new ED."
>
> I am no longer willing to give up my seat on the Board in order to
> become ED. If you want me to serve as ED then you need to allow me to
> retain my seat on the Board.
________________________________________________________________
> From: Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  7:05:39 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
>
> James, thanks for the update in a previous post.
>
> I don't think it is clear that you were voted ED by the Board.  Bruce  
> and I didn't participate, so we clearly didn't vote for you.  I think  
> it was reported that Theo didn't participate, so I don't know that he  
> voted for you.  Jose was there, but didn't seem to realize that you  
> had already been voted ED, so I don't think he voted for you.  And to  
> avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, I don't think you  
> should be allowed to chair the meeting, vote for yourself, and declare  
> yourself winner by acclaim without counting votes, and document your  
> own victory in your own minutes as secretary.  It is possible that you  
> were allegedly hired with five or fewer votes.
>
> I think we should have discussed this on the wta2004 forum without  
> James, and held a clear vote not chaired, counted, acclaimed and  
> documented by James.  This would have documented a clear decision by  
> the Board with no possible appearance of a conflict of interest.  The  
> current declaration does not avoid the appearance of a conflict of  
> interest.  And worse, we have some Board members (Jose) apparently  
> unaware that they supposedly unanimously voted to hire James.  I think  
> a vote of this importance simply must be made with all members and  
> clearly documented and counted correctly.
>
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com>
________________________________________________________________
> From: Nick Bostrom <nick.bostrom at philosophy.oxford.ac.uk>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  7:36:50 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I think it's an obvious decision to confirm James as ED, and I too  
> seem to remember that we voted on this (unanimously) in Ox. However,  
> if there's any ambiguity, I guess the easiest way to fix it would be  
> to have another vote. (I tried posting a vote some time back on the  
> -2004 list but I never saw it appear so I think it didn't "take").
________________________________________________________________
> From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  7:30:41 pm US/Eastern
> To: "'WTA Board of Directors List'" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Appeal for support
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>> I think we should have discussed this on the wta2004 forum
>> without James, and held a clear vote not chaired, counted,
>> acclaimed and documented by James.
>
> Just vote. The perpetual hostility is unhelpful.
> The place to start discussing this with my having to overhear is:
> wtaboard2004 at yahoogroups.com
________________________________________________________________
> From: Jose Cordeiro <jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  8:11:07 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Oxford meeting
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> Just to help clarify and remember a few things about our meeting in  
> Oxford and subsequent discussions:
> ?
> 1. There was never any vote about James or anyone having any formal  
> paid position in the WTA.
> 2. There was never any formal nomination of anyone by anyone, instead,  
> a three phase approach was written at the board meeting: first, begin  
> with a low cost approach with someone like Santiago, second, move to a  
> second phase with half a salary with someone like James, and third,  
> move to full time positions.
> 3. The only formal nomination and vote was held here  
> (wtaboard at transhumanism.org) for Santiago Ochoa to begin working for  
> the WTA.
> 4. If was discussed, certainly by me, that a Board member could not  
> also be the ED. Since James offered to resign as a board member,?that  
> opened the door for James to become ED eventually.
_______________________________________________________________
> From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  8:35:10 pm US/Eastern
> To: "'WTA Board of Directors List'" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Minutes of the Oxford meeting
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>> 3. The only formal nomination and vote was held here
>> (wtaboard at transhumanism.org) for Santiago Ochoa to begin
>> working for the WTA.
>
> These are the verbatim minutes I recorded and which were reflected in  
> the
> minutes you all adopted with minor revisions. This section reflects the
> discussion between 4pm and 6pm, after Peter rejoined us after his  
> doctor's
> appointment:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> "Executive Director, Staff and Budget Discussion
>
> Peter pushed us to think about creating a full-time staff in the next  
> couple
> of years, and we discussed the need for an Executive Director. J.  
> Hughes was
> nominated as Executive Director to which there was general agreement.
> Discussion then turned to what salary J. Hughes would need to come on
> full-time ($50-$60K per year, with some certainty of continuity over a
> couple of years) and how long it would take to raise this amount.  We  
> also
> discussed whether J. Hughes should remain on the Board as he  
> transitions to
> full-time WTA employee. Peter was of the opinion that it would be  
> feasible
> to have J. Hughes as a Board member so long as he recuses himself from  
> all
> decisions regarding his employment. Otherwise he could be a non-voting  
> Board
> member ex officio.
>
> Nick returned to the theme of interim budget plans, and the idea was
> advanced that the short-term goal should be to use the first few tens  
> of
> thousands of dollars to hire someone like Santiago to provide full-time
> admin support, and then to provide a travel budget for J. Hughes so  
> that he
> can represent the WTA as Executive Director at various meetings, and  
> then to
> begin paying Executive Director salary until it reaches a full-time  
> salary.
>
> (Discussion assumed that Santiago, or whichever supplementary staffer,  
> and
> the Executive Director would work from home. In subsequent discussion  
> Peter
> H. was of the opinion that having multiple addresses in multiple  
> cities was
> far more important than having one established central office.)
>
> 12pm Saturday midnight - Nick Bostrom, Jos?  Cordeiro, Tarik Theo  
> Ibrahim,
> J. Hughes, Mike LaTorra, Giulio Prisco, Mike Treder, Mark Walker
>
> The Board voted unanimously to
> -	adopt the new programmatic agenda
> -	authorize Peter as our fundraising committee
> -	approve the new membership fee and benefits structure
> -	request a budget and status report from George Dvorsky on TV04
> -	endorse the idea of the Transhumanist Professional Network
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --
>
> I forgot to include my own appointment as one of the items to vote on  
> at
> that midnight vote, to my chagrin, but there were in fact these five  
> matters
> formally voted on.
________________________________________________________________
> From: Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  10:17:08 pm US/Eastern
> To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] Minutes of the Oxford meeting
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> These minutes, only mention the discussion of hiring staff in the next  
> couple of years.  It only shows that James was Nominated for the  
> position of ED.  They show no vote to accept the nomination.  They  
> show no vote to hire James as ED.  Nothing related to the ED appears  
> in the summary of votes at the bottom.  There was discussion with no  
> voted actions.  Everybody unanimously approved these minutes.
>
> I think it is clear from Jose's accounts and the unanimously approved  
> minutes that James was NOT appointed as ED by the Board during the  
> Oxford meeting.  People are free to make a motion to amend the minutes  
> if they now feel they were inaccurate.  But unless that happens, the  
> official, approved minutes say James was NOT appointed ED.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
> Date: Fri May 21, 2004  11:34:06 pm US/Eastern
> To: "'WTA Board of Directors List'" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Please just vote
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I understand that I don't have the support of Harvey or Jose as ED.
>
> Please just go ahead and vote on the matter and let's move on.
________________________________________________________________
> From: iph1954 at msn.com
> Date: Sat May 22, 2004  12:18:27 am US/Eastern
> To: <jhughes at changesurfer.com>, "WTA Board of Directors List"  
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] Minutes of the Oxford meeting
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I don't recall a vote being taken in Oxford for the step of appointing  
> James
> as ED. It seems to me there was a consensus that we wanted to move in  
> that
> direction but no official action was made. And of course the minutes  
> don't
> contradict this.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "Giulio Prisco" <giulio at prisco.info>
> Date: Sat May 22, 2004  1:25:00 am US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Re: Mike's motions
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> Therefore I am not calling a vote of the issue: it has been settled by  
> a
> previous vote.
________________________________________________________________
> From: "Giulio Prisco" <giulio at prisco.info>
> Date: Tue May 25, 2004  1:12:08 am US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] Minutes approved at Oxford
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> Jose, this is pointless void because as Chair I have already ruled that
> James was appointed ED
________________________________________________________________



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Jun  8 03:28:08 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 23:28:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA-BOARD:  Not an umbrella organization
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520406070725799471a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DC6E7634-B8FB-11D8-BFA9-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>

The WTA Leadership has apparently long since abandoned the idea of 
being an umbrella organization without informing anybody.  I believe 
that this is the root cause of all the differences among WTA Board 
members.  We simply did not agree on what WTA was supposed to be.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>
____________________________________________________________
> From: Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
> Date: Sat Jan 31, 2004  5:54:37 am US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] RE:  Who Really Wrote the Transhumanist FAQ?
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
>>  This will amount to an implicit acknowledgment that there is a 
>> status of covert war between WTA and ExI.
>
> Unfortunately, this war already exists.  WTA seems to have declared 
> war on Extropy Institute from day one.  The original FAQ said, "Many 
> transhumanists do not agree with all the political views of the 
> Extropy Institute .  The World Transhumanist Association was therefore 
> founded in 1998 by Nick Bostrom and David Pearce...."  The reason for 
> the WTA to be created is supposedly because many transhumanists don't 
> like ExI!  What kind of basis for forming an umbrella group is that?
____________________________________________________________
> From: "MIKE TREDER" <iph1954 at msn.com>
> Date: Sat Jan 31, 2004  10:49:07 am US/Eastern
> To: wtaboard at transhumanism.org
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] RE: Who Really Wrote the Transhumanist FAQ?
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I joined the WTA in late 2001, around the time the decision was made 
> to form a Board of Directors and to become incorporated. I had never 
> been a member of ExI, but it seemed (and seems) pretty clear to me 
> that the WTA was originally formed as a breakaway organization, 
> intending to compete with ExI for members. The basis for this was that 
> the WTA would be more inclusive politically, as well as 
> geographically, ExI being seen at the time as somewhat 
> Calif-USA-centric.
>
> Only later, I believe in early 2002, was the idea of becoming an 
> umbrella organization discussed in our online fora. There was some 
> debate about it, and I don't think it was ever settled by a vote. But 
> to my knowledge *that* is the time when the umbrella concept came into 
> being -- about two years ago, not five or six years ago.
____________________________________________________________
> From: Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
> Date: Sat Jan 31, 2004  7:36:32 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] RE: Who Really Wrote the Transhumanist FAQ?
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I think we need to clarify our role as an umbrella organization and 
> try to figure out how we can start helping our affiliate organizations 
> instead of attacking them.  ExI is our biggest affiliate, and as an 
> umbrella organization we should be working with and promoting them 
> most.  I think we need to work more towards service to the 
> transhumanist community instead of demanding service from the 
> transhumanist community.  We need to develop documents and 
> infrastructures that are acceptable to all our affilitate, and try to 
> cleanup and get rid of such that are divisive instead of inclusive.
____________________________________________________________
> From: iph1954 at msn.com
> Date: Sat May 22, 2004  10:06:41 am US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] Stuck in the middle
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> On the WTA -- Holey umbrellas, Batman! If this group was formed with 
> the
> intention of being a gathering place for the numerous fragments of the 
> >H
> movement, it appears to be failing in that mission, as evidenced by 
> Harvey's
> initial survey findings. Either we must redouble our efforts to become 
> a
> *welcoming* community for (almost) all flavors of >H thought and 
> activity
> (which might mean that James could not be our ED), or we must rethink 
> the
> whole umbrella strategy and just make the WTA what it actually seems 
> to be,
> an activist organization that is part of, but not representative of, 
> the
> greater >H community.
____________________________________________________________
> From: "J Hughes" <jhughes at changesurfer.com>
> Date: Sat May 22, 2004  2:02:52 pm US/Eastern
> To: "'WTA Board of Directors List'" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: [wtaboard] In support of a cooling off period
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List 
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> The question is how strategically
> important it is to keep some of the small, marginal groups from being
> annoyed as we move ahead. I guess if I had to choose between between 
> the
> largest, most mainstream and most influential transhumanist 
> organization and
> being an umbrella of transhumanist groups I would want us to choose the
> former.
____________________________________________________________
> From: Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com>
> Date: Sat May 22, 2004  4:11:09 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: A major shift in WTA mission?
>
> The WTA FAQ <http://www.transhumanism.org/resources/faq.html> says,
>> A rapidly expanding family of transhumanist groups, differing 
>> somewhat in flavor and focus, and a plethora of discussion groups in 
>> many countries around the world, are gathered under the umbrella of 
>> the World Transhumanist Association, a non-profit democratic 
>> membership organization.
>
> On Saturday, May 22, 2004, at 02:02 pm, J Hughes wrote:
>
>> The question is how strategically
>> important it is to keep some of the small, marginal groups from being
>> annoyed as we move ahead. I guess if I had to choose between between 
>> the
>> largest, most mainstream and most influential transhumanist 
>> organization and
>> being an umbrella of transhumanist groups I would want us to choose 
>> the
>> former.
>
> This seems to be a major shift in the WTA mission.  James clearly has 
> chosen the former.  I clearly have chosen the latter.  Most of our 
> conflicts seem to stem from these two incompatible visions for the 
> WTA.  I think the Board needs to decide if we are going to continue as 
> an umbrella organization, or abandon that vision for the new vision as 
> James has laid out for us.
>
> 1) WTA should strive to be "the largest, most mainstream and most 
> influential transhumanist organization."
>
> -or-
>
> 2) WTA should strive to be "an umbrella of transhumanist groups."
____________________________________________________________

> From: James Hughes <james_j_hughes_2000 at yahoo.com>
> Date: Sat May 22, 2004  5:13:34 pm US/Eastern
> To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: Re: [wtaboard] A major shift in WTA mission?
> Reply-To: jhughes at changesurfer.com, WTA Board of Directors List 
> <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> Actually I think we started moving away from being an
> umbrella almost immediately when we eliminated
> "organizational memberships" in favor of "chapters"
> and "affiliates" about a month after adopting our
> constitution in January 2002.
____________________________________________________________
> From: "Giulio Prisco" <giulio at prisco.info>
> Date: Sun May 23, 2004  2:10:35 am US/Eastern
> To: "WTA Board of Directors List" <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
> Subject: RE: [wtaboard] A major shift in WTA mission?
> Reply-To: WTA Board of Directors List <wtaboard at transhumanism.org>
>
> I never believed too much in the vision of the WTA as an umbrella
> organization. The correct way to run an umbrella organization is 
> admitting
> all members of the participating organization, and staffing the Board 
> with
> delegated representatives of the participating organizations. This is 
> not
> what the WTA has alswys done: recruiting independent members and asking
> membership to elect a Board.
> The question is not if we are going to continue as an umbrella 
> organization
> but if we are going to become one.
____________________________________________________________



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 04:09:34 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 23:09:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Genetic experiments gone horribly wrong!
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040607230838.01cb4ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

It can happen--be warned, before it's too late!

http://www.noosfere.com/Showcase/IMAGES/futfic_30.jpg



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 04:10:52 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 23:10:52 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] I warned you, you fools!
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040607231008.01ba03b0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

It can lead to this kind of disaster:

http://www.noosfere.com/Showcase/IMAGES/futfic_33.jpg



From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Tue Jun  8 05:18:51 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 14:48:51 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Genetic experiments gone horribly wrong!
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F7E@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

I'm sure I've seen those pictures in "Reproduction and Responsibility:
The Regulation of New Biotechnologies" (report from the President's
Council on Bioethics). 

http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/reproductionandresponsibility/index.htm
l

Emlyn
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dcalwhit/pics/cats/mutant%20cat.jpg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damien Broderick [mailto:thespike at satx.rr.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 8 June 2004 1:40 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Genetic experiments gone horribly wrong!
> 
> It can happen--be warned, before it's too late!
> 
> http://www.noosfere.com/Showcase/IMAGES/futfic_30.jpg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jun  8 07:46:18 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 00:46:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] AI design
In-Reply-To: <40C21EE3.1090501@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20040608074618.75997.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eliezer Yudkowsky <sentience at pobox.com> wrote:
> The problem is expected utility maximization.  I'm
> using expected utility 
> maximization as my formalism because it's a very
> simple and very stable 
> system, it is the unique result of various
> optimality criteria that would 
> make it an attractor for any self-modifying
> optimization process that 
> tended toward any of those optimality criteria and
> wasn't already an 
> expected utility maximizer, and because expected
> utility maximization is so 
> taken-for-granted that most people who try to build
> an AGI will not dream 
> of using anything else.

Except for all the people who are using something
else.  Like the efforts, however off-base, to do it
top-down.  Or the ones who are trying, in essence, to
create models of a baby's consciousness and teach it
like one would a child.  And so forth.

> I haven't heard anyone try
> to analyze a UFAI goal 
> system dynamic other than expected utility
> maximization

Many of these efforts haven't done formal mathematical
analyses (except in the wrong places, such as the
top-down models, which can rightly be ignored), which
is probably why you haven't heard of them.


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Jun  8 08:10:02 2004
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 01:10:02 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] I warned you, you fools!
References: <6.0.3.0.0.20040607231008.01ba03b0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <001501c44d30$006d5270$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Damien Broderick" <thespike at satx.rr.com>

> It can lead to this kind of disaster:
> 
> http://www.noosfere.com/Showcase/IMAGES/futfic_33.jpg

... and in a salmonar vein: 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001950789_genefish08m.html

Olga



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Jun  8 10:15:28 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:15:28 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] I warned you, you fools!
In-Reply-To: <001501c44d30$006d5270$6600a8c0@brainiac>
References: <6.0.3.0.0.20040607231008.01ba03b0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<001501c44d30$006d5270$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20040608101528.GA12847@leitl.org>

On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:10:02AM -0700, Olga Bourlin wrote:

> ... and in a salmonar vein: 
> 
> http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001950789_genefish08m.html

Hilarious. Looks like a good way to decimate the wildtype
salmon population via a double mechanism: outcompete them, flood the
gene pool with individual incapable of handling food shortages.

Ha ha. Can't stop laughing.

-- 
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/20040608/d5d62b94/attachment.bin>

From sentience at pobox.com  Tue Jun  8 11:48:28 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 07:48:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA Growing Pains
In-Reply-To: <42A64D3D.C4A2ED2@sasktel.net>
References: <000001c44cff$efd0da70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<42A64D3D.C4A2ED2@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <40C5A78C.7070705@pobox.com>

Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote:

> The mingling of personalities, politics and ambition with well meaning
> progressive goals  was never guaranteed to be an easy ride.
> 
> If the goals are worth achieving, all the rest will fall back into place.
> 
> Morris

That's one of the most anhistorical statements I've ever heard.

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


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jun  8 12:16:38 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 13:16:38 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] WTA Growing Pains
Message-ID: <40C5AE26.3060603@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Tue Jun 8 05:48:28 MDT 2004 Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote:
>> Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote:
>> The mingling of personalities, politics and ambition with well
>> meaning progressive goals  was never guaranteed to be an easy ride.
>>
>> If the goals are worth achieving, all the rest will fall back into
>> place.
>>
>
> That's one of the most anhistorical statements I've ever heard.
>

Whoops! My favorite dictionary panicked over 'anhistorical'. But it
liked 'unhistorical' or even 'ahistorical' which both mean 'Taking
little or no account of history', which I agree with.
<http://dictionary.reference.com/>

A quick look at the history of any movement provides a long list of
splits, factions, power-struggles, off-shoots, etc. Just look at the
hundreds of slightly different churches, who all call each other
'blasphemers' or 'heretics'.

BillK

"I sent the club a wire stating, PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION. I DON'T
WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT ME AS A MEMBER."
     Groucho Marx (1890 - 1977)


From natasha at natasha.cc  Tue Jun  8 14:59:00 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 07:59:00 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Seena Sharp's  SharpInsights #16: Sounding Off
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040608075513.0379aa00@mail.earthlink.net>

Let me introduce Seena Sharp.  She is a long-time friend of mine who lives 
in Los Angeles.  I met her at FM-2030's futurist courses at UCLA - 
"Accelerating Change," etc. back in the 1980s.

If you would like to subscribe to her newsletter "SharpInsights," I'm sure 
you will not be sorry!  It is packed full of Seena's keen perspective on 
business and trends, and her delightful sense of humor.

>SharpInsights #16: Sounding Off
>
>Back when boomers were babies, a consumer's raves (or rants) about a product
>or service were confined to family and friends. Thanks to the Internet, 
>consumers
>now have an international stage and, if provoked, will share their 
>feelings with the
>world. Just ask the guy who started www.ihatemicrosoft.com!
>
>However, smart marketers can harness their customers' passion by encouraging
>feedback and using it to create value. For instance, software user forums 
>often offer
>better, faster information than the support pages on a developer's site. 
>Power to the
>people!  There's more:
>    * Netflix.com members rate movies and even write reviews. (Take that, 
> Roger Ebert!)
>    * Readers of Fast Company (and other magazines) respond online to 
> articles and to other readers' remarks.
>    * Target customers rate the products on its website-and some items get 
> panned!
>    * Many TV shows host message boards to give viewers a soapbox and to 
> gauge audience reaction to episodes or story lines.
>This type of timely, unedited feedback highlights what matters most to 
>customers.
>How do you access your customers' experience, insight, suggestions and 
>complaints?
>Would creating an online forum be a way to tap this intelligence?
>____________________________________________________________________________
>
>SharpInsights are occasional, byte-size bits of food for thought from 
>Sharp Market Intelligence.
>Visit http://www.sharpmarket.com for past editions as well as more on 
>business intelligence and
>early warning signals. If this issue of SharpInsights was forwarded to 
>you, start receiving your own
>by sending a SUBSCRIBE message to subscribe at sharpmarket.com
>
>To unsubscribe, simply reply with UNSUBSCRIBE in your subject line.

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/20040608/5edafbe4/attachment.html>

From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jun  8 13:44:16 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 14:44:16 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Japan hits record on centenarians
Message-ID: <40C5C2B0.1000509@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3786045.stm>

Quote:

Japan's ageing population has recorded another first - the number of
centenarians has doubled in the last five years to more than 20,000.
A new government report also found that nearly one in five people is now
over 65, a proportion that is set to rise to one in four by 2050.

The report underlined government worries about an over-burdened pension
scheme as its population ages.

The propensity to long life is not seen as wholly positive, however, as
the country's birth rate is falling at the same time. More retirees are 
set to draw their pensions, while fewer working-age people are paying 
into them. According to some estimates, Japan will be home to roughly 
one person over 65 for every two working-age people by 2025.

----------

This should be the future for all the first-world countries. The same
benefits and problems.

Assuming that we can stop eating too much, getting obese and dying from
heart attacks, diabetes and other obesity related problems.

BillK


From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 15:48:27 2004
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 08:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Poor humans: they are just meat!
Message-ID: <20040608154827.90059.qmail@web41310.mail.yahoo.com>

http://www.terrybisson.com/meat.html
 
>(From OMNI, April 1991. This story, which was a 1991 Nebula nominee, has been appearing around the internet lately without my name attached. Several people were kind enough to alert me, but the truth is I'm more flattered than offended. ) 


---------------------------------
THEY'RE MADE OUT OF MEAT 
by Terry Bisson 






"They're made out of meat." 
"Meat?" 
"Meat. They're made out of meat." 
"Meat?" 
"There's no doubt about it. We picked up several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, and probed them all the way through. They're completely meat." 
"That's impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars?" 
"They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don't come from them. The signals come from machines." 
"So who made the machines? That's who we want to contact." 
"They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made the machines." 
"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to believe in sentient meat." 
"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they're made out of meat." 
"Maybe they're like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage." 
"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn't take long. Do you have any idea what's the life span of meat?" 
"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside." 
"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through." 
"No brain?" 
"Oh, there's a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of meat! That's what I've been trying to tell you." 
"So ... what does the thinking?" 
"You're not understanding, are you? You're refusing to deal with what I'm telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat." 
"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!" 
"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal!  Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?" 
"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat." 
"Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they've been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years." 
"Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?" 
"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual." 
"We're supposed to talk to meat." 
"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello. Anyone out there. Anybody home.' That sort of thing." 
"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?"
"Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat." 
"I thought you just told me they used radio." 
"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat." 
"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?" 
"Officially or unofficially?" 
"Both." 
"Officially, we are required to contact, welcome and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the Universe, without prejudice, fear or favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing." 
"I was hoping you would say that." 
"It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact with meat?" 
"I agree one hundred percent. What's there to say? 'Hello, meat. How's it going?' But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?" 
"Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can't live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact." 
"So we just pretend there's no one home in the Universe." 
"That's it." 
"Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you probed? You're sure they won't remember?" 
"They'll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and smoothed out their meat so that we're just a dream to them." 
"A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat's dream." 
"And we marked the entire sector unoccupied." 
"Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others? Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?" 
"Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence in a class nine star in G445 zone. Was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants to be friendly again." 
"They always come around." 
"And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the Universe would be if one were all alone ..." 

the end



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

Back to TERRY BISSON STORY SHOWCASE Main Page 





La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040608/39baa121/attachment.html>

From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Jun  8 16:54:38 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:54:38 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat]  ANNOUNCE: BRUCE STERLING vs. The Singularity,
	Friday 
In-Reply-To: <172010-2200461722958547@M2W038.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <8787B868-B96C-11D8-98B0-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Monday, June 7, 2004, at 06:09 pm, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote:

> I am fowarding a message I received from Stewart Brand about Bruce 
> Sterling.
>
> Try to attend, and if you do please give my best to Stuart and Bruce!
> ________________________________________
>
> Subject: BRUCE STERLING vs. The Singularity, Friday (for forwarding)

I wish I were there.  This sounds like an extremely relevant topic for 
transhumanists.

> Stewart Brand
> The Long Now Foundation - http://www.longnow.org

I also love this website.  The information about CD-rot is great.  As a 
security professional, people don't believe me when I tell them that 
CDs may only last a few years, much less decades.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Jun  8 17:49:33 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:49:33 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Poor humans: they are just meat!
In-Reply-To: <20040608154827.90059.qmail@web41310.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <331DAB76-B974-11D8-98B0-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Tuesday, June 8, 2004, at 11:48 am, Jose Cordeiro wrote:

> http://www.terrybisson.com/meat.html
>
>> (From OMNI, April 1991. This story, which was a 1991 Nebula nominee, 
>> has been appearing around the internet lately without my name 
>> attached. Several people were kind enough to alert me, but the truth 
>> is I'm more flattered than offended. )
>
> ---------------------------------
> THEY'RE MADE OUT OF MEAT
> by Terry Bisson

I am a vegetarian.  For some reason, many people have sent me this 
story over the years.  It still cracks me up!

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 18:00:35 2004
From: jose_cordeiro at yahoo.com (Jose Cordeiro)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 11:00:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Re: Poor humans: they are just meat!
In-Reply-To: <331DAB76-B974-11D8-98B0-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <20040608180035.35241.qmail@web41311.mail.yahoo.com>

Dear Harvey,
 
     I also try to be fishetarian (fish & vegetables, or fish & chips for the British:-)
 
     Vegetarianily yours,
 
     La vie est belle!
 
     Yos?

NB: What is not funny is how people used plagiarism with that great story over the years.

Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, June 8, 2004, at 11:48 am, Jose Cordeiro wrote:

> http://www.terrybisson.com/meat.html
>
>> (From OMNI, April 1991. This story, which was a 1991 Nebula nominee, 
>> has been appearing around the internet lately without my name 
>> attached. Several people were kind enough to alert me, but the truth 
>> is I'm more flattered than offended. )
>
> ---------------------------------
> THEY'RE MADE OUT OF MEAT
> by Terry Bisson

I am a vegetarian. For some reason, many people have sent me this 
story over the years. It still cracks me up!

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC


La vie est belle!

Yos? (www.cordeiro.org) 

Caracas, Venezuela, Americas, TerraNostra

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040608/f258e841/attachment.html>

From jpnitya at sapo.pt  Tue Jun  8 19:34:01 2004
From: jpnitya at sapo.pt (jpnitya at sapo.pt)
Date: Tue,  8 Jun 2004 20:34:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] AGING: research progress
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405310609560.25536-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405310609560.25536-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <1086723241.6azizx9rzhxc@mail.sapo.pt>

Hi!

Sorry for the late reply but only now did I have a chance to read the paper. It
certainly is an interesting experiment but, like Robert mentions, it doesn't
necessarily translate into life extension. In fact, George Martin has an
editorial in the same issue that I totally agree with. He mentions that despite
being a nice work, the real breakthrough will occur when scientists engineer
mice to have a "better" mitochondrial polymerase and thus, hopefully, live
longer. You can find his editorial:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15164048

All the best,

Joao

Citando "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury at aeiveos.com>:

>
> Well, it looks like the mitochondrial theory of aging
> is getting some support.  Scientists created mice
> with a defective mitochondrial DNA polymerase and it
> significantly shortened their lifespans.
>
> URL:
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/05/040527234844.htm
>
> Abstract from PubMed:
> Point mutations and deletions of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)
> accumulate in a variety of tissues during ageing in humans, monkeys and
> rodents. These mutations are unevenly distributed and can accumulate
> clonally in certain cells, causing a mosaic pattern of respiratory chain
> deficiency in tissues such as heart, skeletal muscle and brain. In terms
> of the ageing process, their possible causative effects have been
> intensely debated because of their low abundance and purely correlative
> connection with ageing. We have now addressed this question experimentally
> by creating homozygous knock-in mice that express a
> proof-reading-deficient version of PolgA, the nucleus-encoded catalytic
> subunit of mtDNA polymerase. Here we show that the knock-in mice develop
> an mtDNA mutator phenotype with a threefold to fivefold increase in the
> levels of point mutations, as well as increased amounts of deleted mtDNA.
> This increase in somatic mtDNA mutations is associated with reduced
> lifespan and premature onset of ageing-related phenotypes such as weight
> loss, reduced subcutaneous fat, alopecia (hair loss), kyphosis (curvature
> of the spine), osteoporosis, anaemia, reduced fertility and heart
> enlargement. Our results thus provide a causative link between mtDNA
> mutations and ageing phenotypes in mammals.
>
> URL for Nature article:
>
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/nature/journal/v429/n6990/abs/nature02517_fs.html
>
> Now it looks like the problem is due to an accumulation of mutations in
> the mitochondrial DNA.  But whether that problem causes decreased
> production of ATP (meaning the cells may have reduced protein production
> capacity) or in more production of free radicals and is thus linked to the
> free radical theory of aging (which IMO is linked in complex ways to the
> somatic mutation theory of aging) doesn't seem to be clear.
>
> However it should be considered that there are probably
> many ways to shorten lifespan -- but that doesn't immediately
> translate to methods that may be used to extend lifespan.
>
> Robert
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>







O SAPO j? est? livre de v?rus com a Panda Software, fique voc? tamb?m!
Clique em: http://antivirus.sapo.pt


From jpnitya at sapo.pt  Tue Jun  8 19:36:07 2004
From: jpnitya at sapo.pt (jpnitya at sapo.pt)
Date: Tue,  8 Jun 2004 20:36:07 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] AGING: Live fast, die old
Message-ID: <1086723367.6uo8cz76qj28@mail.sapo.pt>

Hi,

I'm not sure how many of you have read this already but here it goes anyway:

Mice with sky-high metabolic rates live far longer than their sluggish cousins,
UK researchers have found, raising the prospect that human lifespan might be
lengthened with metabolism-boosting drugs.

Metabolic rate is the pace at which the body burns food to produce energy. John
Speakman of the University of Aberdeen, UK, and his colleagues measured the
metabolism of 42 mice, based on the amount of oxygen they consumed, and then
waited until they died.

The group of animals with the highest metabolic rates lived over a third longer
than the group with the lowest rates, they found, and had metabolisms that ran
about 30% faster. If the same is true in humans, this means that people with a
speedy metabolism might add an extra 27 years onto a typical 70-year lifespan.

The finding challenges a century-old theory that animals with higher metabolic
rates die younger. This is based on observations that big animals with low
metabolic rates, such as elephants, tend to outlive small, high metabolism
ones, such as mice: hence the old adage, "live fast, die young."

While this overall trend may be true when comparing different species, the new
study suggests it may be reversed for animals within one species. "It was a
complete surprise," says Speakman.

More efficient cells

The secret to longevity may lie inside mitochondria, the powerhouses of the cell
that help to set the metabolic rate. Mitochondria use oxygen to 'burn' food
molecules to produce chemical fuel that is used by the cell -- but in the
process they generate harmful free radicals that damage other molecules and are
linked to ageing.

Speakman's team found evidence that mice with a high metabolic rate have more
vigorous 'uncoupling proteins', which cause the mitochondria to generate heat
instead of producing fuel. Since more of their energy escapes as heat, the
mitochondria have to run at full speed in order to keep generating enough
chemical fuel for the cell.

At the same time, the mitochondria may run more efficiently and release fewer
harmful free radicals, hence slowing the ageing process. "That's when they run
the cleanest," explains Wayne Van Voorhies, who studies ageing at New Mexico
State University, Las Cruces.

Speakman now plans to test if a higher metabolic rate can prolong human life,
but he cautions that a quick fix to ageing is unlikely to be just around the
corner. Although drugs such as amphetamines are known to speed up metabolism,
Speakman says that they may not simultaneously increase the activity of
uncoupling proteins, the key to cutting free-radical production and thus
potentially prolonging life.

Indeed, finding drugs that really do boost uncoupling proteins may be difficult,
warns Van Voorhies. "You're really messing with some fundamental
characteristics of [the cell]," he says.


References
Speakman, J.R. et al. Aging Cell, 3, 87, (2004).


From: http://www.nature.com/nsu/040531/040531-2.html

All the best,

Joao






O SAPO j? est? livre de v?rus com a Panda Software, fique voc? tamb?m!
Clique em: http://antivirus.sapo.pt


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Jun  8 20:59:56 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:59:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Senators ask Bush to ease restrictions on stem
	cell research
Message-ID: <327120-22004628205956122@M2W052.mail2web.com>


http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/07/stem.cell.ap/index.html


Natasha

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




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun  8 21:17:30 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:17:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Senators ask Bush to ease
	restrictions on stem cell research
In-Reply-To: <327120-22004628205956122@M2W052.mail2web.com>
References: <327120-22004628205956122@M2W052.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040608161600.01c09ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


>
>http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/07/stem.cell.ap/index.html

<"The president does not believe that life should be created for the sole 
purpose of destroying it. >

So much for all those Texas steers, I guess. Back to oats, chef!

Damien Broderick 



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 23:02:23 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:02:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] AGING: Live fast, die old
In-Reply-To: <1086723367.6uo8cz76qj28@mail.sapo.pt>
Message-ID: <20040608230223.78679.qmail@web60501.mail.yahoo.com>


> The finding challenges a century-old theory that
> animals with higher metabolic
> rates die younger. This is based on observations
> that big animals with low
> metabolic rates, such as elephants, tend to outlive
> small, high metabolism
> ones, such as mice: hence the old adage, "live fast,
> die young."
> 
> While this overall trend may be true when comparing
> different species, the new
> study suggests it may be reversed for animals within
> one species. "It was a
> complete surprise," says Speakman.
> 
   Actually this isn't a surprise to me. It is a
fairly well known fact that between species larger
species with lower metabolisms live longer than
smaller species with higher metabolisms. But within a
species smaller individuals (with consequent higher
metabolisms) are the ones that live longer than their
larger fellows. This is very apparent in species that
have a very wide range of sizes like dogs where
massive saint bernards only live 8 years or so while
the scrawny little chihuahua can live 20 years. This
observation tends to hold for people as well. It may
even explain why women who tend to be smaller than men
also tend to live longer.
   Although what was posted doesn't explicitly mention
it, I will bet that Speakman's mice are smaller than
average.


=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Jun  8 23:10:07 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:10:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] AGING: Live fast, die old
In-Reply-To: <1086723367.6uo8cz76qj28@mail.sapo.pt>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406081605200.19581-100000@hplx.net>

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 jpnitya at sapo.pt wrote:

> The finding challenges a century-old theory that animals with higher
> metabolic rates die younger. This is based on observations that big
> animals with low metabolic rates, such as elephants, tend to outlive
> small, high metabolism ones, such as mice: hence the old adage, "live
> fast, die young."

I wonder if this is related to caloric restriction.  Maybe having a faster
metabolism acts as a sort of natural CR diet...?



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun  8 23:54:39 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:54:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [FYI] Tooting my horn
Message-ID: <20040608235439.57786.qmail@web60508.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey all,

      FYI I just got another manuscript published (#2
for me). This time it is in the prestigious journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences June 8
issue. It is in the field of immunology/ HIV research
and not ageing but it is still pretty cool none the
less because it blows away the dogma. Feel free to
check it out. I believe the PNAS site allows free
public access.

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/101/23/8727?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&searchid=1086738049180_452&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&minscore=5000&journalcode=pnas

P.S. For those of you who don't know, my real name is
Stuart LaForge



=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From megao at sasktel.net  Tue Jun  8 23:16:18 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 18:16:18 -0500
Subject: [Fwd: [extropy-chat] AGING: Live fast, die old]
Message-ID: <40C648C2.9E84908C@sasktel.net>

This might go part way  to explain the parrot paradox in birds.

Clone millions of parrots in chicken hosts.
The solution .. extract, "infect" cultivate and re-implant  human stem
cells  .....
with parrot chick derived mitochondria perhaps?
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] AGING: Live fast, die old
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:02:23 -0700 (PDT)
Size: 4266
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040608/02908981/attachment.mht>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Wed Jun  9 00:38:54 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 20:38:54 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] [FYI] Tooting my horn
In-Reply-To: <20040608235439.57786.qmail@web60508.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040608235439.57786.qmail@web60508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0406082030280.-494281@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


Unfortunately the site requires a subscription to view the article.
The abstract however is free (but not understandable by *me*!)

Congratulations. :)

Regards,
MB


On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, The Avantguardian wrote:

> Hey all,
>
>       FYI I just got another manuscript published (#2
> for me). This time it is in the prestigious journal
> Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences June 8
> issue. It is in the field of immunology/ HIV research
> and not ageing but it is still pretty cool none the
> less because it blows away the dogma. Feel free to
> check it out. I believe the PNAS site allows free
> public access.
>
> http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/101/23/8727?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&searchid=1086738049180_452&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&minscore=5000&journalcode=pnas
>
> P.S. For those of you who don't know, my real name is
> Stuart LaForge
>
>
>
> =====
> 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."
>


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 01:12:02 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 18:12:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Kass vs. Blackburn
Message-ID: <20040609011202.78446.qmail@web60508.mail.yahoo.com>

I was bored at work today so I decided to look up and
compare the CVs of Leon Kass and Elizabeth Blackburn
to see how much and what they publish. They are
available at the following URLs:

http://olincenter.uchicago.edu/kass_cv.html

http://biochemistry.ucsf.edu/%7Eblackburn/pub_list.html

The results? 

Leon Kass- 8 scientific research publications all
before 1970, 88 conservative propaganda, 96 total.

Elizabeth Blackburn- 109 original research
publications, 47 scientific reviews, 156 total w/ zero
propaganda.

IMHO Leon Kass should stop trying to give people the
impression that he is a scientist. The last time he
did science was before the first gene was cloned in
1972.

 



 


=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 04:34:42 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 23:34:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Kass vs. Blackburn
In-Reply-To: <20040609011202.78446.qmail@web60508.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040609011202.78446.qmail@web60508.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040608233256.01cce160@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 06:12 PM 6/8/2004 -0700, Stuart LaForge wrote:

>Leon Kass- 8 scientific research publications all
>before 1970, 88 conservative propaganda, 96 total.
>
>Elizabeth Blackburn- 109 original research
>publications, 47 scientific reviews, 156 total w/ zero
>propaganda.
>
>IMHO Leon Kass should stop trying to give people the
>impression that he is a scientist. The last time he
>did science was before the first gene was cloned in
>1972.

A sensible friend who's currently doing an PhD in bioethics comments:

===========

This is a bit silly, don't you think? Kass claims to be a
qualified medical doctor and a bioethicist, mainly the latter. I don't think
I've ever seen him hang his hat on any original scientific research that he
may have done in his youth. Why would he need to?

Conversely, it looks as if Blackburn has done nothing but substantive
science. What publications does she have in fields such as legal policy,
philosophy and bioethics, which is what the committee is *doing* after all?
As it happens, she may have played a good role on the committee in softening
its hard line, but citing her scientific publications is an odd way to
support that view.

I may not *like* Kass's bioethical writings (I don't), but this attack on
him is really clutching at straws.

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

FWIW.

Damien Broderick 



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jun  9 05:34:24 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 22:34:24 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040608075513.0379aa00@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000701c44de3$72e40e80$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi show
on TV.  I didn't pay much attention to it at the time, since I had never
heard of the program.  Last week I saw about 2 minutes of what I think
was 
the show.  The automation was stunning.  Someone said it is available
on DVD now.  Please, what is the name of that program that was 
discussed here several weeks ago?
 
spike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040608/1eb9af7a/attachment.html>

From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Wed Jun  9 05:37:41 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 22:37:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: WTA Board flap
References: <000001c44cff$efd0da70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV38ekzabtneq0002a698@hotmail.com>

Hey Spike, whassup buddy?

Anyway, if not mistaken, I believe it was Harvey who originally posted this
thread and subject line, apparently to bring attention to his plight.

Could be mistaken tho :)

Zero

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Spike" <spike66 at comcast.net>
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2004 7:25 PM
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] MOTION: WTA Board flap


>
> > Giu1i0 Pri5c0
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MOTION: Harvey off the Board
> >
> >
> > Well Samantha, I am sorry if this is your interpretation of things...
> >
> > On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 00:09:42 -0700, Samantha Atkins
> > <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been on the list.  After WTA folks baiting and shunning all
> > > remotely libertarian voices off into a separate mailing list I got
> > > disgusted and quit participating... - s
>
>
> I am reluctant to wade into this, since I find this matter
> most distasteful and I haven't followed the details.  To post
> to extropians under the subject line "MOTION: Harvey off the Board"
> appears mean-spirited and in poor taste.  I am not claiming that
> I have never posted stuff to extropians that is in poor taste, but
> I do claim it was never with intent to harm or embarrass.
>
> Please, you guys fix the subject line and state your
> cases calmly and carefully.
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 05:46:30 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 00:46:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <000701c44de3$72e40e80$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040608075513.0379aa00@mail.earthlink.net>
	<000701c44de3$72e40e80$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040609004525.01c0fa80@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 10:34 PM 6/8/2004 -0700, Spike wrote:

>A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi show
>on TV.  I didn't pay much attention to it at the time, since I had never
>heard of the program.  Last week I saw about 2 minutes of what I think was
>the show.  The automation was stunning.

TRIPPING THE RIFT?

http://www.scifi.com/tripping/

You just like the sexbot, you dog.

Damien Broderick



From starman2100 at cableone.net  Wed Jun  9 05:49:01 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 22:49:01 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
Message-ID: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040608/43539960/attachment.ksh>

From starman2100 at cableone.net  Wed Jun  9 06:11:34 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 23:11:34 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Tripping the Rift
Message-ID: <1086761494_327834@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040608/c32d826a/attachment.ksh>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jun  9 06:29:14 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 23:29:14 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] MOTION: WTA Board flap
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV38ekzabtneq0002a698@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <000601c44deb$15811190$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Zero Powers
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] MOTION: WTA Board flap
>  
> Hey Spike, whassup buddy?
> 
> Anyway, if not mistaken, I believe it was Harvey who 
> originally posted this thread and subject line, 
> apparently to bring attention to his plight.
> 
> Could be mistaken tho :)
> 
> Zero

Oh, ok, I didn't realize that.  Im wasn't sure why this stuff 
was ever posted over to extropians in the first place.  I hate
to see friends fighting each other, when I know both sides
are good guys.  I would like to see them all write out their
cases, so I can read both sides.  The mysterious midnight 
WTA meeting in Oxford seems to have generated some failures
to communicate.  

Harvey did you want to have your name taken in vain in
the subject line?

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jun  9 06:30:45 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 23:30:45 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040609004525.01c0fa80@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000701c44deb$4bdfd4b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Damien Broderick
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 10:47 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
> 
> 
> At 10:34 PM 6/8/2004 -0700, Spike wrote:
> 
> >A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi show
> >on TV.  I didn't pay much attention to it at the time, since 
> I had never
> >heard of the program.  Last week I saw about 2 minutes of 
> what I think was
> >the show.  The automation was stunning.
> 
> TRIPPING THE RIFT?
> 
http://www.scifi.com/tripping/

You just like the sexbot, you dog.

Damien Broderick




From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jun  9 06:34:53 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 23:34:53 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040609004525.01c0fa80@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000801c44deb$dfdef240$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Damien Broderick
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
> 
> 
> At 10:34 PM 6/8/2004 -0700, Spike wrote:
> 
> >A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi show
> >on TV.  ...Last week I saw about 2 minutes of 
> what I think was the show.  The automation was stunning.
> 
> TRIPPING THE RIFT?
> 
http://www.scifi.com/tripping/

>You just like the sexbot, you dog.

>Damien Broderick


Cool they have a sexbot?  {8^D

Actually no, I don't think that was it.  The part I saw
was only a short segment and it had a soaring eagle.  The
animation was clearly partly computer generated, exceedingly
good quality.  Someone has clearly spent some bucks on this,
it wasn't a cobby kids show.

spike




From eliasen at mindspring.com  Wed Jun  9 06:48:50 2004
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 00:48:50 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <000701c44de3$72e40e80$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000701c44de3$72e40e80$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <40C6B2D2.5010802@mindspring.com>


Spike wrote:
> A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi show
> on TV.  I didn't pay much attention to it at the time, since I had never
> heard of the program.  Last week I saw about 2 minutes of what I think was
> the show.  The automation was stunning.  Someone said it is available
> on DVD now.  Please, what is the name of that program that was
> discussed here several weeks ago?

   Please, what means "automated"?

-- 
  Alan Eliasen                 | "You cannot reason a person out of a
  eliasen at mindspring.com       |  position he did not reason himself
  http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  into in the first place."
                               |     --Jonathan Swift


From bjk at imminst.org  Wed Jun  9 07:35:34 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 02:35:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <40C6BDC6.5050607@imminst.org>


Note, in order to see some of the following messages, you'll need to 
access to the wta-talk archives: 
http://www.transhumanism.org/pipermail/wta-talk/

Username: wta
Password: p0sthum


>>The conference on Transhumanism and Spirituality is another example 
>>where the "leaders" went ahead despite board objections. 
>>    
>>
>
>James Hughes Said:   It wasn't a Board decision - it was a conference committee decision, and Harvey could have moved to disavow the  symposium and decided not to. 
>  
>

The ultimate decision was made outside of the WTA board, thus it was 
impossible for Harvey or I to know when to make any motion not to have 
the conference on Transhumanism and Spirituality.


>>They even abridged the official meeting minutes to add 
>>this non-existent vote, and sent this out to the membership. 
>>    
>>
>
>James Hughes Said:   The Board unanimously approved a version of the minutes, already published, which said I was nominated for the position and I met with general acclaim in Oxford.
>

It's important to know here that the WTA Constitution aks for board 
action be governed by Robert's Rules.

Article VI. Parliamentary Authority
http://www.transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/constitution/
"The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order 
Newly Revised shall govern the organization in all cases to which they 
are applicable and in which they are consistent with the conduct of 
electronic decision-making and this Constitution."

When it was discovered that no actual vote had been made on the position 
for WTA Executive Director (we all overlooked this at the time), Harvey 
Newstrom, Jose Cordeior and I, Bruce Klein, requested that we bring an 
actual vote. Upon feeling that he would not win the vote (a board member 
had resigned and a number of directors had changed their minds in the 
interim), James Hughes decided to close the topic by discourage the 
interim-chair from allowing any more motions.


>BJ went public first, arguing that I should be expelled from the WTA on the grounds that I am "political". 
>  
>

Sorry, no. This credit is deserving to Jose Cordeiro when he posted to 
[wta-talk] "James Hughes is not speaking in the name of WTA" on Mon May 
24 01:46:21 BST 2004 and then: "Unauthorized use of our name on your 
site" again on Mon May 24 06:45:25 BST 2004.

I posted on the same day, but a little later.. the following:

Speaking as a WTA director entrusted by WTA members to uphold WTA
principles, I must respectfully guide this discussion to the words found
in the WTA Declaration:

The WTA Declaration sates, "Transhumanism does not support any
particular party, politician or political platform." The Declaration was
created and voted on by WTA membership.
http://transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/declaration/

The Declaration is supported by the WTA Constitution which states, ?All
members of the WTA attest by joining that they are in agreement with the
Transhumanist Declaration posted on the WTA website".
http://www.transhumanism.org/index.php/WTA/constitution/

The full thread is found here: 
http://www.transhumanism.org/pipermail/wta-talk/2004-May/005257.html


>I would say the overall effect has been disconcerting for observers, but the three of them have been so obviously 
>nutty and self-contradictory that I haven't felt moved to much of a defense. 
>  
>

It feels good to get this out in public... my wife calls me 'nutty' all 
the time.


>Because Harvey was acting disruptive and frankly crazy. 
>  
>

As a former WTA board member (who has resigned, please see 
http://www.imminst.org ), I've had the opportunity to follow these 
events fairly closely. In my opinion, Harvey was never 'crazy' and never 
deliberately trying to be 'disruptive'.

Harvey did however became extra cautious when he saw that each time he 
brought up questions, they were rebuffed. The rebuffments turned 
personal because of differences in personality. And, as I sadly found 
out later, the rebuffments were backed in private discussion by plans to 
either sideline Harvey or expel him. As eventually happened, Harvey was 
apparently sidelined and then eventually a motion was made to expel him.


>As for the ExIst machinations, I really couldn't care less.We haven't been pals since about...1994. 
>

I'm sad to see James say, "I really couldn't care less". There could be 
some good work done between WTA and ExI if there was only a little more 
understanding.

Bruce Klein
Chair, ImmInst.org











From iph1954 at msn.com  Wed Jun  9 11:57:43 2004
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 07:57:43 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Grey Goo in Perspective
Message-ID: <BAY5-F16iR9Odutox7n00011547@hotmail.com>

Below is the text of a press release from CRN announcing an important new 
article. The release can be viewed online at  
http://www.crnano.org/PR-IOP.htm

Let us know if you have any comments.

Mike Treder
Executive Director
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology

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

TITLE: Leading nanotech experts put 'grey goo' in perspective

A paper published today in the journal Nanotechnology warns that fear of 
runaway self-replicating machines diverts attention away from other more 
serious risks of molecular manufacturing. The paper, "Safe Exponential 
Manufacturing", published by the Institute of Physics, was written by Chris 
Phoenix, Director of Research at the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology 
(CRN), and Dr. K. Eric Drexler, a pioneering nanotechnology theorist and 
founder of the Foresight Institute.

Drexler had cautioned against self-replicating machines in his 1986 book 
Engines of Creation. The idea became known as 'grey goo' and inspired a 
generation of science fiction authors. In this article, Phoenix and Drexler 
show that nanotechnology-based fabrication can be completely safe from 
out-of-control replication. However, they warn that for other reasons misuse 
of molecular manufacturing remains a significant danger.

"So-called grey goo could only be the product of a deliberate and difficult 
engineering process, not an accident," said Phoenix. "Far more serious is 
the possibility that a large-scale and convenient manufacturing capacity 
could be used to make incredibly powerful non-replicating weapons in 
unprecedented quantity. This could lead to an unstable arms race and a 
devastating war. Policy investigation into the effects of advanced 
nanotechnology should consider this as a primary concern, and runaway 
replication as a more distant issue."

Contrary to previous understanding, self-replication is unnecessary for 
building an efficient and effective molecular manufacturing system. Instead 
of building lots of tiny, complex, free-floating robots to manufacture 
products, it will be more practical to use simple robot arms inside 
desktop-size factories. A robot arm removed from such a factory would be as 
inert as a light bulb pulled from its socket. The factory as a whole would 
be no more mobile than a desktop printer and would require a supply of 
purified raw materials to build anything.

"An obsession with obsolete science-fiction images of swarms of replicating 
nanobugs has diverted attention from the real issues raised by the coming 
revolution in molecular nanotechnologies," said Drexler. "We need to focus 
on the issues that matter ? how to deal with these powerful new capabilities 
in a competitive world."

Mike Treder, Executive Director of CRN, said, "We hope that this article 
will advance the discussion of the actual implications of molecular 
manufacturing. There is no need for panic, but there are urgent concerns 
that must be addressed before the technology arrives."

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




From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Jun  9 15:13:29 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 08:13:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040609074843.037ec930@mail.earthlink.net>

At 10:49 PM 6/8/04 -0700, starman2100 at cableone.net wrote:

>Harvey repeatedly tried to get us to disavow the Transhumanist FAQ because 
>Natasha was annoyed it didn't in her view
>give enough credit to Max and herself. Then she put up her own 
>"Transhumanist FAQ" which barely even mentions the WTA
>in passing. We repeatedly debated and voted down disavowing our 
>Transhumanist FAQ.

I really do not want to be part of this discussion personally, and 
professional it is misplaced.  However, since I have been brought into it, 
I will respond specifically to mention of myself and not to any other 
claims or statements.

It's a long story and no one can attempt to put it down in a few sentences 
by blaming someone(s) because when you have a FAQ and it is rewritten over 
and over again, things gets confused, rewritten, deleted from and added 
to.  What I objected to many years ago and which took many years to be 
heard was the lack of attention to FM-2030 and his hard work and efforts in 
his visionary view of the "transhuman," not using Max More's definition of 
transhumanism and writing about Max as a college student rather than a PhD, 
etc., using the phrase "libertarian" in describing ExI and 
"extropians,"  not mentioning Transhumanist Art and its statement, and 
generally making transhumanism a movement that started with WTA, rather 
than back in the 1980s, which is the truth and should be recognized because 
it is a fascinating story.

There are several Transhumanist FAQs.  In fact, I purchased the domain 
"Transhumansitfaq" which I designed a while ago, I have yet to put it up 
because I was hoping that all transhumanist organizations could contribute 
to it so that it is a fullly realized website. However, Alex Bokow started 
the Transhumanist FAQ and Anders Sandberg has a Transhumanist FAQ, 
Transhumanist Arts & Culture has a Transhumanist FAQ, etc.  ExI's 
Transhumanist FAQ is another Transhumanist FAQ.  Since ExI's "Journal of 
Transhumanist Thought" was the first use of "transhumanist," it seemed 
plausible that ExI should have a "Transhumanist FAQ."

The Transhumanist FAQ that we did many years ago was on the transhuman 
mailing list and Alex says it is "open" source as long as it is credited 
(he has the information that he wants people to use.)  The authors of this 
FAQ were several to many.  The FAQ stemmed, I believe, from the 
Transhumanist Principles which are still on the web and which Alex "Sasha' 
Chislenko put together from some of us to many of us working on it.

It was never the property of WTA.  When Nick started WTA I think he used 
these items and they were rewritten over the years.  So, I suppose it all 
boils down to Alex, Sasha, Anders and the rest of us.

Frankly, I don't care who has it or uses it.  I just care that it be 
authentic and reliable for the public.  This cannot be realized if there is 
anger and name calling because it tarnishes the very essence of the two 
pieces of work - the FAQ and the Principles.

That's pretty much it, other than we are working to have a 
Trans-Cooperative "Colloquium" with all transhumanist organizations and 
groups to try to resolve the conflicts and develop a better way of working 
together.

I am concerned that James wants to disassociate WTA's affiliation with ExI.

Take care,

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/20040609/f510033e/attachment.html>

From gregburch at gregburch.net  Wed Jun  9 13:10:22 2004
From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 08:10:22 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <40C6BDC6.5050607@imminst.org>
Message-ID: <PMEELDEBLOLPFEFPEIBDMEHDCHAA.gregburch@gregburch.net>

ExI as an organization doesn't have a position, takes no role and never has taken a role regarding the governance of the WTA.  There have been and are no "ExIst machinations" (Mr. Hughes' term) regarding the WTA's governance.  Neither this forum nor the governing structures of ExI have ever been used in any way to develop or coordinate plans or "machinations" with regard to WTA governance.  If the WTA has issues regarding their governance, it should address them but that is not a matter connected in any way with the policies of ExI.

Greg Burch
Vice-President, Extropy Institute
http://www.gregburch.net


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Jun  9 13:27:21 2004
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 09:27:21 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>

starman2100 at cableone.net writes: 

> I would hope that should Harvey decide to respond blow by blow it might shed 
> even greater light on exactly what happened.

I have already posted the actual board notes to this list with the prefix 
WTA-BOARD.  People can read for themselves what happened.  If the archives 
ever get opened to the public as promised, everyone could see it.  However, 
we already have one case (of the approved minutes) where the archive entry 
has been deleted.  I am not sure what the archives will contain when they 
finally come back on line. 

>>selling members e-mail to spammers to make money 
> 
> A lie - never happened. 

Yes apparently we exchange them for other lists, not money.  And the deal I 
quoted never actually went through, it was just approved by the board to get 
through.  But this does not change the fact that the WTA reserves the right 
to give out member names if they want, and members have to "opt out" of this 
program if they don't want their names given out.  Reference the join form 
which has an "opt out" section. 

>> adding people to the membership rolls without 
>> their knowledge or permission, 
> 
> 77 members of the Finnish Transhumanist Association which has voted that their members are also WTA members 

Right, but we argued on the board whether we had to actually ask each 
individual if they wanted to join.  The majority vote was we did not.  We 
were even told by James that it was "apparently legal" to add members 
without their knowledge, so there was no problem.  But this does not change 
the fact that members have been added based on their other membership 
organizations without their individual consent. 

>>> The Oxford board meeting was one example where we were not 
>> allowed to vote on whether to hold the international meeting or not. 
> 
> We voted, Harvey lost. 

We were told that Peter donated the money and that the money would be spent 
to have the meeting and fly people there no matter how the Board voted.  I 
didn't consider this much of a "vote". 

>> The conference on Transhumanism and Spirituality is another example 
>> where the "leaders" went ahead despite board objections. 
> 
> It wasn't a Board decision - it was a conference committee decision, and Harvey could have moved to disavow the 
> symposium and decided not to. 

Several board members objected to this when it was discussed, and objected 
when the public announcement came that they did not know that this event was 
proceeding.  James even apologized after he reviewed the wtaboard archives 
and realized that he had not garnered support and had not informed the board 
that he would proceed anyway.  And again, he argued that it was a committee 
decision and not up to the board to vote. 

>> There also were complaints about inaccuracies and plagiarism in the "WTA FAQ" 
>> which the board was not allowed to address. 
> 
> Harvey repeatedly tried to get us to disavow the Transhumanist FAQ because Natasha was annoyed it didn't in her view 
> give enough credit to Max and herself. Then she put up her own "Transhumanist FAQ" which barely even mentions the WTA 
> in passing. We repeatedly debated and voted down disavowing our Transhumanist FAQ. 

Wrong.  As Liaison between WTA and ExI, I never heard the complaints James 
gives above.  The complaints of plagiarism did not come from ExI.  James 
attributes all sorts of evils to Natasha and ExI, but this had nothing to do 
with it. 

>> They are now pushing for 
>> a new Executive Director position who can run WTA independently of the 
>> board with little or no oversight or control. 
> 
> I report to the Board and am accountable through them to the membership.

Theoretically, yes.  But the Executive Director has even more authority to 
act without the board than James did before.  This move obviously increases 
rather than decreases James' freedom for independent action without the 
Board. 

>> James wants to be 
>> Executive Director just as he has been chairman, treasurer, secretary, 
>> publications director, newsletter editor, and website master. 
> 
> As if I haven't begged for someone to take up some slack? I only took on the Treasurer role because no one else would.

The fact remains that more than half of all WTA officers and committee 
leadership positions are held by just a couple of people who control 
everything.  Under Connecticut corporate law, it is illegal for the Chairman 
and the Treasurer to be the same person.  James just resigned from his 
Chairman role to resolve this illegality.  This was not just an idle 
complaint, but a point of law.  Other conflicts of interest still arise if 
James is on the Board, hires himself, pays himself, and is the Treasurer in 
charge of auditing himself.  I am not saying he is doing anything illegal 
(now that he dropped the chair role), but that it is a conflict of interest 
that may not pass financial audits. 

>> The final straw was when James self-declared himself as Executive 
>> Director and said he wanted to start taking a $60,000 salary. 
> 
> I was appointed by acclaim at the Oxford meeting, as affirmed in the unanimously approved minutes,

For those who don't know "acclaim" means by general discussion.  No actual 
vote count was taken.  It is only allowed under Roberts Rules of Order if 
there is a valid motion and a second, which did not occur in this case.  It 
also is only allowed if there are no objections.  Jose insists that he 
objected.  Other board members who were there said they don't remember any 
such vote.  I have also posted on this list a thread showing James himself 
and others discussing the fact that he wasn't voted in yet and needed to be 
in the future.  The story (and the minutes!) changed after the fact. 

> reappointed by a vote of 5-3 two weeks ago. I draw no salary.

Not yet, because we don't have that kind of money.  James plans to draw a 
salary and has included it in future budget projections.  This is the plan 
voted by the majority of the board.  Arguing that "he draws no salary" does 
not change the fact that he wants to pocket the first $60K raised by WTA 
every year. 

>> They even abridged the official meeting minutes to add 
>> this non-existent vote, and sent this out to the membership. 
> 
> The Board unanimously approved a version of the minutes, already published, which said I was nominated for the 
> position and I met with general acclaim in Oxford. Then I presented an abridged version of the minutes to the Board 
> for the newsletter, which were also unanimously approved, including by Harvey, which simply said I had 
> been "appointed."

True, the original minutes said he had been nominated.  True, the board 
members approved the printing of the minutes in the newsletter.  However, 
none of the board members realized that the minutes had been changed between 
these two votes.  There was no vote to amend the minutes.  James changed 
them without anyone's knowledge. 

>> When we 
>> pointed to the public archives for historical evidence, the board voted 
>> to shut down the public archives. 
> 
> Harvey made a motion to open all our Board list archive to the world, which we voted down. Instead we voted to open 
> the Board list to our voting membership. 

True.  I wanted to open everything to the public.  The majority of the board 
voted that down.  They then voted to have a public list and a private list.  
This passed.  This does not change the fact that some board actions have 
been hidden from the public and that future board actions may be hidden from 
the public. 

>> When we pointed to the wtaboard 
>> private archives for evidence, the original motion and minutes were 
>> deleted. 
> 
> I had attached the minutes in Word, and we later discovered that neither the BBS nor the Mailman archives were 
> preserving attachments. However we immediately reposted the minutes in text. 

Yes, and the text minutes were the altered version, not the version 
contained in the original motion for approval that was sent to all board 
members for vote. 

> BJ went public first, arguing that I should be expelled from the WTA on the grounds that I am "political". 

Wrong, as BJ has already addressed.  However, I don't know why it should be 
a crime to go public with Board activities.  I wish all board activities 
were publicly known.  I am appalled at how many votes seem to deliberately 
hide information or mislead the membership.  This is wrong. 

> And then Harvey started his public meltdown. 

The public demanded to know why I was removed from the WTA board.  They, and 
the members who elected me to the Board, have a right to know.  This is not 
a personal attack on James or anybody else.  This is documentation of what 
our elected WTA officials did while in office.  I do not apologize for 
telling the truth and keeping the members informed.  I wish all board 
members would do so.  Sadly, those who did are now off the board. 

> I would say the overall effect has been disconcerting for observers, but the three of them have been so obviously 
> nutty and self-contradictory that I haven't felt moved to much of a defense. 

There is no defense for the truth.  I have posted the actual board e-mails 
showing the events I claimed.  I have been arguing for the opening of 
wtaboard to the members and the public.  Three of us voted against shutting 
down the public wta archives.  Naturally, those who want to hide this stuff 
from the members don't want to defend their actions in public. 

>> Our motions and seconds were ignored. 
> 
> They were all duly voted on defeated, when they were in order, which wasn't always. 

The motion to actually vote for or against hiring James as ED was one such 
motion that was declared out of order.  All motions concerning the WTA FAQ 
were declared out of order (because WTA supposedly has no FAQ).  The vote to 
elect a chairman instead of letting Giulio be appointed acting Chairman by 
Nick was declared out of order.  The motion to require the actual chair to 
confirm votes out of order instead of letting an acting chair do so was 
declared out of order.  Every motion that the top three WTA officials didn't 
like was simply ignored.  If the archives were accessible, all this would be 
clearly visible. 

>> There were 
>> private discussions by the majority how to boot off the minority 
>> without appearing to kick them out. 
> 
> Because Harvey was acting disruptive and frankly crazy. 

That does not make it legal.  Just because you disagree with my standards 
for openness and legal compliance doesn't mean I'm disruptive and crazy.  
Was it crazy when I discovered that we hadn't renewed the WTA corporate 
filing for years?  (We may have lost out corporate status temporarily.)  Was 
it crazy when I discovered that we hadn't filed the required IRS forms for 
nonprofits?  (We may have to pay penalties for tax filing avoidance.)  Was 
it crazy to demand a written contract and actual vote count to hire an 
Executive Director?  Besides, even if I were crazy, that doesn't excuse you 
from the obligation to follow wta bylaws to remove officers instead of 
resorting to dirty tricks and hidden processes to do so. 

>> Finally, I was told I was removed and had my 
>> access to the wtaboard revoked. Later, they denied this ever happened 
>> and made their motion that I had to resign or be removed. 
> 
> Harvey's yahoo account was bouncing and he interpreted it that we had expelled him. When we told him he wasn't 
> expelled he went silent for two weeks, and all his email started bouncing. Then we finally started to take a vote that 
> if Harvey didn't tell us if he had resigned or not, we would expell him. Which is when he claimed we expelled him 
> again. 

That wasn't what the WTA motion said.  It said I had to give a clear 
resignation by June 30 or be expelled.  It did not give me the option to 
remain on the board either way. 

>> They say the "umbrella" status of the WTA is now dead. 
> 
> We're not an umbrella, and never were. We're a membership organization with affiliates. If ExI disaffiliates it would 
> be a relief IMHO. I think the transhumanist movement is ready to move on. 

This is not what the founding papers and FAQ for WTA claims.  As I 
repeatedly told the board, I don't care what they do, as long as it is 
legally voted by the board and documented to the members.  As long as the 
WTA public statements claim it is an umbrella organization, it is.  It is 
wrong for them to say one thing in public, but secretly do another.  If they 
don't want to be an umbrella organization for all transhumanist groups 
anymore, than they need to officially vote to change this, and stop claiming 
it in their public statements. 

>>I hope the WTA situation can be resolved 
> 
> Already has been with Harvey and BJ's resignation. Jose we can work with - chock his craziness up to the political 
> pressure he's under at home and his Latin temprament.

Yes, this is their answer to the problem.  Remove the complainers.  These 
are elected board members.  If the members want our brand of "craziness", 
they should get it.  It is not up to a self-appointed few to override the 
member elections. 

> As for the ExIst machinations, I really couldn't care less.We haven't been pals since about...1994. 

This is the root of the problem.  The WTA leadership really have no desire 
to work with Extropy Institute.  They see them as competitors to be beaten 
rather than transhumanists to be supported.  These are the exact attitudes 
and actions that they want to keep quiet from the membership. 

 --
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> 




From alex at ramonsky.com  Wed Jun  9 14:09:35 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:09:35 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>
Message-ID: <40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com>




> starman2100 at cableone.net writes:
>
>>   Jose we can work with - chock his craziness up to the political 
>> pressure he's under at home and his Latin temprament. 
>
This is not a bag of worms I particularly want to enter, but that's 
rather a bit racist, IMHO!
AR






From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jun  9 14:28:04 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:28:04 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <40C6B2D2.5010802@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c44e2d$fa21f200$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

>    Please, what means "automated"?
> 
> -- 
>   Alan Eliasen

It's like a cartoon, not Simpsons style but with
computer generated graphics.

spike





From pgptag at gmail.com  Wed Jun  9 15:03:19 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:03:19 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c52040609080354e25677@mail.gmail.com>

Harvey, the WTA motion said: "the WTA Board requests Mr. Harvey
Newstrom to provide a
clear and final statement concerning his intention to resign from the
WTA Board". A clear and final statement concerning your intention to
resign could have been either "Yes, I want to resign" (which you have
issued, all in capitals if I remember well), or "No, I don't want to
resign". Please read the text again.

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 09:27:21 -0400, Harvey Newstrom
<mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:

> That wasn't what the WTA motion said.  It said I had to give a clear
> resignation by June 30 or be expelled.  It did not give me the option to
> remain on the board either way.


From pgptag at gmail.com  Wed Jun  9 15:19:52 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:19:52 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com>
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>
	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>
	<40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c5204060908195f3b17c0@mail.gmail.com>

Well, I am also latin and I don't see this as a racist comment. I
would have been the first to react if I did.
It is true that most of us latins tend to say or do things without
thinking them through first. Perhaps this is why we have lost all
recent wars against you anglos.
Anyway, things and cultures change and I am sure that we latins will
play a more and more important role in the future. By the way, expect
a major "food for thought" note from a group of latin transhumanists
soon.
G.

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:09:35 +0100, Alex Ramonsky <alex at ramonsky.com> wrote:

> > starman2100 at cableone.net writes:
> >
> >>   Jose we can work with - chock his craziness up to the political
> >> pressure he's under at home and his Latin temprament.
> >
> This is not a bag of worms I particularly want to enter, but that's
> rather a bit racist, IMHO!
> AR


From pgptag at gmail.com  Wed Jun  9 15:38:10 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:38:10 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040609074843.037ec930@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040609074843.037ec930@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <470a3c520406090838609fa7a8@mail.gmail.com>

I am with Natasha here, and I am not too worried of having separate
versions of a document called "Transhumanist FAQ". It is normal that a
common source spans out different offsprings (think of Linux
distributions). If different documents have the same name then people
will start referring to the "Transhumanist FAQ on the ExI site",  the
"Transhumanist FAQ on the WTA site", etc. I am sure there are many
documents called e.g. "Linux FAQ".
The Colloquium seems a good idea. Perhaps some problems and
misunderstandings stem from the fact that when we choose to subscribe
to a memeset we tend to try "owning" it and putting a nametag on it.
And as one of the participants in our Spanish transhumanist list said
recently (more on this in a few days), this decreases the viral power
of the memes. The most effective memes are those with no owners and no
name.
G.

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 08:13:29 -0700, Natasha Vita-More
<natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:

> Frankly, I don't care who has it or uses it.  I just care that it be
> authentic and reliable for the public.  This cannot be realized if
> there is anger and name calling because it tarnishes the very essence of
> the two pieces of work - the FAQ and the Principles.
> 
> That's pretty much it, other than we are working to have a
> Trans-Cooperative "Colloquium" with all transhumanist
> organizations and groups to try to resolve the conflicts and develop a
> better way of working together.


From eliasen at mindspring.com  Wed Jun  9 16:32:38 2004
From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:32:38 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <000b01c44e2d$fa21f200$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000b01c44e2d$fa21f200$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <40C73BA6.1070505@mindspring.com>


Spike wrote:
>>   Please, what means "automated"?
>>
>>-- 
>>  Alan Eliasen
> 
> It's like a cartoon, not Simpsons style but with
> computer generated graphics.

    I was wondering, is this a new industry term, combining "animated" with 
some other word?  I hadn't heard this usage of "automated" before.

    For a while, I had my TiVo recording "Tripping the Rift" but it's 
painfully un-funny.  (And I have a very forgiving threshhold.)  It's all 
sophomoric (minus the sophistry) sex humor that's probably only funny to 
13-year-olds.  I think the humor was generated by a one-tape Turing machine. 
  Automated indeed.

-- 

   Alan Eliasen                 | "Whenever you find you are on the side of
   eliasen at mindspring.com       |  the majority, it is time to pause and
   http://futureboy.homeip.net/ |  reflect."  --Mark Twain



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Wed Jun  9 17:49:43 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 10:49:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <000701c44de3$72e40e80$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <20040609174943.40301.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an
> automated sci-fi show
> on TV.  I didn't pay much attention to it at the
> time, since I had never
> heard of the program.  Last week I saw about 2
> minutes of what I think
> was 
> the show.  The automation was stunning.  Someone
> said it is available
> on DVD now.  Please, what is the name of that
> program that was 
> discussed here several weeks ago?

You mean "animated"?  (Even computer generated
animation is still animation.  Although I have heard
about completely computer-generated - animation,
vocals, and script - shows.  The fruits so far have
been lame enough that no one's been showing them off,
though.  There have been efforts with one person
directing the computer through everything, even basing
the vocals off modulations of the author's own voice,
but those are commonly taken to speak more to the
director's talent than to the state of the tools.)


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 21:50:28 2004
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars rovers RIP?
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605143800.01c34008@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040609215028.60920.qmail@web60004.mail.yahoo.com>

Mars rovers prepare for a dramatic last act

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0609/p01s02-usgn.html

The above article begins, "Well past their expiration
dates, ..."

So okay, the designers needed to GUARANTEE that the
Rovers would "last" long enough to complete their 90
day missions.  To me this means making them robust
enough so that the probability of failure prior to 90
days is effectively zero.  Inevitably this makes the
probability of failure on day 91 very low as well. 
And day 92, and 93, etc.  Well, we're past day 180 
and they're still goin' strong.  Which suggests the
obvious question, "Just how long will they last?"

I suggest a "Rover expiration pool", where we all make
our predictions re the date of the rovers' demise.  

Now I don't know by what logic others will make there
predictions, but here is a thought or two from moi.

Batteries and photovoltaics.  Batteries get old and
fade away.  As they go through the charge/discharge
cycle they come to hold less and less charge each
time.  At some point the amount of charge they will
hold will be insufficient to last overnight, at which
point the game will be over.  Contributing to this
will be the decline in the output of the solar panels
providing the daily recharge.

If I knew the particulars of the battery design, and
the pattern of daily power usage, I might be able to
calculate how long before the batteries fail.  I don't
know this.  But I do have a cordless drill at home
which is till going strong after at least five years
of heavy and abusive use.  So...

I will guess five years from this date for the
problem-free rover, and two years for the rover with
the heater-always-on problem.

That's June 9th, 2009, and June 9th, 2006,
respectively.

And to make it interesting I will place ten bucks US
on each guess.

Best, Jeff Davis

   "My guess is that people don't yet realize how
          "handy" an indefinite lifespan will be." 
                            J Corbally 



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From benboc at lineone.net  Wed Jun  9 22:26:34 2004
From: benboc at lineone.net (Ben Cunningham)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:26:34 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Senators ask Bush to ease restrictions on
	stem cell research
References: <200406091328.i59DSIn10397@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <000a01c44e70$e66997c0$94c4e150@ibm300mx>

Re: NEWS: Senators ask Bush to ease restrictions on stem cell research

<"The president does not believe that life should be created for the sole
purpose of destroying it. ">


Yikes!!
So that's what those evil scientists are up to. Creating life for the sole
purpose of destroying it. Who would have known? They must be stopped, at
once!


Does anybody ever 'create life' (which i don't think we can actually do yet,
strictly speaking, but it's just a matter of time) for the *sole purpose* of
destroying it?

I'm sure this would be news to stem cell researchers. AFAIK, they thought
they were trying to save lives!

ben



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Wed Jun  9 22:40:36 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 15:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Kass vs. Blackburn
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040608233256.01cce160@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040609224036.56209.qmail@web60504.mail.yahoo.com>

     Yes but what on earth qualifies him to be a
"bioethicist"? That he has strong convictions? The
impression he tries to give is that he is a "biology
insider" who has sufficient knowledge of biology to
make informed assessments of the risks of doing
certain types of biological research. This image he
tries to maintain of higher knowledge gives him a more
authoritative air and thus his opinions are to be more
valued than that of rank and file of citizenry. Indeed
more, apparently, than even practicing biologists.
     My point here is that he is not a practicing
biologist and he doesn't have the knowledge base to be
weighing the risks and benefits of cutting edge
biotechnologies. Thus his fears are founded on little
more than gut reactions to things he doesn't
understand. The guillable masses believe him not
because he has some superior moral authority such as
the "mandate of heaven" to tell us what is right and
what is wrong but because he has an MD/PhD after his
name. 
after his name.h. It would be like using a himalayan
sherpa to guide       
--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> A sensible friend who's currently doing an PhD in
> bioethics comments:
> 
> ===========
> 
> This is a bit silly, don't you think? Kass claims to
> be a
> qualified medical doctor and a bioethicist, mainly
> the latter. I don't think
> I've ever seen him hang his hat on any original
> scientific research that he
> may have done in his youth. Why would he need to?
> 
> Conversely, it looks as if Blackburn has done
> nothing but substantive
> science. What publications does she have in fields
> such as legal policy,
> philosophy and bioethics, which is what the
> committee is *doing* after all?
> As it happens, she may have played a good role on
> the committee in softening
> its hard line, but citing her scientific
> publications is an odd way to
> support that view.
> 
> I may not *like* Kass's bioethical writings (I
> don't), but this attack on
> him is really clutching at straws.
> 
> =============
> 
> FWIW.
> 
> Damien Broderick 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From starman2100 at cableone.net  Wed Jun  9 23:33:16 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:33:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
Message-ID: <1086823996_46100@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040609/8271cce4/attachment.ksh>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Jun  9 23:47:53 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:47:53 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Bruce Sterling on internet crime
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040609184656.01bd3040@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3365491


June 8, 2004 The Internet: 'A Dirty Mess' By Roy Mark


WASHINGTON -- The digital revolution has degenerated into an underworld
of organized crime, dirty tactics, black ops and terrorism, said
science fiction writer and cyberpunk pioneer Bruce Sterling Tuesday.

Keynoting a morning session of Gartner's 10th Annual IT Security Summit
here, Sterling said, "This is the birth of a genuine, no kidding,
for-profit, electronic, multi-national criminal world. The global
criminal world of oil, narcotics and guns now has broadband." [etc]



From vanmojo at msn.com  Thu Jun 10 00:09:24 2004
From: vanmojo at msn.com (Michael Howell)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:09:24 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
Message-ID: <BAY3-DAV73vqzAoa2JB000025e0@hotmail.com>


     I've got a question, I've seen numerous scenarios about amazing possibilities the future holds for expanding human potential: Intelligence Amplification, Uploading, Immortality, etc... But how are we actually going to DO this. It seems to me that there are two main obstacles:

          1) Financial: The above technologies are going to be expensive. Unless you volunteer to be a lab rat, you're going to have to consider how to acquire the money.

          2) Social: If you haven't noticed, society is pretty hostile to transhumanism. We're going to have a problem if the Luddite/Theocratic trend get's worse.

         Any ideas?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040609/757b6abb/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jun 10 00:38:02 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:38:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Arab states want ban on therapeutic cloning
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040609193539.01c4b418@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

http://www.scidev.net/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=readnews&itemid=1421&language=1

<...There is also opposition within parts of the medical community. Ali 
Khalifa, for example, professor of medicine at Cairo's Ain Shams 
University, says that fully-fledged use of cloning technology is prohibited 
because of dangers it poses "to the human personality, human dignity and 
honor, and human family and society".

According to Khalifa, there is no justification for cloning human embryos 
and then killing them to extract stem cells for therapeutic purposes, as 
some scientists are already doing. "[This is] murder in the name of 
scientific advancement," he says.>



From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Thu Jun 10 00:57:30 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:27:30 +0930
Subject: Machinima (was RE: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program)
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F8D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

For those of you who haven't heard of it, check out Machinima. This is
where (correct me if I'm wrong here), people are using commercial 3D
games to make movies and soap operas. 

For instance, for a high quality Machinima, check out www.RedVsBlue.com,
which is a soap opera set in the Xbox's Halo. These guys write a script,
send in actors each playing an in game character, and play out the
scenes while recording the action (I guess using a "record snapshot"
feature; I've never played Halo). Then I assume there's some playing
with POV for the director afterwards, a bit of video editing, and voila!
Instant 3D animated show. Download some of the episodes in the archive
and have a look; it's pretty funny stuff.

People are also doing this in Quake, (using Q3Radiant for example).
There's some info here:
http://www.machinima.com/tritin-films/machinima.htm .

Emlyn


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spike [mailto:spike66 at comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, 9 June 2004 4:05 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
> 
> 
> > Damien Broderick
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
> >
> >
> > At 10:34 PM 6/8/2004 -0700, Spike wrote:
> >
> > >A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi
show
> > >on TV.  ...Last week I saw about 2 minutes of
> > what I think was the show.  The automation was stunning.
> >
> > TRIPPING THE RIFT?
> >
> http://www.scifi.com/tripping/
> 
> >You just like the sexbot, you dog.
> 
> >Damien Broderick
> 
> 
> Cool they have a sexbot?  {8^D
> 
> Actually no, I don't think that was it.  The part I saw
> was only a short segment and it had a soaring eagle.  The
> animation was clearly partly computer generated, exceedingly
> good quality.  Someone has clearly spent some bucks on this,
> it wasn't a cobby kids show.
> 
> spike
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From vanmojo at msn.com  Thu Jun 10 00:58:36 2004
From: vanmojo at msn.com (Michael Howell)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:58:36 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Arab states want ban on therapeutic cloning
Message-ID: <BAY3-DAV125YjqyxBao000174f3@hotmail.com>



----- Original Message -----
From: Damien Broderick
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 7:53 PM
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: [extropy-chat] Arab states want ban on therapeutic cloning

http://www.scidev.net/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=readnews&itemid=1421&language=1

<...There is also opposition within parts of the medical community. Ali  
Khalifa, for example, professor of medicine at Cairo's Ain Shams  
University, says that fully-fledged use of cloning technology is prohibited  
because of dangers it poses "to the human personality, human dignity and  
honor, and human family and society".

According to Khalifa, there is no justification for cloning human embryos  
and then killing them to extract stem cells for therapeutic purposes, as  
some scientists are already doing. "[This is] murder in the name of  
scientific advancement," he says.>
     Really, what does he call letting thousands of people suffer and die without that technology. Apparently embryos are people to.


_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040609/ab7b4f78/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jun 10 02:24:03 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:24:03 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
In-Reply-To: <1086823996_46100@mail.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <002401c44e91$ffef16e0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Adrian Tymes wrote:
> You mean "animated"? (Even computer generated 
> animation is still animation. Although I have heard 
> about completely computer-generated - animation...

Well, sorta.  I meant automated or machine generated
animation.  There was a discussion here a few
weeks ago, and I know its in the archives but I don't
know what the subject line was.  I might need to search
thru or take a ride down to Fry's electronics.  Thats
where I saw a DVD collection of the first season of
that program for sale, and the graphics looked just
like that short piece I saw.    spike 



From mike99 at lascruces.com  Thu Jun 10 02:24:17 2004
From: mike99 at lascruces.com (mike99)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 20:24:17 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Comments on the late unpleasantness on the WTA Board
	from a Board Member
Message-ID: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKOEGNDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>

Comments on the late unpleasantness on the WTA Board from a Board Member

My name is Michael LaTorra. I was elected to the WTA Board of Directors a
couple of years ago and then re-elected. I participated in the ongoing email
discussions held on the WTA Board listserv and I attended the April 2004
Board meeting in Oxford.

Up to now I have not discussed publicly what went on in the online and
face-to-face meetings. But I think it?s time that I do.


Q: What went wrong on the Board of the World Transhumanist Association?
A: Plenty.

Q: Who is responsible?
A: Everyone. Myself included.

Q: Can you describe the problems?
A: Let me start by telling you a paradoxical truth: Diversity is a strength
and diversity is a weakness. Politically, the Board consists of
libertarians, centrists, and democratic socialists. On the Board there are
many people of high intelligence, large talents and large egos. I felt
privileged to work with such a group. But it became obvious fairly quickly
that many Board members were used to getting their way and would fight
mightily to continue getting their way. The art of compromise was in
frighteningly small supply.

Q: That?s awfully general. What about the specific charges that former Board
member Harvey Newstrom has made?
A: I have a lot of respect for Harvey. His expertise as a certified auditor
and security specialist is very valuable. He pointed out that our little
Board of part-time volunteer members was not consistently following Robert?s
Rules of Order. And he was right. But when most of our meetings took place
via email, and without all of us having Harvey?s degree of knowledge in how
to operate corporately, many errors were made. Some of those apparent errors
may have been intentional and devious ploys. Or they could have been honest
human mistakes. It?s not always easy to tell one from the other.
Unfortunately, Harvey did not attend our face-to-face meeting in Oxford
where many discussions were held and significant decisions were taken. If he
had been there, perhaps some of the late unpleasantness could have been
avoided. My memory of what went on at Oxford is, of course, just one man?s
fallible memory. But I would stack it up against the other fallible memories
of those present. In a situation reminiscent of the Kurosawa film
 ?Roshomon,? people who experienced the same events now remember them
differently.

Q: You still haven?t answered those specific charges!
A: OK, let?s consider some of those charges. I can?t promise to remember or
respond to all of them. You can get back to me on those later if you really
want to know what I think.
1) Changes to the Board notes between the first version issued after the
Oxford meeting and the notes include in the WTA News email newsletter.
MY RESPONSE: This is a good place to begin, Kurosawa fans. As I recall the
Oxford meeting (which Harvey did not attend), we agreed that the WTA should
establish the position of Executive Director because our fundraiser, Peter
Houghton, strongly recommended that we do so. He also recommended James for
the job. James, as Secretary, was busily typing away on his laptop at the
time, taking minutes. He stopped typing to discuss this proposal with us.
James agreed that he could work part-time as our unpaid Executive Director,
but would not leave his full-time job until WTA could afford to pay him a
salary comparable to what he is currently earning. James? wife and two
children deserved at least that much support.
   Here?s where it gets really interesting. James is talking, not typing.
When he goes back to typing, he fails to record our decision. This is human
error. Unfortunate, indeed, but completely understandable. But now we get
into the area where Harvey has so justly criticized us. The Board did not
entertain a formal motion, followed by a second and a vote on this matter.
We were operating on the basis of discussion, debate, and then an assessment
of the general will of the Board. In other words, consensus. That was not
the proper way to operate. It left us open to all kinds of charges and
countercharges. It also left us in the land of ?Roshomon? with some Board
members saying that the Board never agreed to making James the unpaid
Executive Director while other members (including myself) remember things
differently.

2) Executive Director salary of $60,000.
MY RESPONSE: This is our goal for the future. The WTA Board never committed
itself to paying out money that we do not have. We drafted a plan to raise
money over the coming years. As part of that plan, we hope to be able to pay
that salary someday, perhaps 3 to 5 years from now. In the meantime, no one
gets paid for serving on the WTA Board. The only money we have given to
James is to reimburse his expenses for attending the Foresight Conference.
James stated his intention to go as a representative of the WTA whether we
paid his airfare and attendance fee or not. We voted to pay those expenses.
We also agreed to Jose Cordeiro?s proposal that the WTA hire his fellow
Venezuelan, Mr. Ochoa, to work part-time as the assistant to our unpaid
Executive Director.

2) Selling our membership list to other organizations.
MY RESPONSE: The Wilson Quarterly published an article about the TV03
conference. Then they asked to buy our membership list so they could try to
sell magazine subscriptions to our members. The Board quickly reached a
consensus that we would not sell our membership list. However, we decided
that we might take paid advertising. If you get an ad, it will come through
us and no other organization will have your address. We will guard your
personal information to ensure your privacy. If you don?t want to get ads
from us, you can opt-out. But we won?t let anyone else spam you based on
information you confided to us.

3) The Board did not vote on significant issues.
MY RESPONSE: Harvey is right about this. But we have endeavored to stop
operating in this loose manner. The Board now holds regular votes on matters
of significance. Although Harvey has left the Board, he has done us a
valuable service in getting us to change our act.

4) The Transhumanism and Spirituality Conference.
MY RESPONSE: We decided to do this as a matter of consensus without a formal
vote. Another past error that we will not commit again. I was and still am
in favor of this conference and I will tell you why. Religion won?t go away.
It is a human tendency that we are coming to understand better and better in
terms of cognitive science and brain structure functions. I am a
materialist, rationalist Buddhist. I will be presenting at this conference
on the topic of transhumanism, religion and spirituality, and I will use the
work of Pascal Boyer (?Religion Explained?), Michael Persinger (?The
Neuropsychology of God Beliefs?) and other scientists to explain how and why
religions and spiritual experience arise from our material brains. The WTA
is not endorsing some kooky, immaterial New Age garbage. We are endeavoring
to engage with intelligent people who come from a religious orientation and
to find areas of common interest in which we can cooperate. We do the same
with atheists. Some members of the Board do not want any entanglement with
religious people whatsoever. Those members were in the minority.

5) James Hughes holds too many positions within WTA: Secretary, Treasurer,
Executive Director and member of the Board.
MY RESPONSE: I blame myself for this as much as I blame anyone else. When
our previous Treasurer stepped down, no one else stepped forward. Finally,
James offered to take on this position. When Peter Houghton recommended that
James become Executive Director, no one else at the meeting put themselves
forward for that position. I could have done so. Or anyone else on the
Board. But the fact is that James has been willing to do the work that other
people have not. Which is worse, allowing one person to do too much or
allowing others not to do enough?

6) James has made enemies.
MY RESPONSE: This is certainly true. No one who is as prominent and
controversial as James could avoid doing that. But perhaps James has
irritated some people unnecessarily. Maybe James has done some things he
should not have done. Maybe, as Jose has asserted, James has not been a good
Buddhist. Maybe James is not God. (No, I must modify that last statement:
Not only is James definitely NOT God, but he does even BELIEVE in God.)

7) The WTA Board has hidden some of its activities
MY RESPONSE: Definitely. And with good reason, at least some of the time. A
motion was made and seconded and voted on that the Board should make all of
its deliberations public. I voted against this. I feel that honest and frank
debate would be hindered if every email we ever exchanged were to be made
public. I certainly felt this way when private emails I sent OFFLIST were
made public without my permission.
   Another vote was taken to make all Board motions and votes public. I
voted against this, too, even though I half agreed with it. I agreed that
all of our votes should be made public. But I saw no reason to publicize a
motion that failed to get the necessary second in order to be voted on.
Believe me, if you saw some of the motions that had been made (including
some that I myself have made), you would agree that these were not worthy of
the second that they deservedly failed to garner.

Q: What about the other issues?
A: Let me know what you want to hear about and I will respond to the best of
my ability.

Q: If the WTA Board is so dysfunctional, why do you continue to serve on it?
A: Have you ever changed a baby?s diaper? I?ve done it for each of my 3
children and believe me, I would have been happy to have someone else do it
for me. No one likes dealing with this shit. But somebody?s got to do it.
And the shit I?m talking about here is the primate politics that we
 ?wannabe? posthumans must deal with while we are still little baby
transhumanists. We are young and immature and we have made many mistakes.
But we all want the same things: High-tech life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness beyond human limits (which is my personal definition of what
transhumanism is all about). I am neither a saint nor a genius. In fact, I
think that many of you reading this are probably smarter, more knowledgeable
and more capable than I am. I would urge you to step up and run for the open
Board seats. We need you. Transhumanism needs you. But if you good folks do
not step forward, then I?ll just keep on changing these diapers for you to
the best of my ability. I don?t really want to do this. But I do want, both
for myself and for all of you, the opportunity to have physical immortality,
enhanced intelligence, beyond-human powers and capabilities, and more. MUCH
more!
   I will work with almost anyone to achieve these goals. I think every
member of the WTA Board has contributed something. I think Harvey
contributed quite a lot. So did Bruce. I look forward to working with them
again in the future. And I look forward to working with Nick, Giulio, Jose,
James and Mike Treder for as long as the voting membership of the WTA wants
me to serve on the Board. But if someone better comes along, please vote for
them over me! I will be a transhumanist whether I am on the Board or not.
Achieving our common goals is all that matters to me. I don?t much care who
achieves the final victory, just so long as we all get to enjoy the fruits
of that victory.


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

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




From reason at longevitymeme.org  Thu Jun 10 02:48:39 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:48:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV73vqzAoa2JB000025e0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNIELCEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


--> Michael Howell
>I've got a question, I've seen numerous scenarios about amazing
>possibilities the future holds for expanding human potential:
>Intelligence Amplification, Uploading, Immortality, etc... But
>how are we actually going to DO this. It seems to me that there
>are two main obstacles:
>
>1) Financial: The above technologies are going to be expensive.
>Unless you volunteer to be a lab rat, you're going to have to
>consider how to acquire the money.

I've written briefly on this topic:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000057.php

As medicine improves - and improves faster thanks to the efforts of
researchers, educators, businesspeople, advocates and other pro-research
folks - we will have access to ever more options for living longer, healthy
lives. Those options are unlikely to be free, however, especially in the
early years of availability. The cost of any given medical treatment drops
as marketplace competition sets in and the technology is improved, but most
medical expenses require planning.

That said, what sort of medical expenses should you plan on for a future
that involves real anti-aging medicine? If I knew the answer, I'd go into
business as a fortune teller (and make a killing on the stock market). I
think, however, that there are some useful guesstimates that we can make
based upon possible events down the road, the plausible future of
regenerative medicine, and the way in which medical pricing has behaved in
the past.

...

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Thu Jun 10 03:35:52 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:35:52 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040609074843.037ec930@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <46162346-BA8F-11D8-A7EC-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 11:13 am, Natasha Vita-More wrote:

> At 10:49 PM 6/8/04 -0700, starman2100 at cableone.net wrote:
>
> Harvey repeatedly tried to get us to disavow the Transhumanist FAQ 
> because Natasha was annoyed it didn't in her view
> give enough credit to Max and herself. Then she put up her own 
> "Transhumanist FAQ" which barely even mentions the WTA
> in passing. We repeatedly debated and voted down disavowing our 
> Transhumanist FAQ.

I never did this.  The only objections from ExI concerning the FAQ were 
the unflattering things that it said about the purpose of ExI, which 
ExI has long disputed.  I felt, as Liaison for WTA to other 
transhumanist groups, that WTA should stop publishing descriptions of 
our affiliates that those affiliates dispute.  The other complains may 
have been made in the past, but I was not involved or aware of them.

The main dispute of the FAQ names was that WTA objected to the Extropy 
Institute publishing their own transhumanist FAQ, claiming that it 
intruded upon the memespace for WTA.  This was the real heated battle 
that I remember.  The concept that their could only be one 
transhumanist FAQ was promoted by WTA against other groups.

The final official decision by the WTA Board was that the WTA never has 
had a FAQ and has never endorsed any FAQ!  The Transhumannist FAQ 
currently promoted by Nick was originally copied mostly from public 
domain submissions from ExI members to the Extropians list and >H 
Transhumanist list before WTA was formed, and thus WTA had no specific 
interests in or claims to this FAQ.  Nick grabbed these public postings 
and edited them together, but never claimed to have written the FAQ 
bearing his name.  (They would not agree to take the WTA logo off of 
it, or remove the "Published by the World Transhumanist Association" 
from its cover, however!)

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From artillo at comcast.net  Thu Jun 10 03:43:02 2004
From: artillo at comcast.net (Brian Shores)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:43:02 -0400
Subject: Machinima (was RE: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program)
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F8D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <000a01c44e9d$08ad3ea0$49635544@bjsmain2>

I haven't heard it called "Machinima" before, but I have seen some and
known of many people doing such things since I've been involved in 3D
online worlds back in 1999.

If any of you have ever seen the show "Portal" on G4TV (which is now
called G4TechTV), they used to do corny little bits and skits all
through the show, using various 3D online multiplayer games and
environments. Pretty funny stuff in some cases :D  

And then of course there's the great movie "Sim0ne" about the rise to
stardom of a completely virtual actor ("vactor" I think they called
them)... One of the only Al Pacino movies I actually like!

Anybody ever see the computer-generated show called "Reboot"? 

Ohh about Tripping the Rift: the original 6 minute long pilot was MUCH
more adult oriented, but I guess they had to dull it down for cable TV
LOL -- and Six was originally called Six-of-Nine and looked much more
anderoid-like...

Have fun y'all,

Artillo

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn
ORegan
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 8:58 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Machinima (was RE: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program)


For those of you who haven't heard of it, check out Machinima. This is
where (correct me if I'm wrong here), people are using commercial 3D
games to make movies and soap operas. 

For instance, for a high quality Machinima, check out www.RedVsBlue.com,
which is a soap opera set in the Xbox's Halo. These guys write a script,
send in actors each playing an in game character, and play out the
scenes while recording the action (I guess using a "record snapshot"
feature; I've never played Halo). Then I assume there's some playing
with POV for the director afterwards, a bit of video editing, and voila!
Instant 3D animated show. Download some of the episodes in the archive
and have a look; it's pretty funny stuff.

People are also doing this in Quake, (using Q3Radiant for example).
There's some info here:
http://www.machinima.com/tritin-films/machinima.htm .

Emlyn


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Spike [mailto:spike66 at comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, 9 June 2004 4:05 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
> 
> 
> > Damien Broderick
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program
> >
> >
> > At 10:34 PM 6/8/2004 -0700, Spike wrote:
> >
> > >A few weeks ago there was a discussion about an automated sci-fi
show
> > >on TV.  ...Last week I saw about 2 minutes of
> > what I think was the show.  The automation was stunning.
> >
> > TRIPPING THE RIFT?
> >
> http://www.scifi.com/tripping/
> 
> >You just like the sexbot, you dog.
> 
> >Damien Broderick
> 
> 
> Cool they have a sexbot?  {8^D
> 
> Actually no, I don't think that was it.  The part I saw
> was only a short segment and it had a soaring eagle.  The animation 
> was clearly partly computer generated, exceedingly good quality.  
> Someone has clearly spent some bucks on this, it wasn't a cobby kids 
> show.
> 
> spike
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


************************************************************************
***
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document. No
warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or other
defect.

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



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jun 10 04:34:07 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 21:34:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] drug training in elementary schools
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F8D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <002701c44ea4$2b2080d0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


Today's SF Chron claims $cientology is penetrating the
public elementary schools with their narcanon program: 


http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Stop-Narconon/SFUSD/


The Chron claims that the narcanon program contains
many factual errors, such as the notion that body fat
absorbs the toxins in drugs and must be sweated out.

I can see how this would be a very harmful meme to
give to elementary school students.  The young dopers 
will be sitting still in cool dark rooms, porking out 
on twinkies, in the mistaken belief that they can 
stay high indefinitely by packing on the flab and
not sweating.

spike








From alex at ramonsky.com  Thu Jun 10 12:28:47 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:28:47 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>	<40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com>
	<470a3c5204060908195f3b17c0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <40C853FF.4080801@ramonsky.com>



Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

>Well, I am also latin and I don't see this as a racist comment. I
>would have been the first to react if I did.
>
Interesting. I once got slapped for telling someone she may have a 
'classical Italian temper'. I thought it was because I was being 
racist...maybe it was because she really had  :  )

>It is true that most of us latins tend to say or do things without
>thinking them through first.
>
I thought everybody did that, as a side effect of being young and human? 
 :  )

> By the way, expect
>a major "food for thought" note from a group of latin transhumanists
>soon.
>
Ok
AR






From charlie at antipope.org  Thu Jun 10 12:35:48 2004
From: charlie at antipope.org (Charlie Stross)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:35:48 +0100
Subject: Machinima (was RE: [extropy-chat] automated sci-fi program)
In-Reply-To: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F8D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
References: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3F8D@mmdsvr01.mm.local>
Message-ID: <B3B89BEA-BADA-11D8-A230-000D9328A216@antipope.org>


On 10 Jun 2004, at 01:57, Emlyn ORegan wrote:

> For those of you who haven't heard of it, check out Machinima. This is
> where (correct me if I'm wrong here), people are using commercial 3D
> games to make movies and soap operas.
>
> For instance, for a high quality Machinima, check out 
> www.RedVsBlue.com,
> which is a soap opera set in the Xbox's Halo. These guys write a 
> script,
> send in actors each playing an in game character, and play out the
> scenes while recording the action (I guess using a "record snapshot"
> feature; I've never played Halo). Then I assume there's some playing
> with POV for the director afterwards, a bit of video editing, and 
> voila!
> Instant 3D animated show. Download some of the episodes in the archive
> and have a look; it's pretty funny stuff.
>
> People are also doing this in Quake, (using Q3Radiant for example).

They're also using much more sophisticated engines from as-yet 
unreleased games. The thing about Machinima, as my friend the machinima 
start-up director likes to explain, is that it gets animation 
production away from the traditional cell-by-cell model (draw a cell, 
draw the next one, rinse, cycle, repeat) to a model more like 
conventional movie-making, with actors and sets and cameras. But there 
are some subtle differences. You can save an event stream for an actor 
in a machinima production then re-run it, attaching a motion controller 
to some other part of the actor's body to iteratively build up a much 
more realistic model than you'd normally expect of a game system 
controlled by joystick. You can make your cameras invisible and fly 
them through the action in ways that would make the Warshawski brothers 
green with envy. You can mess around with time in much more subtle 
manners than simple bullet-time photography allows, speeding it up as 
well as slowing it down and having different visual domains run at 
different speeds. And, most importantly, you can cut the cost of 
production: the best estimates I've heard are that on a budget of 1-2 
million dollars and a crew of a dozen programmers you can produce a 
feature-length machinima movie with about the same quality of rendering 
as Shrek #1.

I'm involved in a machinima production at present. It's a bit of an 
eye-opener ...


-- Charlie



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jun 10 14:24:55 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:24:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
In-Reply-To: <40C853FF.4080801@ramonsky.com>
Message-ID: <003a01c44ef6$b3e49580$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


 
> >It is true that most of us latins tend to say or do things without
> >thinking them through first.
> >
> I thought everybody did that, as a side effect of being young 
> and human?   :  )

I don't do that.  I think long and carefully first,
*then* say something silly.  {8^D

spike






From scerir at libero.it  Thu Jun 10 16:07:33 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:07:33 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>	<40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com><470a3c5204060908195f3b17c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<40C853FF.4080801@ramonsky.com>
Message-ID: <0b6d01c44f05$22821e00$47c01b97@administxl09yj>

[Giu1i0] 
It is true that most of us latins 
tend to say or do things without
thinking them through first.

[Alex]
I thought everybody did that, 
as a side effect of being 
young and human? :  )


The impression is that (us) latins 
tend to say or do things (silly or
reasonable, it does not matter)
without believing in these things.
Or is this a wrong impression?
I'm inclined to think that "anglos"
do believe in what they say, or 
in what they are doing (silly or
reasonable, it does not matter).
s.

"Is that the truth?
No, but it's a lot simpler."
- Walt Kelly (in "Pogo")




From starman2100 at cableone.net  Thu Jun 10 17:49:03 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 10:49:03 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
Message-ID: <1086889743_18308@mail.cableone.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040610/95d812b1/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 18:22:47 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 11:22:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406051739470.3914@hercules>
Message-ID: <20040610182247.53507.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >about the robots amok, I don't see that either. While it wasn't at
> the
> >forefront in his novels, his robots did, in fact, send ships all
> over
> >the galaxy committing genocide via terraforming against any number
> of
> >intelligent alien races, which is why in the Foundation series only
> >humans inhabit the galaxy. Daneel was no saint, nor were his
> comrades.
> >Their zeroeth rule only resulted in the rationalization of the
> deaths
> >of trillions of intelligent alien beings, who were judged not
> 'human'
> >only because they didn't have the look of homo sapiens.
> 
> There isn't any like that in any book written by Asimov! Only in the
> End
> of the Eternity, it is suggested that a special timeline was selected
> for
> the humans where they would evolve faster than the aliens, and thus
> colonize worlds before them. There's one world that the robots helped
> destroy (the Earth...), but everything was set up by humans.

On the contrary, in Robots of Dawn, the issue of the murder being
investigated was tied into the debate among the spacers on Aurora
whether to explore space as humans, or simply send out robots to go
find worlds and terraform them for human occupation. Suggest you read
it again.

While it didn't deal with the possible genocide of alien species
explicitly, the terraforming proposal was there and the results are
logically derived.

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 18:25:13 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 11:25:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040605125623.01c19ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040610182513.51287.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> UK sf writer Adam Roberts mentioned in an interview his puzzlement
> that 
> Titan (diameter 5150 km, 0.4 of Earth) has an atmospheric pressure at
> the 
> surface 60% *greater* than Earth's, while Mars (6794 km, 0.53 Earth)
> has 
> negligible atmosphere.
> 
> Hmm. How so? Is solar wind the culprit, far less intense at 9.5 AU
> than at 
> 1.5? You'd expect Saturn to rip the air away, but maybe it outgasses
> itself 
> and helps keep Titan pumped up?

The atmosphere is methane, the oceans are methane, and the surface of
titan is methane. THe atmosphere is a thermal result of tectonic stress
caused by Saturnian tidal influence.

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 18:50:20 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 11:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] M3 UP UP UP - Something REALLY BAD is going on
	folks
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0406070950020.10472-100000@dot-god.com>
Message-ID: <20040610185020.93910.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>

THis is a bogus argument. The M3 is not a measure of the supply of real
Federal Reserve Notes, that is the M1. M3 is M1+M2+other stuff and is
mostly (93%+) NOT FRNs. It is primarily commercial paper: mortgages,
car loans, college loans, municipal and state bonds, etc which back
electronic 'dollars' on the electronic financial system and which, in
and of themselves, are NOT backed by either US Treasury bills, notes,
or US federal gold reserves.

The M1 stands at about $682 billion. The M3 is about $8.6 trillion. M3
is primarily a measure of how much credit the individuals and
businesses in our country (and out of it) have sought to borrow money
from US institutions. Statutes allow the banking system to loan out
something like 20 times the M1 supply.

THis statutory limitation, however, is rooted in 'old economy' thinking
and is the root of our economic troubles the last few years. The M3 is
generally maxed out right now because we are just exiting a recession.
Economic growth needed to expand the tax base (which will allow an
expansion in the M1) and give the profits and income increases needed
to pay off debt, is just starting to occur.

Individuals trying to cry wolf with the money supply for their own
financial reasons always point at the M3 supply and blame the
government, when most of that supply is the result of consumer 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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From twodeel at jornada.org  Thu Jun 10 19:12:05 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:12:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <20040610182247.53507.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406101203100.19581-100000@hplx.net>

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> While it didn't deal with the possible genocide of alien species
> explicitly, the terraforming proposal was there and the results are
> logically derived.

Wouldn't Asimov consider terraforming to mean making lifeless worlds
habitable, not killing off alien life so humans could occupy their
planets?



From alex at ramonsky.com  Thu Jun 10 19:41:04 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:41:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>	<40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com><470a3c5204060908195f3b17c0@mail.gmail.com>	<40C853FF.4080801@ramonsky.com>
	<0b6d01c44f05$22821e00$47c01b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <40C8B950.5020908@ramonsky.com>



scerir wrote:

>
>The impression is that (us) latins 
>tend to say or do things (silly or
>reasonable, it does not matter)
>without believing in these things.
>Or is this a wrong impression?
>I'm inclined to think that "anglos"
>do believe in what they say, or 
>in what they are doing (silly or
>reasonable, it does not matter).
>s.
>
I certainly get this impression of most UK and US folks; europeans in 
general have different attitudes to things, sometimes they are much more 
laid back than us frantic types. :  )
AR





From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 19:34:10 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406101203100.19581-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20040610193410.38025.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > While it didn't deal with the possible genocide of alien species
> > explicitly, the terraforming proposal was there and the results are
> > logically derived.
> 
> Wouldn't Asimov consider terraforming to mean making lifeless worlds
> habitable, not killing off alien life so humans could occupy their
> planets?

No, terraforming means making planets have earth-like ecospheres. If,
for example, an ecosphere were based on amino acids of opposite
chirality to ours, all life would need to be wiped out in order to make
it habitable by us. If the ecosphere were methane rather than water
based, changing that is a MUCH bigger chore than just wiping out life
of opposite chirality. Robots, after travelling many light years at
sublight speed, would pick whatever planet could be formed for the
least work.

Keep in mind that the spacers generally considered themselves
distinctly different from humans on Earth. They were thus of sufficient
racial bias to easily entertain genocide of alien species.

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From twodeel at jornada.org  Thu Jun 10 20:00:50 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <20040610193410.38025.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406101257160.19581-100000@hplx.net>

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> <snip>
> Robots, after travelling many light years at sublight speed, would pick
> whatever planet could be formed for the least work.
>
> Keep in mind that the spacers generally considered themselves distinctly
> different from humans on Earth. They were thus of sufficient racial bias
> to easily entertain genocide of alien species.

But is that spelled out, or is that just a deduction?  It doesn't sound
like anything I remember from Asimov.  I mean, unless he was writing some
kind of social commentary, Asimov doesn't seem like the kind of author who
would write about mass genocide.  Wouldn't his characters usually rather
study alien life than wipe it out?



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jun 10 20:21:28 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:21:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406101257160.19581-100000@hplx.net>
References: <20040610193410.38025.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406101257160.19581-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040610151515.01c1deb8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


>
> > Keep in mind that the spacers generally considered themselves distinctly
> > different from humans on Earth. They were thus of sufficient racial bias
> > to easily entertain genocide of alien species.
>
>But is that spelled out, or is that just a deduction?  It doesn't sound
>like anything I remember from Asimov.  I mean, unless he was writing some
>kind of social commentary, Asimov doesn't seem like the kind of author who
>would write about mass genocide.  Wouldn't his characters usually rather
>study alien life than wipe it out?

Indeed. The fact that Asimov's Foundation future was `human-only' is one of 
its most famous features; it was his way of evading editor John Campbell's 
insistence that humans were meaner and leaner and would lick any goldarned 
alien varmints and so on. Asimov was rather proud of this device, and 
mentions it repeatedly in articles and in his autobiographies. (One very 
early robot story has aliens, who abscond.)

For a protracted and rambling discussion, check out

http://www.asimovs.com/discus/messages/5/818.html?1084431341

for example:

<The idea the Galaxy was all-human was very central to the Foundation 
series, to suggest the AIs may have wiped out countless species is just not 
cricket. Especially as the series states the previous life forms of many 
worlds survived in preserves. Did these dudes even bother to read any of 
the books, sheesh. >



From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Thu Jun 10 20:22:05 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:22:05 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <20040610182247.53507.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040610182247.53507.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406102217200.27997@zeus>

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>On the contrary, in Robots of Dawn, the issue of the murder being
>investigated was tied into the debate among the spacers on Aurora
>whether to explore space as humans, or simply send out robots to go
>find worlds and terraform them for human occupation. Suggest you read
>it again.
>
I remember the book. Something like that was debated, then decided against
at the end. In a following book, we are told that the very same robots
that will invent the Zeroth Law made sure that it was not followed upon.
So arguing that the zeroth law will then lead to universal genocide it's a
really long stretch.
I'm glad I didn't read the non-Asimov written sequels. They seem really
bad if this is the premise.

Alfio



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 20:26:26 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406101257160.19581-100000@hplx.net>
Message-ID: <20040610202626.8332.qmail@web12905.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Don Dartfield <twodeel at jornada.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > <snip>
> > Robots, after travelling many light years at sublight speed, would
> pick
> > whatever planet could be formed for the least work.
> >
> > Keep in mind that the spacers generally considered themselves
> distinctly
> > different from humans on Earth. They were thus of sufficient racial
> bias
> > to easily entertain genocide of alien species.
> 
> But is that spelled out, or is that just a deduction?  It doesn't
> sound
> like anything I remember from Asimov.  I mean, unless he was writing
> some
> kind of social commentary, Asimov doesn't seem like the kind of
> author who
> would write about mass genocide.  Wouldn't his characters usually
> rather
> study alien life than wipe it out?

Depends on which characters you are talking about. Keep in mind that
the robot explorers/terraformers faction was considered 'the enemy'
faction in Asimovs spacers/robots novels (Solaria, Robots of Dawn, etc)
from the point of view of the protagonist, who wanted human
exploration. 

Just because Senator Palpatine wants to dominate the galaxy (in star
wars) does not make George Lucas a fascist.

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jun 10 20:41:49 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 13:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] DAY AFTER TOMORROW meets Asimov
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406102217200.27997@zeus>
Message-ID: <20040610204149.68610.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>


--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >
> >On the contrary, in Robots of Dawn, the issue of the murder being
> >investigated was tied into the debate among the spacers on Aurora
> >whether to explore space as humans, or simply send out robots to go
> >find worlds and terraform them for human occupation. Suggest you
> read
> >it again.
> >
> I remember the book. Something like that was debated, then decided
> against at the end. In a following book, we are told that the very
> same robots that will invent the Zeroth Law made sure that it was
> not followed upon.
> So arguing that the zeroth law will then lead to universal genocide
> it's a really long stretch.
> I'm glad I didn't read the non-Asimov written sequels. They seem
> really bad if this is the premise.

Uh, no it wasn't 'decided against'. What was decided was that humans
from Earth would be permitted to colonize new worlds. In Asimov's
second Foundation trilogy, we see the search for Earth, ultimately with
a librarian from the First Foundation meeting Daneel on earth's Moon.
We also see that while a number of worlds near earth were colonized by
humans from earth, Asimov did explore questions in his second
Foundation trilogy about humans-only issues.....

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From vanmojo at msn.com  Thu Jun 10 21:53:47 2004
From: vanmojo at msn.com (Michael Howell)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:53:47 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
Message-ID: <BAY3-DAV65aZVrDs9aA00018501@hotmail.com>



----- Original Message -----
From: Reason
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 9:49 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?


--> Michael Howell
>I've got a question, I've seen numerous scenarios about amazing
>possibilities the future holds for expanding human potential:
>Intelligence Amplification, Uploading, Immortality, etc... But
>how are we actually going to DO this. It seems to me that there
>are two main obstacles:
>
>1) Financial: The above technologies are going to be expensive.
>Unless you volunteer to be a lab rat, you're going to have to
>consider how to acquire the money.

I've written briefly on this topic:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000057.php

As medicine improves - and improves faster thanks to the efforts of
researchers, educators, businesspeople, advocates and other pro-research
folks - we will have access to ever more options for living longer, healthy
lives. Those options are unlikely to be free, however, especially in the
early years of availability. The cost of any given medical treatment drops
as marketplace competition sets in and the technology is improved, but most
medical expenses require planning.

That said, what sort of medical expenses should you plan on for a future
that involves real anti-aging medicine? If I knew the answer, I'd go into
business as a fortune teller (and make a killing on the stock market). I
think, however, that there are some useful guesstimates that we can make
based upon possible events down the road, the plausible future of
regenerative medicine, and the way in which medical pricing has behaved in
the past.

..

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme

    Interesting idea, except for one thing as far as I see. A number of Transhumanists have written and talked about the Singularity, I'll assume everyone knows what I'm talking about, it's possibilities and it's dangers. If the Singularity is approaching as fast as some theorists say, are we going to have enough time to wait for the cost to go down?

_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040610/ed1b55df/attachment.html>

From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Jun 10 22:11:52 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:11:52 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV65aZVrDs9aA00018501@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY3-DAV65aZVrDs9aA00018501@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <40C8DCA8.90702@pobox.com>

Michael Howell wrote:
> 
> Interesting idea, except for one thing as far as I see. A number of
> Transhumanists have written and talked about the Singularity, I'll
> assume everyone knows what I'm talking about, it's possibilities and
> it's dangers. If the Singularity is approaching as fast as some
> theorists say, are we going to have enough time to wait for the cost to
> go down?

If you're interested in pushing on the Singularity, see 
http://singinst.org/ - another and somewhat unusual approach to "How are we 
going to do this?"

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


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Jun 10 22:58:32 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV73vqzAoa2JB000025e0@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040610225832.64177.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Michael Howell <vanmojo at msn.com> wrote:
>      I've got a question, I've seen numerous
> scenarios about amazing possibilities the future
> holds for expanding human potential: Intelligence
> Amplification, Uploading, Immortality, etc... But
> how are we actually going to DO this.

Good question, and exploring that is one of the main
reasons I joined this list.

> It seems to me
> that there are two main obstacles:
> 
>           1) Financial: The above technologies are
> going to be expensive. Unless you volunteer to be a
> lab rat, you're going to have to consider how to
> acquire the money.

One way I've found is through developing the
technology itself.  Baby steps, anyway, short enough
to get funding through traditional mechanisms (grants,
business financing, et al) but with enough serious
substance to advance whichever field you're working
in.

There are a few speculative jackpot scenarios I've
heard of, the nearest to practicality involving the
private, cheap access to space that's now being
developed.

>           2) Social: If you haven't noticed, society
> is pretty hostile to transhumanism. We're going to
> have a problem if the Luddite/Theocratic trend get's
> worse.

As I posted recently, a large part of this actually
relates back to an aspect of the financial - only
instead of you (or us) getting the money, it's these
other people not experiencing the benefits.  Once you
can give, for free or little $, a drug that defeats
aging, very few people will refuse to take it on moral
principles.  When only the rich can get it, people may
see that as unfair, and believe (falsely) that their
only path to remedying that unfairness is to deprive
the rich of the drug (or, equivalently, of their
lives).  When no one can get it, people may think
(again, falsely) that the people developing it are
sucking up resources that could be better spent
elsewhere, or think that the research is likely to
produce things that would materially detriment
society.

It seems the solution here largely involved cluing
people in as to how they can participate in, and
benefit from, these technological advances without
having to already be a hyperintelligent billionaire.
This is a process commonly referred to as "education",
although it is not the only thing people mean by that
word.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Thu Jun 10 23:04:55 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:04:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV65aZVrDs9aA00018501@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040610230455.21635.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Michael Howell <vanmojo at msn.com> wrote:
[re: the cost of medicine]
>     Interesting idea, except for one thing as far as
> I see. A number of Transhumanists have written and
> talked about the Singularity, I'll assume everyone
> knows what I'm talking about, it's possibilities and
> it's dangers. If the Singularity is approaching as
> fast as some theorists say, are we going to have
> enough time to wait for the cost to go down?

If the Singularity actually arrives, then wouldn't
that necessarily include nano-Santa, or something with
the same results?  Paying for medicine would be the
least of one's worries at that point.  Or if you mean
one of the more harmful versions of the Singularity,
anti-aging medicine wouldn't help much.


From vanmojo at msn.com  Thu Jun 10 23:13:04 2004
From: vanmojo at msn.com (Michael Howell)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:13:04 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
Message-ID: <BAY3-DAV66d8XgIBGjy000186a2@hotmail.com>



----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian Tymes
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 6:01 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?

--- Michael Howell <vanmojo at msn.com> wrote:
>      I've got a question, I've seen numerous
> scenarios about amazing possibilities the future
> holds for expanding human potential: Intelligence
> Amplification, Uploading, Immortality, etc... But
> how are we actually going to DO this.

Good question, and exploring that is one of the main
reasons I joined this list.

> It seems to me
> that there are two main obstacles:
>  
>           1) Financial: The above technologies are
> going to be expensive. Unless you volunteer to be a
> lab rat, you're going to have to consider how to
> acquire the money.

One way I've found is through developing the
technology itself.  Baby steps, anyway, short enough
to get funding through traditional mechanisms (grants,
business financing, et al) but with enough serious
substance to advance whichever field you're working
in.

There are a few speculative jackpot scenarios I've
heard of, the nearest to practicality involving the
private, cheap access to space that's now being
developed.

   I wasn't talking about the difficulty of developing the technology, merely of buying it.

>           2) Social: If you haven't noticed, society
> is pretty hostile to transhumanism. We're going to
> have a problem if the Luddite/Theocratic trend get's
> worse.

As I posted recently, a large part of this actually
relates back to an aspect of the financial - only
instead of you (or us) getting the money, it's these
other people not experiencing the benefits.  Once you
can give, for free or little $, a drug that defeats
aging, very few people will refuse to take it on moral
principles.  When only the rich can get it, people may
see that as unfair, and believe (falsely) that their
only path to remedying that unfairness is to deprive
the rich of the drug (or, equivalently, of their
lives).  When no one can get it, people may think
(again, falsely) that the people developing it are
sucking up resources that could be better spent
elsewhere, or think that the research is likely to
produce things that would materially detriment
society.
    The problem I see is not that they see it as unfair but that the hole idea of pushing back boundaries on human potential; be they intellectual, physical, or in the realm of human lifespan, is wrong. For centuries, as Max More pointed out, humans have had to accept certain limitations to the point of glorifying them( you shouldn't play God, don't tamper with nature, do you really want to live forever?).   

It seems the solution here largely involved cluing
people in as to how they can participate in, and
benefit from, these technological advances without
having to already be a hyperintelligent billionaire.
This is a process commonly referred to as "education",
although it is not the only thing people mean by that
word.
     Robert Anton Wilson said that the only real way to change human behavior on a large scale is to introduce a new technology. My BEST hope currently is that the Singularity will introduce such a technology, probably in the realm of intelligence amplificaition.
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040610/459a8186/attachment.html>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Jun 11 00:24:33 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV66d8XgIBGjy000186a2@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040611002433.33794.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Michael Howell <vanmojo at msn.com> wrote:
>    I wasn't talking about the difficulty of
> developing the technology, merely of buying it.

Yep.  But if you develop some part of the tech, you
can get enough money from that to buy the rest.

>     The problem I see is not that they see it as
> unfair but that the hole idea of pushing back
> boundaries on human potential; be they intellectual,
> physical, or in the realm of human lifespan, is
> wrong.

That's what they say.  It makes a comfortable
rationalization.  But watch what happens in most cases
when former opponents of a technology realize they,
personally, stand to benefit a lot from it.  (Which
includes having had the "it's too difficult/too
expensive for me to play with" problem solved.)  For
one good example, look at access to the 'Net under
repressive governments: people might officially tout
the party line, but only those who stand to lose power
(the government itself) actually try to restrict the
tech.

They say power corrupts.  In this case, that's a good
thing.

>      Robert Anton Wilson said that the only real way
> to change human behavior on a large scale is to
> introduce a new technology. My BEST hope currently
> is that the Singularity will introduce such a
> technology, probably in the realm of intelligence
> amplificaition.

Why wait for the Singularity?  Why not take action to
develop and introduce humanity-augmenting technology
today?  (As, for instance, with the SIAI: trying to
ensure that the first AI that comes about won't cause
bad ends for us.)  We're here, and the Singularity
isn't (yet).


From vanmojo at msn.com  Fri Jun 11 01:55:58 2004
From: vanmojo at msn.com (Michael Howell)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:55:58 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
Message-ID: <BAY3-DAV44KZvEHAoD70001895c@hotmail.com>



----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian Tymes
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 7:27 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?t to buy the rest


That's what they say.  It makes a comfortable
rationalization.  But watch what happens in most cases
when former opponents of a technology realize they,
personally, stand to benefit a lot from it.  (Which
includes having had the "it's too difficult/too
expensive for me to play with" problem solved.)  For
one good example, look at access to the 'Net under
repressive governments: people might officially tout
the party line, but only those who stand to lose power
(the government itself) actually try to restrict the
tech.

      What you say is true, but the problem still remains. Suppose in the near future, we wake up one day to find the first assembler nanites have been created. One week later, Congress bans nanotechnology( not to mention dozens of other governments probably, as you said think of what they would lose). What would we do?  
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040610/93c29e97/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jun 11 03:03:40 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:03:40 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV44KZvEHAoD70001895c@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY3-DAV44KZvEHAoD70001895c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040610220053.01d37758@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Could we do it in non-HTML vanilla text, please, as the list conventions 
require? On Eudora, this thread resembles the tiny illegible tracks of some 
plantigrade insect. No fun at all to try to read.

Damien Broderick



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Jun 11 05:54:24 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] How are we going to do this?
In-Reply-To: <BAY3-DAV44KZvEHAoD70001895c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040611055424.46281.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Michael Howell <vanmojo at msn.com> wrote:
>       What you say is true, but the problem still
> remains. Suppose in the near future, we wake up one
> day to find the first assembler nanites have been
> created. One week later, Congress bans
> nanotechnology( not to mention dozens of other
> governments probably, as you said think of what they
> would lose). What would we do?  

Make very very certain the procedures and techniques
for creating assembler nanites fall into hands that
are not banned, and/or use other techniques to obviate
the ban in practice.  (Reenacting a lesson from the
Prohibition slice of history.)

Although, I'm not sure Congress would ban nano
outright.  American politics are deliberately rigged
so that there are a wide variety of interests in
Congress - probably including some who would
personally stand to benefit from assembler nano, and
know it.  The benefit might be enough that they could
bribe away a ban.  (Work within the system?  Hey,
sometimes the system isn't totally messed up... ;) )

BTW, have you seen others' (like Damien's) comments
about not using HTML?  They are specifically directed
to you.  Your email software is sending HTML messages
instead of the standard for email: plain text ASCII.
While HTML email has its uses, many online communities
(including this one) frown on it because many email
clients can not read it correctly.  My mail client,
fortunately, can read HTML, but many other list
participants can only read my replies to you.
Whatever setting you have in your mail client
(apparently MSN Explorer) to send in "HTML" or "with
formatting" or whatever, please turn it off.  If you
do not know how to turn it off, please find the
control; there should be a Help menu available.  (My
apologies for having to put it like this, but you
weren't acting on others' messages to this effect.)


From amara at amara.com  Fri Jun 11 11:48:53 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 12:48:53 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
Message-ID: <p05100300bceea20cb94f@[150.146.134.133]>

If that behavior is not a behavior observed, then maybe it is wise
to take notice of that and alter one's preconceived notions. If that
behavior is a behavior observed, then it is not a stereotype, it is
an observation of an individual.

I was thinking about this alot last year when I was publically raked
over the coals by a group for promoting a particular stereotype (not
the latin thing, something else). Not only is such an action not my
way, but I never had heard of the stereotype that I was accused of
promoting. But no amount of explaining helped to convince them of
that.

I suggest that if a group or some people in that group hold buttons
about a stereotype, then it's their trap that limits them, not your
trap.

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/
********************************************************************
"It's not the pace of life I mind. It's the sudden stop at the end."
--Calvin


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jun 11 14:35:32 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 07:35:32 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bceea20cb94f@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <006c01c44fc1$59e50440$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Amara Graps
> 
> I was thinking about this alot last year when I was publically raked
> over the coals by a group for promoting a particular stereotype (not
> the latin thing, something else). Not only is such an action not my
> way, but I never had heard of the stereotype that I was accused of
> promoting. But no amount of explaining helped to convince them of
> that.

That sounds like an interesting case for further discussion.

> 
> I suggest that if a group or some people in that group hold buttons
> about a stereotype, then it's their trap that limits them, not your
> trap.
> 
> Amara

Hot buttons are a trap that limits us too.  Ive noticed
a lot of my neighbors seem to have hidden hot buttons
that only the other neighbors can hit: the local
WASPs (Shelly and me) are not expected to understand
them, so they cut us a lot of slack.

spike



From amara at amara.com  Fri Jun 11 16:47:33 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:47:33 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
Message-ID: <p05100300bcef91c6412b@[150.146.134.133]>

Spike:
>That sounds like an interesting case for further discussion.

Not here, though.

>>  I suggest that if a group or some people in that group hold buttons
>>  about a stereotype, then it's their trap that limits them, not your
>>  trap.

>>Hot buttons are a trap that limits us too.  Ive noticed
>a lot of my neighbors seem to have hidden hot buttons
>that only the other neighbors can hit: the local
>WASPs (Shelly and me) are not expected to understand
>them, so they cut us a lot of slack.

I'm a foreigner, stranger in a strange land, and I make alot of
mistakes, obviously. Sometimes I push the envelope, being sillier
than usual, just because I can (That's what being anonymous gives me
- in some sense I can be whoever and whatever I want.)

I don't know if my neighbors cut me slack, because I typically
wouldn't recognize their gossip if they were doing it. At least
the people around my vicinity who know me ('know' in the sense
that they smile, wave, give me my newspaper without asking and say
buongiorno every day) understand that I'm perfectly harmless, so I
am guessing that they are cutting me alot of slack too.

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/
********************************************************************
"It's not the pace of life I mind. It's the sudden stop at the end."
--Calvin


From amara at amara.com  Fri Jun 11 19:27:04 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:27:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cassini Phoebe flyby (today)
Message-ID: <p05100305bcefb6c8faa3@[150.146.134.133]>

Today is the Phoebe flyby of Cassini on its way to Saturn
orbit (insertion into orbit takes place on July 1). The closest
images for Phoebe will likely be ready to the science teams on Sunday,
and hopefully to the press very soon after. Meanwhile, checkout
the latest Phoebe view:

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/index.cfm

Look at that crater on the bottom. Wow!

Amara

-- 

***********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD             email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics        vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers            URL:   http://www.amara.com/
***********************************************************************
"The universe: a device contrived for the perpetual astonishment
of astronomers."   -- Arthur C. Clarke


From amara at amara.com  Fri Jun 11 19:59:26 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:59:26 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
Message-ID: <p05100306bcefbf2af621@[150.146.134.133]>

Mike Lorrey
>The atmosphere is methane, the oceans are methane, and the surface of
>titan is methane. THe atmosphere is a thermal result of tectonic stress
>caused by Saturnian tidal influence.

The solar system isn't that simple, especially where planetary
atmospheres are concerned.

The gas-rich ice from which Titan formed, condensed at low
temperatures in the Saturn nebula. During the accretion of the moon,
heat was generated that could be, and probably was, liberated,
leading to the 'primary' atmosphere. In addition impacting comets
originating outside the Saturn sub-nebula could contribute volatiles
(note that the probability of this is far less likely for Mars)
Additional thermal heat in the rocky part of the moon was/is
generated by by isotopes that are transformed by radioactive decay
into stable isotopes. This process is the same as the melting and
differentiation of the Earth, and how Titan formed a core of dense
rocky material, surrounded by a mantle of ice. Titan's atmosphere is
secondary, outgassed from the volatile elements in the interior.

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/
********************************************************************
"Sipping coffee on a sunbaked terrace can be surprisingly productive."
  ---Michael Metcalf [on the origin of NUMERICAL RECIPES IN FORTRAN 90]


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Fri Jun 11 19:19:57 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:19:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
Message-ID: <40CA05DD.7090009@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

<http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2004-06-11-hybrids-fuel-economy_x.htm>

So many people have complained about disappointing fuel economy of
gas-electric hybrid cars that the federal government is telling
automakers to consider putting more realistic mileage labels on their
cars or do a better job warning buyers that they won't get the
advertised mileage.

Poor fuel economy has been among hybrid owners' top gripes, according to
consultant J.D. Power and Associates, as much as three times as high as
for other small cars and even surpassing that of owners of gas-thirsty
sport-utility vehicles.

"Most of our cars get 10% to 15% less than the EPA (rating) in the real
world," says Toyota spokesman Mike Michels. "A 10% to 15% variance looks
a lot bigger on a 55-mpg (hybrid) car than on (a gas-power) one that
gets 15 or 20."

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

Looks like the technology is still too new and needs a bit of work to
optimize it.  Till then a normal small gas engine looks like a more
efficient system.

BillK


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jun 11 19:38:42 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 12:38:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
In-Reply-To: <40CA05DD.7090009@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20040611193842.53568.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>


--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
<http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2004-06-11-hybrids-fuel-economy_x.htm>
> 
> "Most of our cars get 10% to 15% less than the EPA (rating) in the
> real world," says Toyota spokesman Mike Michels. "A 10% to 15%
> variance looks a lot bigger on a 55-mpg (hybrid) car than on
> (a gas-power) one that gets 15 or 20."
> 
> --------------
> 
> Looks like the technology is still too new and needs a bit of work to
> optimize it.  Till then a normal small gas engine looks like a more
> efficient system.

The problem with hybrid cars isn't the technology, it's the user. If
you are a lead foot (or a heavy braker) with a old style car, your poor
fuel economy is not going to magically improve with a hybrid car if you
don't learn to drive more normally.

EPA rating on my mum's Accord is 35. She gets 30, dad gets 35 in the
same vehicle.

People need to get through their heads that they are as much a
contributor to their car's efficiency as their engine.

=====
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!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From iph1954 at msn.com  Fri Jun 11 20:44:45 2004
From: iph1954 at msn.com (MIKE TREDER)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:44:45 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
Message-ID: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>

As an original and current WTA Director, and as a member of the Executive 
Advisory Team for the Extropy Institute, I?ve been dismayed and disheartened 
by the recent unpleasantness between people within the two organizations. It 
is unnecessary, unseemly, and counterproductive. In a silly fight like this, 
there are no winners, only losers.

It seems patently obvious to me that we have so much to gain by working 
together and so much to lose by defeating each other ? why can?t we keep our 
eyes on the prize? The tendency of some to be offensive and provocative, and 
the tendency of others to be defensive and destructive, can only lead to 
ruin for us all.

I can easily find fault on both sides, although I prefer to focus on our 
common and complementary strengths instead of dwelling on what divides us. 
I?ve urged James Hughes and Nick Bostrom to exercise leadership by being 
inclusive and conciliatory; I?ve counseled Harvey Newstrom and Bruce Klein 
to show restraint and to seek compromises that satisfy everyone?s primary 
needs. But my efforts to be a calming influence seem to have had little 
effect.

Still, we must try. Let?s remember that none of us are transhumans yet; we 
are only imperfect humans dreaming of and working toward a better future. 
Our leaders, representatives, and fellow members are subject to flaws and 
failings, as are each of us. But there are no monsters running loose, no one 
is trying to become a dictator, and those who issue criticism are not crazy 
or evil. We?re just folks (at least until the Singularity).

I appeal to everyone ? WTA members, Extropians, transhumanists of all 
stripes ? to refocus on our highest priorities. Let?s begin by making 
positive statements about what we must stand for; remember why we came 
together in the first place; stand in a virtual circle, hold cyber hands, 
sing a couple of inspiring songs, have an Internet group hug, and then get 
back to work.

See you in the future!

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

"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people 
always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can become 
great." - Mark Twain




From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Fri Jun 11 22:03:40 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:03:40 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
Message-ID: <40CA2C3C.9090605@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Fri Jun 11 13:38:42 MDT 2004 Mike Lorrey wrote:
> The problem with hybrid cars isn't the technology, it's the user. If
> you are a lead foot (or a heavy braker) with a old style car, your
> poor fuel economy is not going to magically improve with a hybrid car 
> if you don't learn to drive more normally.


This is very true. In Europe and UK they have annual competitive car
economy runs where the drivers achieve unbelievable mileage figures,
just by using careful driving techniques.

The current Guinness World Record came from last year's Europe run.
He covered a distance of 2,910 miles through 20 European countries in a
standard Lupo 3L TDI at an average consumption of 2.78 litres per 100 km
(101.6 mpg) at an average speed of 50 mph.
The Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDI uses a 1.2-litre TDI PD diesel engine,
combined with extensive use of lightweight components and automatic
operation of its clutch and five speed gearbox.
<http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/press/Lupo_3L_in_Guiness_World_Record>


On the other hand, I think there is more going on with the hybrid car
fuel economy than just saying 'All Hybrid car buyers don't know how to
drive in an economic fashion'.  I would expect hybrid car buyers to be
more knowledgeable than your average car driver. Hybrids are pretty
unusual, after all. You wouldn't buy one unless you had investigated
hybrids in some detail.

If so many hybrid owners have complained that the federal government has
been stirred into action, then that's significant. Considering the sales
numbers of hybrids are still pretty low, it probably means that almost
every hybrid owner is grumbling.

BillK


From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com  Fri Jun 11 22:14:25 2004
From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 23:14:25 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
References: <40CA05DD.7090009@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <001901c45001$9ddea4e0$0600000a@BRYAN>

USA Today wrote:

> Poor fuel economy has been among hybrid owners' top gripes, according to
> consultant J.D. Power and Associates, as much as three times as high as
> for other small cars and even surpassing that of owners of gas-thirsty
> sport-utility vehicles.

Their gripes have been three times as high?

BM


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 11 22:16:28 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:16:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
Message-ID: <300590-220046511221628218@M2W066.mail2web.com>

Mike,

Thank you for your kind note.  I hope you have seen ExI's Vice President
Greg Burch's recent post to the extropy-chat list (which should have been
forwarded to John Grigg to the wta-talk list), as I hope this clarifies
ExI's position (or lack thereof) in any of the current going on in WTA. 
Greg states that ExI does not have any relationship with the internal
affairs of WTA.  ExI has refrained to comment on or participate in any of
the current issues within WTA's framework.  It would be highly
inappropriate for ExI, or any organization, to interfere with the internal
business of another organization.

To respond to your concerns and best wishes, ExI is currently addressing
the past, recent and future issues that have and could occur in our
transhumanist community. 

We are in the process of scheduling a "TransCooperative Colloquium" virtual
meeting for more than a dozen transhumanist organizations.  It is currently
scheduled for June 15th.

The organizations that participate in the TransCoopertive Colloquium will
also chair and moderate the meetings. The chair will rotate for each
meeting, making sure that each organization has the opportunity to chair.
The chairing organization will not, at the same meeting, moderate the
meeting; as the moderator will be from a different organization.  For
example, if Foresight Institute chairs the meeting, WTA will moderate (and
visa versa); or if The Singularity chairs the meeting, Betterhumans will
moderate (visa versa). 

No one organization will "run" the colloquium, as it will be a cooperative
and collaborative effort.

The letter inviting organizations will be delivered early next week.

I think the TransCooperative Colloquium will offer a wonderful opportunity
of transhumanist organizations to meet and greet, show and tell, discuss
and debate, calendar events, and clear the air.

Thank you Mike for your email and I send my best to everyone,

Warmly,

Natasha Vita-More
President, Extropy Institute
Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture

http://www.extropy.org
http://www.transhumanist.biz
http://www.natasha.cc




Original Message:
-----------------
From: MIKE TREDER iph1954 at msn.com
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:44:45 -0400
To: wta-talk at transhumanism.org, extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug


As an original and current WTA Director, and as a member of the Executive 
Advisory Team for the Extropy Institute, I?ve been dismayed and
disheartened 
by the recent unpleasantness between people within the two organizations.
It 
is unnecessary, unseemly, and counterproductive. In a silly fight like
this, 
there are no winners, only losers.

It seems patently obvious to me that we have so much to gain by working 
together and so much to lose by defeating each other ? why can?t we keep
our 
eyes on the prize? The tendency of some to be offensive and provocative,
and 
the tendency of others to be defensive and destructive, can only lead to 
ruin for us all.

I can easily find fault on both sides, although I prefer to focus on our 
common and complementary strengths instead of dwelling on what divides us. 
I?ve urged James Hughes and Nick Bostrom to exercise leadership by being 
inclusive and conciliatory; I?ve counseled Harvey Newstrom and Bruce Klein 
to show restraint and to seek compromises that satisfy everyone?s primary 
needs. But my efforts to be a calming influence seem to have had little 
effect.

Still, we must try. Let?s remember that none of us are transhumans yet; we 
are only imperfect humans dreaming of and working toward a better future. 
Our leaders, representatives, and fellow members are subject to flaws and 
failings, as are each of us. But there are no monsters running loose, no
one 
is trying to become a dictator, and those who issue criticism are not crazy 
or evil. We?re just folks (at least until the Singularity).

I appeal to everyone ? WTA members, Extropians, transhumanists of all 
stripes ? to refocus on our highest priorities. Let?s begin by making 
positive statements about what we must stand for; remember why we came 
together in the first place; stand in a virtual circle, hold cyber hands, 
sing a couple of inspiring songs, have an Internet group hug, and then get 
back to work.

See you in the future!

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

"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people 
always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too, can
become 
great." - Mark Twain


_______________________________________________
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 puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Fri Jun 11 22:21:23 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 00:21:23 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
In-Reply-To: <40CA2C3C.9090605@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40CA2C3C.9090605@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406120010240.11104@zeus>

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, BillK wrote:

>On Fri Jun 11 13:38:42 MDT 2004 Mike Lorrey wrote:
>> The problem with hybrid cars isn't the technology, it's the user. If
>> you are a lead foot (or a heavy braker) with a old style car, your
>> poor fuel economy is not going to magically improve with a hybrid car
>> if you don't learn to drive more normally.
>
>
>This is very true. In Europe and UK they have annual competitive car
>economy runs where the drivers achieve unbelievable mileage figures,
>just by using careful driving techniques.

As Mike implies, there's a simple driving technique which is very
effective in getting a good fuel economy, especially in an urban
evironment which is usually the worst for a car: brake as less as
possible.
Every time you brake you'll need to accelerate again, thus wasting fuel.
Now, sometimes you really have to brake (say, to stop at a red light), but
often you could just keep a larger distance from the car in front of you,
so that you will not need to brake if they slow down and accelerate again.
Even that red light is not a sure sign of stopping: brake early, and slow
down to say 15 mph instead of stopping. Most of the time the light will be
green when you arrive there, and you'll save the 0-15mph fuel.

This way, you also break the disruptive "traffic waves" that cause lots
of queues - a wave of cars slowing down, each a bit more than the
preceding one, until a standing wave of stopped cars forms. Break it by
braking early and refusing to stop.

Another one, not applicable to the automatic gearbox of US cars: when
going uphill, push heavily on the pedal but keep the highest possible
gear. This way you keep the engine in the max efficency range, which is at
fairly low rpm and high load.

Alfio


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Fri Jun 11 22:29:20 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:29:20 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
Message-ID: <80250-220046511222920919@M2W089.mail2web.com>

From: MIKE TREDER 


>As an original and current WTA Director, and as a member of the Executive 
>Advisory Team for the Extropy Institute, I?ve been dismayed and
>disheartened by the recent unpleasantness between people within the two
>organizations. It is unnecessary, unseemly, and counterproductive. In a
>silly fight like this, there are no winners, only losers.

Mike, I will respond momentarily about your generous post and kind words as
president of ExI.  As a transhumanist and friend, I wanted to quickly
recognize you and let you know that I agree with you in total.  I don't
have my glasses on, so I hope this is legible.

Natasha

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




From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Fri Jun 11 23:04:31 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:04:31 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <B266E24C-BBFB-11D8-BE8B-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Friday, June 11, 2004, at 04:44 pm, MIKE TREDER wrote:

> As an original and current WTA Director, and as a member of the 
> Executive Advisory Team for the Extropy Institute, I?ve been dismayed 
> and disheartened by the recent unpleasantness between people within 
> the two organizations. It is unnecessary, unseemly, and 
> counterproductive. In a silly fight like this, there are no winners, 
> only losers.

> I can easily find fault on both sides, although I prefer to focus on 
> our common and complementary strengths instead of dwelling on what 
> divides us. I?ve urged James Hughes and Nick Bostrom to exercise 
> leadership by being inclusive and conciliatory; I?ve counseled Harvey 
> Newstrom and Bruce Klein to show restraint and to seek compromises 
> that satisfy everyone?s primary needs.

What unpleasantness are you talking about?  And what Extropy Institute 
people are you referring to?  Both sides you mention above (James and 
Nick versus Harvey and Bruce) are internal to the WTA Board.  I don't 
see how Extropy Institute is involved in any of the WTA Board's 
internal problems.  Is there some additional controversy with WTA that 
I missed that extends outside the WTA Boardroom?

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Jun 12 01:29:53 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:29:53 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug: TransCooperative Colloquium
In-Reply-To: <300590-220046511221628218@M2W066.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040611182808.02e855e0@mail.earthlink.net>

Forgive me, I mean July 15th.

>We are in the process of scheduling a "TransCooperative Colloquium" virtual
>meeting for more than a dozen transhumanist organizations.  It is currently
>scheduled for June 15th. (error) July 15th.


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/20040611/98a4bbde/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Jun 12 02:34:43 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:34:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
In-Reply-To: <40CA2C3C.9090605@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <009101c45025$d233aaf0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

BillK:
 
> This is very true. In Europe and UK they have annual competitive car
> economy runs where the drivers achieve unbelievable mileage figures,
> just by using careful driving techniques. BillK

True.  If one is ever in an emergency sitch where one
has enough fuel to go 20 km and one knows the next 
fuel station is 40 km away, i'll offer an old motorcyclists
trick to get you to the station without walking:
Accelerate to speed steadily, not too hard, put her in 
neutral, switch off the motor and coast to a stop.  
Start the motor and repeat.  It takes a looong time 
to get there that way, but it beats pushing the car.  
One can double the fuel economy on a typical car.

Motorcyclists, you can easily prove this by riding along
at highway speeds, reach down and shut off the fuel.
Note how long you can go on the gas in the carburetors.
Now stop, shut off the fuel, and do the above trick,
see how far you can go.  Betcha it will be over twice
as far.

The effect on a motorcycle is even more than twice
the fuel economy because bikes use a larger percentage
of their gas pushing air out of the way.  Recall that
the energy use increases as the square of the velocity.

Next time you run short and need to limp into the station 
on fumes, recall this post.

spike


  



From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sat Jun 12 03:24:30 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 20:24:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEMKEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>

For discussion, quoting below from myself and George Dvorsky. Read the
articles.

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000143.php
http://www.betterhumans.com/Features/Columns/Transitory_Human/column.aspx?ar
ticleID=2004-06-10-1
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000092.php

Government mandated limits to life span: it's an ugly idea, frequently
explored in Science Fiction. Is it likely to happen in the real world,
however? Worse things have been done to people in the name of law and
government in the past, even in the recent past. If you live in a developed
country, the chances are that government employees already have a great deal
of control over your life span: your opinions on the matter are usually
irrelevant.

...

Of late, I have started to explore the idea that present day opposition to
serious anti-aging research (as led by Leon Kass, Francis Fukuyama and
others) will lead to legislation blocking or limiting our access to healthy
life extension technologies.

Politicians - even in comparatively free countries like the US - already
exert a great deal of control over access to medicine, what you can and
can't do with your body, and what medical research is permitted.
Unfortunately, this power is already being abused - as power always is - in
many areas, including stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. It is a
small leap from the present day functions of the FDA to a body that sets
maximum life spans by enforcing restrictions on new anti-aging medical
technologies.

George Dvorsky has written an excellent article on this topic that is
currently posted at Betterhumans. I quote a fair amount in this post, but
there is a good deal more where that came from - so read the whole thing.

...

I consider myself open to ideas and alternative perspectives, but as I
consider the arguments of the bio-Luddites and look deeper into their
meaning, I have come to realize that the death-promoting propaganda campaign
is more than just a battle for hearts and minds. I get the impression
that?should radical life extension technologies become readily
available?these detractors, some of whom have the ear of the President,
would go much further than fighting a war of words in their attempt to
ensure that we never gain mastery over our mortality.

...

At times the bio-Luddites sound parochial and authoritarian, and at their
worst they sound downright ideological and even totalitarian.

Indeed, as Kass has repeatedly stated, "the finitude of human life is a
blessing for every individual, whether he knows it or not." And
frighteningly, when asked by Brian Alexander, the author of Rapture: How
Biotechnology Became the New Religion, if the government has a right to tell
its citizens that they have to die, Fukuyama answered, "Yes, absolutely."

...

And as for the bio-Luddite deathists, they're offering Americans the worst
and most useless kind of ethics. It is an ethics without foundation in
reality and devoid of pragmatic guidance and practical solutions. It simply
doesn't do for the coming realities of 21st century life.

...

I couldn't agree more, and it's a great shame that the field once known as
medical ethics has degenerated into a coven of high profile bioethicists set
on finding the best way to prevent new medicines from saving lives.

Squashing the opposition to serious anti-aging medical research will require
supporters of healthy life extension to start our side of the coming battle
early. We can't afford to wait for entrenched pro-death bioethicists to gain
even greater influence over our overbearing, winner-takes-all governments.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From samantha at objectent.com  Sat Jun 12 07:17:33 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 00:17:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEMKEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEMKEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <92D9968C-BC40-11D8-85E5-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>

With national health care just around the corner, one has to wonder how 
far the hazy line between "therapy" and "enhancement" will be pushed.  
When the government is the single payer cum single insurer the push 
will be one to not "waste" those tax dollars and give everyone "his or 
her fair share".   Dollars to donuts all forms of "enhancement" will be 
unsupported.   And when the tax bite increases and the number of 
private citizens going to out-of-the-norm specialists decreases the 
price of these "enhancements" will go higher and higher due to lack of 
any economy of scale or research dollars or payments for expensive 
operations using advanced techniques that would push the state of the 
art.   And if we don't get regime change in November the situations is 
as bad or worse.

Sigh.

- samantha



From pgptag at gmail.com  Sat Jun 12 09:12:30 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 11:12:30 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c52040612021277123ed2@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Mike for this call to reason. I agree with what you said, and
wish to make some additional considerations.
We have several transhumanist groups, each with its own specific
flavour. The main differences are political (the socialist vs.
libertarian struggle). One flavour dominates in some groups, the other
dominates in some other gropus.
Time of the broken disk (I must have said this hundred of times): SO WHAT?
As Fabio (Estropico) was among the first to make explicit a couple of
years ago, the Central Transhumanist Meme (CTM) in itself is
compatible with both the socialist and libertarian worldviews. Why
don't we just leave it at that and focus more on the CTM itself?
Face it, the transhumanist movement will always be split in separate
groups, and none of the separate groups is likely to achieve a
critical mass on its own. If we want to achieve a critical mass, we
must find some way to collaborate on the important issues.
Instead of fighting OVER politics in transhumanist fora, we should
fight FOR transhumanism in political fora. If you are a socialist,
argue for transhumanism in your camp. If you are a libertarian, argue
for transhumanism in your camp. And let our transhumanist lists become
meme factories to facilitate this work.
I don't want transhumanism to become one of those all encompassing
ideologies that dictate all sorts of fine grained behaviours to their
subscribers. Ideologies too ambitious become a cage for ideas, let's
leave that to Opus Dei and the Raelians. I don't want transhumanism to
tell me how many sugar cubes I should put in my morning coffee, what
my religious ideas should be, what sexual preferences I should have,
or what party I should vote for.
We share a beautiful and urgent vision (R.Cooper on the wta-talk
list). Let's focus on converting this vision to reality. So I support
Mike's call for a group hug, and will do my best to facilitate it.

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:44:45 -0400, MIKE TREDER <iph1954 at msn.com> wrote:
> I appeal to everyone ? WTA members, Extropians, transhumanists of all
> stripes ? to refocus on our highest priorities. Let's begin by making
> positive statements about what we must stand for; remember why we came
> together in the first place; stand in a virtual circle, hold cyber hands,
> sing a couple of inspiring songs, have an Internet group hug, and then get
> back to work.
> 
> See you in the future!
> 
> Mike Treder
> Executive Director, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology


From pgptag at gmail.com  Sat Jun 12 09:26:44 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 11:26:44 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
In-Reply-To: <0b6d01c44f05$22821e00$47c01b97@administxl09yj>
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>	<40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com><470a3c5204060908195f3b17c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<40C853FF.4080801@ramonsky.com>
	<0b6d01c44f05$22821e00$47c01b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <470a3c5204061202263163a750@mail.gmail.com>

There is some element of truth in what Serafino says if we interpret
"believe in" as "being cempletely certain of".
Latins see more shades of grey in the world and have problems in
collapsing their worldview to black and white. This is a strength,
since it permits making better decision, and a weakness, since the
risk is making a decision too late or not making any decision at all.
In military conflicts, where the important thing is making reasonably
good decisions fast, the anglos have outclassed us since centuries.
But I think in a more and more complex world the cowboy attitude
"shoot, then think" will demonstrate its limitations and will have to
be replaced by a more sophisticated worldview. Computer systems to aid
decision making by computing the likely outcomes of a large number of
options will be an enabling technology for including more shades of
grey in one's worldview.

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:07:33 +0200, scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> The impression is that (us) latins
> tend to say or do things (silly or
> reasonable, it does not matter)
> without believing in these things.
> Or is this a wrong impression?
> I'm inclined to think that "anglos"
> do believe in what they say, or
> in what they are doing (silly or
> reasonable, it does not matter).
> s.


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Jun 12 14:00:15 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:00:15 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
References: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>

"MIKE TREDER " wrote:

As an original and current WTA Director, and as a member of the Executive
Advisory Team for the Extropy Institute, I've been dismayed and disheartened
by the recent unpleasantness between people within the two organizations. It
is unnecessary, unseemly, and counterproductive. In a silly fight like this,
there are no winners, only losers.

It seems patently obvious to me that we have so much to gain by working
together and so much to lose by defeating each other - why can't we keep our
eyes on the prize? The tendency of some to be offensive and provocative, and
the tendency of others to be defensive and destructive, can only lead to
ruin for us all.

I can easily find fault on both sides, although I prefer to focus on our
common and complementary strengths instead of dwelling on what divides us.
I've urged James Hughes and Nick Bostrom to exercise leadership by being
inclusive and conciliatory; I've counseled Harvey Newstrom and Bruce Klein
to show restraint and to seek compromises that satisfy everyone's primary
needs. But my efforts to be a calming influence seem to have had little
effect.

Still, we must try. Let's remember that none of us are transhumans yet; we
are only imperfect humans dreaming of and working toward a better future.
Our leaders, representatives, and fellow members are subject to flaws and
failings, as are each of us. But there are no monsters running loose, no one
is trying to become a dictator, and those who issue criticism are not crazy
or evil. We're just folks (at least until the Singularity).

I appeal to everyone - WTA members, Extropians, transhumanists of all
stripes - to refocus on our highest priorities. Let's begin by making
positive statements about what we must stand for; remember why we came
together in the first place; stand in a virtual circle, hold cyber hands,
sing a couple of inspiring songs, have an Internet group hug, and then get
back to work.

------

I suspect your sole question in that post ("why can't we (sic) keep our
eyes on the prize") may have been rhetorical. Yet if your dismay and
disheartenment is genuine perhaps it was not.

If so, I suggest you examine your premises.

First, I suggest you consider in what sense there is a "we".

Perhaps consider the tragedy of the commons. If virtual communities
are easy to join and organisations are easy, relatively to attain positions
of ostensible authority in then they are also easily corrupted and hijacked
by people with egos (I don't say that pejoratively - we (I mean living
people) all have egos) and low personal investment.  Perhaps when the
cost of of entry are so low it is easy for the brands to be debased.
Perhaps you have some illusions about the elite nature of the folk that
frequent the same places you do. Perhaps.

Second, I suggest you consider in what sense there is "a prize". And how
even if "we" could be operationalised, "we" in your terms would go after
that prize.   Can you get consensus in your view from the folks you see
as the "we" on even the "highest priorities"?R (R = Rhetorical). Note
priorities are plural not singular - like "the prize".

I don't have time to engage in this discussion too deeply, in fact, I'm
probably done with it now. You can take or leave my comments as
you see fit.

Group Hug? - Isn't that what litters of baby rabbits would do in the
face of fierce adult rabbit-politics and a universe that wasn't explicitly
configured for their comfort?R

If so, perhaps its the ones that don't need the group hug as much that
are the fiercer rabbits, and don't really give a damn for rabbit politics
they just grow to see it as funny, and perhaps even to wonder if maybe
they are slightly foxy, like the politicing older-rabbits seem to be with
each other, because after all the stakes are very high when one is a
rabbit.

Regards,
Brett Paatsch










From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sat Jun 12 15:58:03 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 11:58:03 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Neapolitan
In-Reply-To: <B55E044559115F4B8C9EE62323C322B40439EB55@hickory.cc.trincoll.edu>
Message-ID: <497E1396-BC89-11D8-A336-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Saturday, June 12, 2004, at 07:40 am, Hughes, James J. wrote:

> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ExI-Community/polls
> 51% of the ExI respondents were "libertarian" or "anarchist,"

Only if you combine libertarian, anarchist and self-governance 
categories all together into this one number.  The actual numbers are 
distributed thusly:

	21% US-style left-wing
	37% Libertarian
	07% Upwinger / Future
	06% US-Style right-wing
	16% Anarchist or self-governance
	13% other or none

> In our December 2003 poll of our membership:
> http://transhumanism.org/resources/WTASurvey03Report.pdf
> 35% are left-wing or liberal

Only if you combine the 4% US-style liberals with the 27% libertarian 
socialists, democrat socialists, social democrats, and radicals.

	13% Libertarian Socialist
	04% Democrat Socialist
	04% Social democrat
	06% Radical

	04% US-style liberal

I had no idea that "Libertarian Socialist" and "Democrat Socialist" and 
"Radical" WTA members outnumbered the US-style liberal members so much!

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sat Jun 12 16:24:10 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:24:10 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
In-Reply-To: <497E1396-BC89-11D8-A336-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <497E1396-BC89-11D8-A336-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <40CB2E2A.20505@cfl.rr.com>

I just joined the list last night.  I've followed the extropian movement 
for some years in a disinterested kind of way but recently became much 
more active in seeking information and contacts with people in the 
"transhumanist" groups.  I am also interested in any other groups/lists 
that people might suggest as being good and active sources of 
information and/or contacts.  I live in Central Florida and am also 
interested in any TH or extro groups local to that area.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sat Jun 12 16:25:47 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 09:25:47 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics
	andlegislation
In-Reply-To: <92D9968C-BC40-11D8-85E5-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <00b601c45099$eb528a50$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Samantha Atkins
> 
> With national health care just around the corner...

Dont worry Samantha, it isn't.  It looked like it was
around the corner ten years ago, but no one is pushing
for that now.  Either the singularity or our natural
demise is much more eminent.

> When the government is the single payer...

Don't worry, that won't happen either.  If you are
referring to the US government, it cannot afford
to take on everyone's medical bills.
 
> Sigh.
> 
> - samantha

There are some advantages to having the Fed up to
its elected eyeballs in debt: it is less able to
take on and screw up new areas of our lives.  

spike






From zero_powers at hotmail.com  Sat Jun 12 16:27:19 2004
From: zero_powers at hotmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 09:27:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
References: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
	<009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <BAY2-DAV41yFjEmHkYv0002ffbb@hotmail.com>

From: "Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2004 7:00 AM


> I suspect your sole question in that post ("why can't we (sic) keep our
> eyes on the prize") may have been rhetorical. Yet if your dismay and
> disheartenment is genuine perhaps it was not.
>
> If so, I suggest you examine your premises.
>
> First, I suggest you consider in what sense there is a "we".
>
> Perhaps consider the tragedy of the commons. If virtual communities
> are easy to join and organisations are easy, relatively to attain
positions
> of ostensible authority in then they are also easily corrupted and
hijacked
> by people with egos (I don't say that pejoratively - we (I mean living
> people) all have egos) and low personal investment.  Perhaps when the
> cost of of entry are so low it is easy for the brands to be debased.
> Perhaps you have some illusions about the elite nature of the folk that
> frequent the same places you do. Perhaps.
>
> Second, I suggest you consider in what sense there is "a prize". And how
> even if "we" could be operationalised, "we" in your terms would go after
> that prize.   Can you get consensus in your view from the folks you see
> as the "we" on even the "highest priorities"?R (R = Rhetorical). Note
> priorities are plural not singular - like "the prize".
>
> I don't have time to engage in this discussion too deeply, in fact, I'm
> probably done with it now. You can take or leave my comments as
> you see fit.
>
> Group Hug? - Isn't that what litters of baby rabbits would do in the
> face of fierce adult rabbit-politics and a universe that wasn't explicitly
> configured for their comfort?R
>
> If so, perhaps its the ones that don't need the group hug as much that
> are the fiercer rabbits, and don't really give a damn for rabbit politics
> they just grow to see it as funny, and perhaps even to wonder if maybe
> they are slightly foxy, like the politicing older-rabbits seem to be with
> each other, because after all the stakes are very high when one is a
> rabbit.

This is not my fight at all.  Although I am an intermittent lurker/poster to
this list, I am not and have never been a member of ExI or WTA or any other
TH organization.  I am however fascinated by the accelerating advance of
technology and the probability that in the fairly near future humans will be
able, with the application of copious amounts of advanced technology, to
ameliorate the last few inconveniences we have yet to conquer (specifically
including sickness, aging and death).  That's why I poke my nose in here
from time to time.

OK, it's not my fight, so why am I butting in?  You all know as well as I do
that, with the possible exception of Wired magazine, the mainstream press
(and therefore the mainstream of public opinion) views TH movements,
organizations and enthusiasts unfavorably (you know, cults, kooks, spoiled
"rich" kids with nothing better to do, etc.)

So my two cents: The airing of your "dirty laundry" on such publicly
accessible lists as ExI chat; the public finger pointing, accusations and
infighting of TH leaders and such as has taken place on this list over the
past week or so, only lends fuel to the fire and amunition to those who see
TH organizations as sophomoric clubs of clueless (fill in your own
derogatory epithet).

My recommendation: There are enough adversaries to the shared goals of TH
organizations that these organizations have good reason for unity and
cooperation (if not social identity), rather than among-group competition
and public venting of within-group conflicts.  It all seems very much like
Apache and Commanche warring against each other while Europe is landing.

Zero


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sat Jun 12 17:25:07 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:25:07 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] When did WTA turn socialist???
In-Reply-To: <470a3c52040612021277123ed2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <72E664B3-BC95-11D8-A336-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Saturday, June 12, 2004, at 05:12 am, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 16:44:45 -0400, MIKE TREDER <iph1954 at msn.com> 
> wrote:
>> I appeal to everyone ? WTA members, Extropians, transhumanists of all
>> stripes ? to refocus on our highest priorities. Let's begin by making


> We have several transhumanist groups, each with its own specific
> flavour. The main differences are political (the socialist vs.
> libertarian struggle).

The main differences between transhumanist groups is whether they are 
socialist vs. libertarian?  That is the primary struggle between groups 
like ExI and WTA?  When did this occur???  What the hell are you 
talking about???

> As Fabio (Estropico) was among the first to make explicit a couple of
> years ago, the Central Transhumanist Meme (CTM) in itself is
> compatible with both the socialist and libertarian worldviews.

Do the WTA founders really see all of transhumanism boiling down to 
socialists vs. llbertarians?  That is bizarre!  Although this explains 
James' Politics of Transhumanism which tries to position ExI into the 
libertarian camp and WTA into the socialist camp.  It also explains 
Nick's original WTA FAQ which stated that WTA was formed by people who 
wanted a global transhumanist group with different political leanings.  
(It even explains the political survey of the members, showing lots of 
socialists.  It also explains James' recent donation in the name of WTA 
dedicated to a famous socialist.)

I guess I was just oblivious and blind to the obvious clues!  Was this 
the original purpose of the WTA all along?  To promote a world 
socialist order of transhumanism?  I can see hints of this looking back 
at the original founding documents, but it certainly wasn't clear to me 
at the time!  I had no idea what I was getting myself into.

> Face it, the transhumanist movement will always be split in separate
> groups, and none of the separate groups is likely to achieve a
> critical mass on its own. If we want to achieve a critical mass, we
> must find some way to collaborate on the important issues.
> Instead of fighting OVER politics in transhumanist fora, we should
> fight FOR transhumanism in political fora. If you are a socialist,
> argue for transhumanism in your camp. If you are a libertarian, argue
> for transhumanism in your camp. And let our transhumanist lists become
> meme factories to facilitate this work.

You really think that promoting libertarianism and/or socialism is the 
key to success for the transhumanist movement?

> So I support
> Mike's call for a group hug, and will do my best to facilitate it.

I'm not sure Mike would appreciate his efforts at peace being converted 
into a political agenda.  In fact, I am not sure that most WTA members 
would appreciate WTA being used to promote a socialist world order.  
(Although a large percentage of WTA members are socialists of some sort 
or another, now that I look at the recent member survey again.)

I guess I never made the connection.  I had no idea that we were 
supposed to be socialists versus libertarians.  Has this always been 
the case as far as the WTA leadership is concerned?  Or is this a new 
change for the organization?  No wonder I didn't fit in with all the 
secretive machinations of the rulers over the members.

Sheesh!  Surely transhumanism should be something different than this.  
I don't think socialism versus libertarianism has every been a core 
part of transhumanism for decades.  This seems to be a socialist 
take-over of transhumanism from the inside, using secret agendas and 
revisionist history.  I don't think most transhumanists want to be 
world socialists.  I think these political aspirations are being tacked 
onto the movement later by people with some pretty aggressive political 
agendas.  The original transhumanists that were active decades before 
WTA would not recognize any of the above political ranting as being 
related to transhumanism in any way.  And frankly, neither do I.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Jun 12 19:43:11 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:43:11 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <BAY2-DAV41yFjEmHkYv0002ffbb@hotmail.com>
References: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
	<009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>

At 09:27 AM 6/12/04 -0700, Zero  wrote:

>So my two cents: The airing of your "dirty laundry" on such publicly
>accessible lists as ExI chat; the public finger pointing, accusations and
>infighting of TH leaders and such as has taken place on this list over the
>past week or so, only lends fuel to the fire and amunition to those who see
>TH organizations as sophomoric clubs of clueless (fill in your own
>derogatory epithet).

I am responding to Zero's wise word and making a comment to anyone 
involving ExI in WTA's internal problems.

Please make sure that you are aware that this fight is between WTA and its 
board and "its leaders" not leaders of transhumanism.  It should remain on 
the WTA list unless and until it involves ExI, which it did when WTA's 
Executive Director (through a messenger) a rather nasty message placing 
blame on ExI which, in fact, which was totally mistaken and should be 
addressed professionally.  I do not want to have to make a public, press 
statement about this, but if I am pushed far enough I will have to speak 
with ExI' s Board about making it publically known that ExI is not and 
never has been involved with the internal structure and current problems of 
WTA.

Since that post and Greg Burch's response to WTA's Executive Director's 
message, which was posted earlier this week and which I think everyone 
should read in deference to Greg and ExI, ExI has not heard one single word 
of apology from WTA and its leaders.

This type of attitude - blaming others for one's own problems - reflects 
very poorly on any organization, not to mention alienating other 
transhumanist organizations who are watching and listening to WTA's 
accusations.

With this said, I will state openly that ExI will continue to work to have 
a cooperative relationship with WTA and hope that Mike's message to "their 
leaders" is listened to.

Regardless, I continue to support Mike's "group hug."

Natasha Vita-More
President, Extropy Institute


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/20040612/755d6a1a/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jun 12 18:05:48 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:05:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hungover
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
	<009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040612130009.01c6c578@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 12:43 PM 6/12/2004 -0700, Natasha wrote:

>I do not want to have to make a public, press statement about this, but if 
>I am pushed far enough I will have to speak with ExI' s Board about making 
>it publically known that ExI is not and never has been involved with the 
>internal structure and current problems of WTA.

I'm not an extropian, so I don't have a say, but as an interested observer 
I'd recommend leaving this alone. Let it go out, probably not even any need 
to piss on it. Do we really benefit from having the People's Front of Judea 
brawling in public with the Judean People's Front? (When there were a few 
racists mouthing off on the exi list I felt differently; that was toxic and 
had to be dealt with.)

Damien Broderick




From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sat Jun 12 19:03:09 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:03:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <470a3c52040612021277123ed2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNIENAEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


--> Giu1i0 Pri5c0

> Time of the broken disk (I must have said this hundred of times): SO WHAT?
> As Fabio (Estropico) was among the first to make explicit a couple of
> years ago, the Central Transhumanist Meme (CTM) in itself is
> compatible with both the socialist and libertarian worldviews. Why
> don't we just leave it at that and focus more on the CTM itself?

The libertarian viewpoint is that transhumanist progress thrives on freedom.
Freedom tends to be minimalized in socialist states - everything from
personal choice through to research choice through to commercialization is
harder or subject to whims of groups with a strong vested interest in
preserving the status quo.

The pragmatic libertarian viewpoint would be that we should co-opt/work with
the system (if it speeds things up, which is not usually the case) in order
to attain the goals of a) new frontiers, and b) radical life extension.
These allow time and space for libertarian societies to form as a practical
matter of course, but we're a bit stuck (and all too soon dead) without
them.

--> Harvey Newstrom

> > We have several transhumanist groups, each with its own specific
> > flavour. The main differences are political (the socialist vs.
> > libertarian struggle).
>
> The main differences between transhumanist groups is whether they are
> socialist vs. libertarian?  That is the primary struggle between groups
> like ExI and WTA?  When did this occur???  What the hell are you
> talking about???

This is a common perception, and it's one that I subscribe to. The current
leadership of the WTA is pro-socialist and virulently anti-libertarian. That
is the organizational bias despite the public stance of non-alignment.

My reading of the Extropy Principles (
http://www.extropy.org/principles.htm ) is that they require a libertarian
system of governance: right there under "open society" is a long description
of the desirable traits of a minarchist or otherwise distributed governance
system. So from this, and many other statements and actions, I conclude that
the current leadership of ExI is biased towards libertarianism despite the
public stance of non-alignment.

This is all fine and well. There's nothing wrong with people being people
and being aligned. Of course, I'd prefer a world in which it was ok and
accepted to post some sort of standard organizational/leadership bias
statement on your website - it would save a whole bunch of time.

Looking at the claim that basic conflict between transhumanist groups
relates to socialist versus libertarian modes of thought, I'd probably
agree. Transhumanism has strong roots in personal freedom - the freedom to
change as you will, to be different, to find your own unique way through the
future, enabled by technology as a generator of ever greater numbers of
choices. Socialism in practice is a form of governance very hostile to this
vision of the future - if you're not with the (central) plan, you're out,
where "out" is usually something fairly unpleasant.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme




From pgptag at gmail.com  Sat Jun 12 19:04:56 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:04:56 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] When did WTA turn socialist???
In-Reply-To: <72E664B3-BC95-11D8-A336-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <72E664B3-BC95-11D8-A336-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c52040612120446e09195@mail.gmail.com>

Harvey, next time please count up to ten and take the time to read a
message before replying to it in such a misguided and aggressive
fashion.
I am referring to the main topic where there is heated discussion and
disagreement on all list, including those run by WTA and ExI. I never
said, or implied, that the WTA is a socialist organization.
Or if I did say or imply it, could you please try to calm down and
tell me just where I said or imply it?


From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Sat Jun 12 19:19:52 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:19:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re:extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040612201823.023aee40@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>


>Message: 16
>Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 11:12:30 +0200
>From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
>To: World Transhumanist Association Discussion List
>         <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>
>Cc: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>Message-ID: <470a3c52040612021277123ed2 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

*Considering myself hugged and hugging back*

The Transhumanist world is as yet too small for such painful schisms.



James...



From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Sat Jun 12 19:22:50 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 20:22:50 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040612202140.02450008@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>


>Message: 20
>Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:24:10 -0400
>From: Gregory Propf <gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Message-ID: <40CB2E2A.20505 at cfl.rr.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>I just joined the list last night.  I've followed the extropian movement
>for some years in a disinterested kind of way but recently became much
>more active in seeking information and contacts with people in the
>"transhumanist" groups.  I am also interested in any other groups/lists
>that people might suggest as being good and active sources of
>information and/or contacts.  I live in Central Florida and am also
>interested in any TH or extro groups local to that area.

Welcome, Mr. Propf!




James...



From cphoenix at CRNano.org  Sat Jun 12 19:50:19 2004
From: cphoenix at CRNano.org (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 15:50:19 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Suggestion to +H groups: Diversify.
In-Reply-To: <200406121800.i5CI0Hn07789@tick.javien.com>
References: <200406121800.i5CI0Hn07789@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <40CB5E7B.9090102@CRNano.org>

Two years ago, Mike Treder and I realized that there was a need for an 
organization like CRN.  So we created one.

We're often asked whether we're competing with Foresight, or were 
frustrated with Foresight, etc.  No!  It has nothing to do with 
Foresight.  The tasks to be accomplished are simply far too big for any 
single organization.  (Or any two; if someone else wants to start a 
nano-preparation organization, PLEASE do!)

We are very different from Foresight.  We don't have members.  We don't 
hold conferences.  We focus on somewhat different things.  We have 
different styles of publishing.  Is this because we think we're better? 
  No!  It's because diversity is good, and styles are different, and we 
do what we're best at.

We don't even work with Foresight very much.  We work with people who 
are also involved in Foresight.  (Drexler's on our Board of Advisors.) 
But the two organizations don't try to do joint projects, or coordinate 
activities.  This is not due to any failure.  It's just that there's so 
much to do that we can be more efficient by picking our separate 
favorite things to work on than by spending time dividing up the space.

And so we never fight.  We don't owe each other anything.  We give each 
other free publicity when we feel like it.  We don't compete for members 
or funding.  If we did something that Foresight actually disliked or 
disapproved of, I assume they'd tell us so; and vice versa; and we might 
agree or not; and either way would be fine.

There's a paradox in economics: if you have one beach and two ice cream 
vendors, with each person walking to the nearest one, the sytem is most 
efficient if the vendors stand at the 1/4 and 3/4 points.  But they'll 
tend to edge closer to each other, jockying for market share, until they 
stand side by side in the middle and everyone has to walk farther to get 
ice cream.

When we started CRN, we did not have a strategy of being different from 
Foresight.  We simply invented ourselves from scratch, and the 
possibilities were so wide that we ended up quite different.  But I 
think it's worked out very well.

So when I see organizations in a space as unexplored as transhumanism 
jockying for control of a single FAQ or a joint policy or a political 
stance, I have to wonder whether they're falling into the pattern of the 
ice cream vendors.  Perhaps less collaboration and more diversity would 
help break some of the logjams.  In organization-space, territory is not 
a zero-sum game.  And sometimes it's best for organizations basically to 
ignore each other--even while cooperation can happen at the level of 
people or projects within those organizations.

I realize that this appears to be the opposite of Mike Treder's "group 
hug" advice.  I don't see any irony or contradiction in that.  It may be 
an example of the diversity/freedom I'm advocating: Mike has close ties 
with the WTA, and I have none at all, and neither of us consulted the 
other before writing our advice.  Just use what works.

Chris

-- 
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From scerir at libero.it  Sat Jun 12 21:06:57 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:06:57 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Latin temperaments
References: <1086760141_325088@mail.cableone.net>	<04Jun9.092723-0400_edt.439945-4729+56279@ams.ftl.affinity.com>	<40C71A1F.3040700@ramonsky.com><470a3c5204060908195f3b17c0@mail.gmail.com><40C853FF.4080801@ramonsky.com><0b6d01c44f05$22821e00$47c01b97@administxl09yj>
	<470a3c5204061202263163a750@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c450c1$32e20540$87bf1b97@administxl09yj>

Giu1i0:
[...] if we interpret "believe in"
as "being cempletely certain of".
Latins see more shades of grey
in the world and have problems in
collapsing their worldview
to black and white.


Giuseppe Prezzolini (1882-1982!)
http://www.lineadinavigazione.it/prezzolini.htm
co-editor of the influential, but short-lived
Florentine magazine "Leonardo", 1903-07, attempted
to modernize Italian culture, introduced significant
French, British, and American ideas, and attacked
traditionalist writers and positivist philosophers.
"Leonardo", at that time, was a sort of "Edge.org",
and Prezzolini and Papini (the other editor) published
papers by mathematicians, artists, philosophers,
writers, etc. (Prezzolini is also known in US
because he was teaching Italian literature,
at the Columbia University, in the '30s-'50s).

Prezzolini, in his late '90s, pointed out to me,
(we were talking in Lugano, a long afternoon), an old
paper http://www.erasmo.it/liberale/testi/0361.htm
he wrote in the '20s, against the starting fascism
(note he was the ma?tre a pens?e and also a friend
of Benito Mussolini).

In that paper he was speaking of a possible
"Congregazione degli 'Apoti'", that is to say
an "Assembly of 'Apoti'". 'Apoti', from the Greek,
actually means "those who do not drink it" easily!

Just a minor "food for thought" memo for a starting
group of latin transhumanists!

s.











From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 12 21:56:10 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 14:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEMKEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <20040612215610.28673.qmail@web50707.mail.yahoo.com>

I couldn't agree more and that is why I'm going to
start writing to some of the congress people to try to
abolish the council on bioethics as you have alluded
to in previous conversation.  I don't relish living my
life in a Logan's Run fascist scenario and I don't
think any of us her do as well.  Perhaps getting
people on our side by lobbying more is one solution
certainly bringing it up in everyday conversation
couldn't hurt.
--- Reason <reason at longevitymeme.org> wrote:
> For discussion, quoting below from myself and George
> Dvorsky. Read the
> articles.
> 
> http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000143.php
>
http://www.betterhumans.com/Features/Columns/Transitory_Human/column.aspx?ar
> ticleID=2004-06-10-1
> http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000092.php
> 
> Government mandated limits to life span: it's an
> ugly idea, frequently
> explored in Science Fiction. Is it likely to happen
> in the real world,
> however? Worse things have been done to people in
> the name of law and
> government in the past, even in the recent past. If
> you live in a developed
> country, the chances are that government employees
> already have a great deal
> of control over your life span: your opinions on the
> matter are usually
> irrelevant.
> 
> ...
> 
> Of late, I have started to explore the idea that
> present day opposition to
> serious anti-aging research (as led by Leon Kass,
> Francis Fukuyama and
> others) will lead to legislation blocking or
> limiting our access to healthy
> life extension technologies.
> 
> Politicians - even in comparatively free countries
> like the US - already
> exert a great deal of control over access to
> medicine, what you can and
> can't do with your body, and what medical research
> is permitted.
> Unfortunately, this power is already being abused -
> as power always is - in
> many areas, including stem cell research and
> therapeutic cloning. It is a
> small leap from the present day functions of the FDA
> to a body that sets
> maximum life spans by enforcing restrictions on new
> anti-aging medical
> technologies.
> 
> George Dvorsky has written an excellent article on
> this topic that is
> currently posted at Betterhumans. I quote a fair
> amount in this post, but
> there is a good deal more where that came from - so
> read the whole thing.
> 
> ...
> 
> I consider myself open to ideas and alternative
> perspectives, but as I
> consider the arguments of the bio-Luddites and look
> deeper into their
> meaning, I have come to realize that the
> death-promoting propaganda campaign
> is more than just a battle for hearts and minds. I
> get the impression
> that?should radical life extension technologies
> become readily
> available?these detractors, some of whom have the
> ear of the President,
> would go much further than fighting a war of words
> in their attempt to
> ensure that we never gain mastery over our
> mortality.
> 
> ...
> 
> At times the bio-Luddites sound parochial and
> authoritarian, and at their
> worst they sound downright ideological and even
> totalitarian.
> 
> Indeed, as Kass has repeatedly stated, "the finitude
> of human life is a
> blessing for every individual, whether he knows it
> or not." And
> frighteningly, when asked by Brian Alexander, the
> author of Rapture: How
> Biotechnology Became the New Religion, if the
> government has a right to tell
> its citizens that they have to die, Fukuyama
> answered, "Yes, absolutely."
> 
> ...
> 
> And as for the bio-Luddite deathists, they're
> offering Americans the worst
> and most useless kind of ethics. It is an ethics
> without foundation in
> reality and devoid of pragmatic guidance and
> practical solutions. It simply
> doesn't do for the coming realities of 21st century
> life.
> 
> ...
> 
> I couldn't agree more, and it's a great shame that
> the field once known as
> medical ethics has degenerated into a coven of high
> profile bioethicists set
> on finding the best way to prevent new medicines
> from saving lives.
> 
> Squashing the opposition to serious anti-aging
> medical research will require
> supporters of healthy life extension to start our
> side of the coming battle
> early. We can't afford to wait for entrenched
> pro-death bioethicists to gain
> even greater influence over our overbearing,
> winner-takes-all governments.
> 
> Reason
> Founder, Longevity Meme
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Devon Fowler

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jun 13 01:43:41 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 18:43:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hungover
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040612130009.01c6c578@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
	<009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612183717.02dbfd80@mail.earthlink.net>

At 01:05 PM 6/12/04 -0500, Damien wrote:

>I'm not an extropian, so I don't have a say, but as an interested observer 
>I'd recommend leaving this alone. Let it go out, probably not even any 
>need to piss on it. Do we really benefit from having the People's Front of 
>Judea brawling in public with the Judean People's Front? (When there were 
>a few racists mouthing off on the exi list I felt differently; that was 
>toxic and had to be dealt with.)

Hey, I'm not an "extropian" either :-)  I'm a transhumanist, always have been.

Listen, you missed the point. It is the business of WTA, so let's leave it 
with WTA.  The only people drawing ExI into this are those, like you, who 
keep pinning one against the other.  Let's have some respect for WTA and 
leave their issues to their Board and those of us who are members of WTA.

I'd rather not see it on this list, but I'm not a moderator so I have no say.

If someone from the press is on this list (which I KNOW they are), and they 
write anything about this and involve ExI in any way that is not true, I 
will have to make a public statement.  It is my responsibility to do that 
in deference to ExI's members.  I did NOT mention the press to start with, 
someone else did and I responded to that.

Thanks,
Natasha



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

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/20040612/47fd2718/attachment.html>

From starman2100 at cableone.net  Sun Jun 13 01:28:05 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 18:28:05 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
Message-ID: <1087090085_29294@mail.cableone.net>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040612/bbdad70f/attachment.html>

From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Jun 13 02:14:26 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 12:14:26 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics
	andlegislation
References: <20040612215610.28673.qmail@web50707.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <009601c450ec$26ceaf80$852c2dcb@homepc>

"devon fowler" wrote:

... I'm going to start writing to some of the congress people
to try to abolish the council on bioethics as you have alluded
to in previous conversation.
------

If you have never written a congressman I reckon that would be
a good experience for you. You would be learning about practical
politics by doing and about how to exert political influence above
and beyond your single vote (especially if you understood that was 
what you were doing). That would be a life lesson you could build
on. 

Note though. It is probably not the "[C/c]ongress people's Council on
Bioethics" that you are concerned with. Nor is it the first structure
ostensibly about ethics or even bioethics set up by politicians to consider
bioethics or ethics from one particular point of view.

If you want to know whose council on bioethics is the one you are 
concerned about perhaps consider its formal name. In 2004, in 
developed western countries, a council comprised of homo-sapiens is
not "owned" like you or I might own say a menagerie of companion
animals. Or not *very* like ;-). But it IS *owned* in the political sense
by the person whose authority is in the name.   

You might see it written in capitalised form something like 
"Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" or some such. 

Here's a further political tip. "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics"
is unlikely to be called "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" for long
if Knucklehead is not a name but a role. 

It is extremely unlikely that Knucklehead number 44 will chose to 
use the title "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" when the 44th
person in the role replaces the 43rd because the 44th person will
want to re-brand. And if the 44th person is not smart enough to
know they should rebrand they probably will not be politcally smart
enough to be the 44th person in the Knucklehead role. 

Regards,
Brett Paatsch 



From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 04:04:28 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:04:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics
	andlegislation
In-Reply-To: <009601c450ec$26ceaf80$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20040613040428.18630.qmail@web50701.mail.yahoo.com>

Interesting take on politics I'm not completely sure
what you exactly mean by "Knucklehead's Council for
Bioethics," and I don't exactly know how to influence
beyond my one vote unless I have some respectable
position in politics which I don't.  

I'm sorry I didn't quite get the rest of your message
with reference to the idea of 'knuckleheads' could you
rephrase?
Devon
--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> "devon fowler" wrote:
> 
> .... I'm going to start writing to some of the
> congress people
> to try to abolish the council on bioethics as you
> have alluded
> to in previous conversation.
> ------
> 
> If you have never written a congressman I reckon
> that would be
> a good experience for you. You would be learning
> about practical
> politics by doing and about how to exert political
> influence above
> and beyond your single vote (especially if you
> understood that was 
> what you were doing). That would be a life lesson
> you could build
> on. 
> 
> Note though. It is probably not the "[C/c]ongress
> people's Council on
> Bioethics" that you are concerned with. Nor is it
> the first structure
> ostensibly about ethics or even bioethics set up by
> politicians to consider
> bioethics or ethics from one particular point of
> view.
> 
> If you want to know whose council on bioethics is
> the one you are 
> concerned about perhaps consider its formal name. In
> 2004, in 
> developed western countries, a council comprised of
> homo-sapiens is
> not "owned" like you or I might own say a menagerie
> of companion
> animals. Or not *very* like ;-). But it IS *owned*
> in the political sense
> by the person whose authority is in the name.   
> 
> You might see it written in capitalised form
> something like 
> "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics" or some such. 
> 
> Here's a further political tip. "Knucklehead's
> Council for Bioethics"
> is unlikely to be called "Knucklehead's Council for
> Bioethics" for long
> if Knucklehead is not a name but a role. 
> 
> It is extremely unlikely that Knucklehead number 44
> will chose to 
> use the title "Knucklehead's Council for Bioethics"
> when the 44th
> person in the role replaces the 43rd because the
> 44th person will
> want to re-brand. And if the 44th person is not
> smart enough to
> know they should rebrand they probably will not be
> politcally smart
> enough to be the 44th person in the Knucklehead
> role. 
> 
> Regards,
> Brett Paatsch 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 04:09:23 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 21:09:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040613040923.28978.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>

I agree with you completely Michael let's not let
infighting ruin the dreams of transhumanist alike.  We
have far loftier and nobler goals than to squabble
over petty politics, my understanding is things are
reconciling and although I have my personal opinions I
will refrain from airing them in keeping with progress
not regress.  
--- MIKE TREDER <iph1954 at msn.com> wrote:
> As an original and current WTA Director, and as a
> member of the Executive 
> Advisory Team for the Extropy Institute, I?ve been
> dismayed and disheartened 
> by the recent unpleasantness between people within
> the two organizations. It 
> is unnecessary, unseemly, and counterproductive. In
> a silly fight like this, 
> there are no winners, only losers.
> 
> It seems patently obvious to me that we have so much
> to gain by working 
> together and so much to lose by defeating each other
> ? why can?t we keep our 
> eyes on the prize? The tendency of some to be
> offensive and provocative, and 
> the tendency of others to be defensive and
> destructive, can only lead to 
> ruin for us all.
> 
> I can easily find fault on both sides, although I
> prefer to focus on our 
> common and complementary strengths instead of
> dwelling on what divides us. 
> I?ve urged James Hughes and Nick Bostrom to exercise
> leadership by being 
> inclusive and conciliatory; I?ve counseled Harvey
> Newstrom and Bruce Klein 
> to show restraint and to seek compromises that
> satisfy everyone?s primary 
> needs. But my efforts to be a calming influence seem
> to have had little 
> effect.
> 
> Still, we must try. Let?s remember that none of us
> are transhumans yet; we 
> are only imperfect humans dreaming of and working
> toward a better future. 
> Our leaders, representatives, and fellow members are
> subject to flaws and 
> failings, as are each of us. But there are no
> monsters running loose, no one 
> is trying to become a dictator, and those who issue
> criticism are not crazy 
> or evil. We?re just folks (at least until the
> Singularity).
> 
> I appeal to everyone ? WTA members, Extropians,
> transhumanists of all 
> stripes ? to refocus on our highest priorities.
> Let?s begin by making 
> positive statements about what we must stand for;
> remember why we came 
> together in the first place; stand in a virtual
> circle, hold cyber hands, 
> sing a couple of inspiring songs, have an Internet
> group hug, and then get 
> back to work.
> 
> See you in the future!
> 
> Mike Treder
> Executive Director, Center for Responsible
> Nanotechnology - 
> http://CRNano.org
> Director, World Transhumanist Association -
> http://transhumanism.org
> Founder, Incipient Posthuman Website -
> http://incipientposthuman.com
> Executive Advisory Team, Extropy Institute -
> http://extropy.org
> KurzweilAI "Big Thinker" -
> http://kurzweilai.net/bios/frame.html
> 
> "Keep away from people who try to belittle your
> ambitions. Small people 
> always do that, but the really great make you feel
> that you, too, can become 
> great." - Mark Twain
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
Devon Fowler


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From scerir at libero.it  Sun Jun 13 05:18:12 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 07:18:12 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] I warned you, you fools!
References: <6.0.3.0.0.20040607231008.01ba03b0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <004e01c45105$d34223f0$b6c61b97@administxl09yj>

Damien Broderick:
> It can lead to this kind of disaster: 
> http://www.noosfere.com/Showcase/IMAGES/futfic_33.jpg

completely different, but with some music ...
http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/sorcerer/html/jw_wells.html



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Jun 13 05:48:54 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 00:48:54 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hungover
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612183717.02dbfd80@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
	<009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612183717.02dbfd80@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20040613004043.01c96478@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 06:43 PM 6/12/2004 -0700, Natasha quoted me:

>>I'm not an extropian, so I don't have a say, but as an interested 
>>observer I'd recommend leaving this alone.
>
>Hey, I'm not an "extropian" either :-)

Eh? It says here: "President, Extropy Institute."

I know you don't like the clumsy term `extropianism', because it seems to 
imply cultishness or clannishness or something, but I haven't seen any 
suggestion that all the people on the list who call themselves extropians 
(like Spike, say) are mistaken in doing so. What gives with that?

>Listen, you missed the point. It is the business of WTA, so let's leave it 
>with WTA.

But that's what I just suggested: to leave it alone.

I find the next bit *extremely* puzzling:

>The only people drawing ExI into this are those, like you, who keep 
>pinning one against the other.

Huh? My suggestion was that people *avoid* pitting one against the other, 
even if goaded. Let the flames die down, right?

Damien Broderick



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Jun 13 06:06:09 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:06:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
In-Reply-To: <40CB2E2A.20505@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <00ea01c4510c$86275ac0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

Central Florida?  Where in Central Florida?  Orlando?

Welcome aboard Gregory.

spike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Gregory Propf
> Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2004 9:24 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
> 
> 
> I just joined the list last night...I live in Central Florida and am
also 
> interested in any TH or extro groups local to that area.




From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jun 13 08:11:29 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:11:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNIENAEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <470a3c52040612021277123ed2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040613003601.02db8210@mail.earthlink.net>

At 12:03 PM 6/12/04 -0700, Reason wrote:

>This is a common perception, and it's one that I subscribe to. The current
>leadership of the WTA is pro-socialist and virulently anti-libertarian. That
>is the organizational bias despite the public stance of non-alignment.
>My reading of the Extropy Principles (
>http://www.extropy.org/principles.htm ) is that they require a libertarian
>system of governance: right there under "open society" is a long description
>of the desirable traits of a minarchist or otherwise distributed governance
>system. So from this, and many other statements and actions, I conclude that
>the current leadership of ExI is biased towards libertarianism despite the
>public stance of non-alignment.

Reason, you are incorrect.  The philosophy of extropy and its principles do 
not rely on any one political system to function. That would be very narrow 
in scope and contrary to futurism.  In order to understand this, one might 
have to be knowledgeable in history and theories of social change, but I 
don't think so.  What we need to do is to think outside the political box. 
That box is too small and lacks enough holes to allow a sufficient flow of 
oxygen (maybe that is why brains are faltering when transhumanists base 
everything on politics! :-))

Now, here is the key:  an open society is quite democratic.  Do you know 
what open society means in principle?  "Definitions of open society on the 
Web:  a society that allows its members considerable freedom (as in a 
democracy). "  This principle does not mean, "an open society where no 
rules apply."   For goodness sakes!  We need rules to coexist in the world.

It's late and I'm tired, but I thought I'd send these few, short quotes for 
the benefit of those in doubt:

The Economist
"Toward a Global Open Society," 1998

"Our global society contains many different customs, traditions, and 
religions; where can it find the shared values that would hold it together? 
I should like to put forward the idea of what I call the open society as a 
universal principle that recognizes the diversity inherent in our global 
society, yet provides a conceptual basis for establishing the institutions 
we need. I realize that gaining acceptance for a universal principle is a 
tall order, but I cannot see how we can do without it."

"From Popper, Karl R., The Open Society and its Enemies, Rev. Ed., 
Princeton U. Press, 1950, p.181. Quoting Pericles' famous funeral oration 
as reported by Thucydides:

"Our political system does not compete with institutions which are 
elsewhere in force. We do not copy our neighbors, but try to be an example. 
Our administration favors the many instead of the few: this is why it is 
called a democracy. The laws afford equal justice to all alike in their 
private disputes, but we do not ignore the claims of excellence. When a 
citizen distinguishes himself, then he will be called to serve the state, 
in preference to others, not as a matter of privilege, but as a reward of 
merit; and poverty is no bar.

... The freedom we enjoy extends also to ordinary life; we are not 
suspicious of one another, and we do not nag our neighbor if he chooses to 
go his own way. ... But this freedom does not make us lawless. We are 
taught to respect the magistrates and the laws, and never to forget that we 
must protect the injured. And we are also taught to observe those unwritten 
laws whose sanction lies only in the universal feeling of what is right...."


"Open Society News: Democracy in Southeast Asia
A Hard Road Ahead"

Fall-Winter 2002/3

"Southeast Asia is a region where some states have developed rapidly and 
raised living standards by producing goods and resources for world markets 
and working with multinational corporations. It is also a region where the 
forces of globalization have decimated the environment, fueled human rights 
abuses, and helped stifle the development of open society by enriching and 
entrenching corrupt regimes.

"The Fall-Winter 2002/3 issue of Open Society News highlights OSI's efforts 
to promote democracy and open society and to eliminate the worst effects of 
globalization in Southeast Asia. While the individual articles highlight 
problems, they also demonstrate how aspects of globalization, such as the 
increasing use of international law and greater cooperation and 
communication among civil society organizations throughout the world, can 
be forces for the growth of open society. "

"The Open Society- Media, Democracy and Multiculturalism"
Ecologia incepe aici
2004

"AEGEE Novi Sad invites the representatives of your organization to attend 
the Academic Training Course "The Open Society- Media, Democracy and 
Multiculturalism", Youth for South-East Europe project, which will take 
place in Novi Sad, Yugoslavia, between 7-14 December 2002.

"The Training course aims at helping young activists of nongovernmental 
organizations from transition countries in the SEE region gain a deeper 
insight and understanding of the complex matters which influence their 
activities and daily life and to offer the participants a much needed 
possibility to improve the knowledge, skills and contacts relevant to their 
youth work. This would be achieved through the series of team-building 
activities: plenary sessions, case study sessions and tutorials. The 
participants will be students and young professionals who hold key 
positions in South-East European non-governmental organizations."

The Advertiser-Tribune 2004

"Records kept by government should be accessible to the public except in 
limited and specified instances. Making records secret chips away at the 
freedoms and protections that we enjoy in a open society."

My best to all -

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/20040613/05ad6880/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jun 13 08:29:51 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:29:51 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hungover
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040613004043.01c96478@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040612183717.02dbfd80@mail.earthlink.net>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<BAY5-F4Iras2lKn53y30003e74c@hotmail.com>
	<009701c45085$96c8c8f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612122728.02e57a10@mail.earthlink.net>
	<5.2.0.9.0.20040612183717.02dbfd80@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040613011526.02db9620@mail.earthlink.net>

At 12:48 AM 6/13/04 -0500, Damien wrote:

>At 06:43 PM 6/12/2004 -0700, Natasha quoted me:
>
>>>I'm not an extropian, so I don't have a say, but as an interested 
>>>observer I'd recommend leaving this alone.
>>
>>Hey, I'm not an "extropian" either :-)
>
>Eh? It says here: "President, Extropy Institute."

Yes I am :-)  I don't use the term extropian.

>I know you don't like the clumsy term `extropianism', because it seems to 
>imply cultishness or clannishness or something, but I haven't seen any 
>suggestion that all the people on the list who call themselves extropians 
>(like Spike, say) are mistaken in doing so. What gives with that?

You are right.  Oh my, listen people can call themselves whatever makes 
them feel good.  I was a transhumanist long before I knew of Extropy 
Institute, and when I found out about ExI, I thought it was the best 
organization around to get transhumanism off the ground.  (Remember 
Extropy, the Journal of Transhumanist Thought" way back in the early 1990s 
-)  It caught my eye and I became a member of ExI.  My philosophical view 
is that of the transhumanist philosophy of Extropy.

>>Listen, you missed the point. It is the business of WTA, so let's leave 
>>it with WTA.
>
>But that's what I just suggested: to leave it alone.

Okay, sorry.  It was the drama of your writing :-)

>>The only people drawing ExI into this are those, like you, who keep 
>>pinning one against the other.
>
>Huh? My suggestion was that people *avoid* pitting one against the other, 
>even if goaded. Let the flames die down, right?

I'm sorry, let me explain.

You wrote:  'I'm not an extropian, so I don't have a say, but as an 
interested observer I'd recommend leaving this alone. Let it go out, 
probably not even any need to piss on it. Do we really benefit from having 
the People's Front of Judea brawling in public with the Judean People's Front?"

By this, the inference is that ExI is one of these parties and WTA is 
another of the parties, above.   ExI is NOT one of the players in the 
current situation with WTA.   The players/parties are WTA's Board.  I hope 
this explains.

I wrote a couple of short posts this past week stating that ExI is not 
involved with WTA's business (nor should it be) and I stated that it would 
be in all our best interest if we did not refer to the current problems 
there or on the WTA-chat list. When any of us, including me, bring ExI into 
WTA's problems it goes off course.  So, by this very post, I am 
contributing to the perpetuation of this nonsense. Damn.

warmly,
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/20040613/cc625697/attachment.html>

From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 13 06:39:51 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <92D9968C-BC40-11D8-85E5-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <20040613063951.53678.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>

Samantha I agree completely with your statements. 
Enhancements helping the well are important in their
own right and we have to stop government interventions
from preventing the enhancments that the so called
'well' want.  It is my belief that everyone is not as
well as they could be so in a sense we are all
somewhat in need of therapy!  Regime change is so
important...how is this going to happen though?...
--- Samantha Atkins <samantha at objectent.com> wrote:
> With national health care just around the corner,
> one has to wonder how 
> far the hazy line between "therapy" and
> "enhancement" will be pushed.  
> When the government is the single payer cum single
> insurer the push 
> will be one to not "waste" those tax dollars and
> give everyone "his or 
> her fair share".   Dollars to donuts all forms of
> "enhancement" will be 
> unsupported.   And when the tax bite increases and
> the number of 
> private citizens going to out-of-the-norm
> specialists decreases the 
> price of these "enhancements" will go higher and
> higher due to lack of 
> any economy of scale or research dollars or payments
> for expensive 
> operations using advanced techniques that would push
> the state of the 
> art.   And if we don't get regime change in November
> the situations is 
> as bad or worse.
> 
> Sigh.
> 
> - samantha
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From starman2100 at cableone.net  Sun Jun 13 06:34:42 2004
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:34:42 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hug & Society for Venturism
Message-ID: <1087108482_146799@mail.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040612/41a93c00/attachment.ksh>

From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sun Jun 13 08:00:10 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 01:00:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040613003601.02db8210@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNAENMEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


---> Natasha Vita-More [mailto:natasha at natasha.cc]

>>At 12:03 PM 6/12/04 -0700, Reason wrote:
>>
>>My reading of the Extropy Principles (
>>http://www.extropy.org/principles.htm ) is that they require a
>>libertarian system of governance: right there under "open society"
>>is a long description of the desirable traits of a minarchist or
>>otherwise distributed governance system. So from this, and many
>>other statements and actions, I conclude that the current
>>leadership of ExI is biased towards libertarianism despite the
>>public stance of non-alignment.
>
>Reason, you are incorrect.  The philosophy of extropy and its
>principles do not rely on any one political system to function.
>That would be very narrow in scope and contrary to futurism.  In
>order to understand this, one might have to be knowledgeable in history
>and theories of social change, but I don't think so.  What we need to
>do is to think outside the political box. That box is too small and
>lacks enough holes to allow a sufficient flow of oxygen (maybe that is
>why brains are faltering when transhumanists base everything on
>politics! :-))
>
>Now, here is the key:  an open society is quite democratic.  Do you
>know what open society means in principle?  "Definitions of open
>society on the Web:  a society that allows its members considerable
>freedom (as in a democracy). " This principle does not mean, "an open
>society where no rules apply."   For goodness sakes!  We need rules to
>coexist in the world.

The perception that a libertarian society is a society without rules (I
assume you mean rules in the sense of laws) is a disturbingly common one.
It's wrong. A society without laws is an anarchy. Libertarianism is not
anarchism: it encompasses differing forms of governance (including the
inappropriately named anarcho-capitalism) that are all characterised by a
strong rule of law. The principle difference between these societies and any
present day state are the ways in which this law is arrived at, changed, and
enforced.

In general, libertarianism tends to decentralization of decision making and
dispute resolution mechanisms, and thus greater personal freedom through
true pluralism. Coercion through force for any reason other than
self-defense is frowned upon. Freedom of choice, contract, and association
is prized. Most present day systems of government tend towards
centralization and thus suppression of individual choice. Coercion through
force is everywhere, and freedom of choice, contract and association thus
suffers accordingly.

Now you can argue that the lines in the principles that say:

"Opposing authoritarian social control and unnecessary hierarchy and
favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power and responsibility.
Preferring bargaining over battling, exchange over extortion, and
communication over compulsion."

and the lengthy expansion of these lines in section 5 do not refer to
libertarian ideals if you like, but I'm really not convinced. So we should
probably leave it there.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme




From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jun 13 15:38:32 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 08:38:32 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNAENMEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040613003601.02db8210@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040613082359.02dbad20@mail.earthlink.net>

At 01:00 AM 6/13/04 -0700, Reason wrote:

>Now you can argue that the lines in the principles that say:
>
>"Opposing authoritarian social control and unnecessary hierarchy and
>favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power and responsibility.
>Preferring bargaining over battling, exchange over extortion, and
>communication over compulsion."
>
>and the lengthy expansion of these lines in section 5 do not refer to
>libertarian ideals if you like, but I'm really not convinced. So we should
>probably leave it there.

If you are of the people, by the people, for the people, it works for you.

This might be of importance to all who are interested, the upcoming RU 
Sirius magazine article deals with the Extropy principles.  I'm not sure 
when it comes out though.

N


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/20040613/48f7c61c/attachment.html>

From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Jun 13 15:17:10 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 11:17:10 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Group Hungover
In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20040613004043.01c96478@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BDC881BA-BD4C-11D8-9D18-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 01:48 am, Damien Broderick wrote:

> I find the next bit *extremely* puzzling:
>
>> The only people drawing ExI into this are those, like you, who keep 
>> pinning one against the other.
>
> Huh? My suggestion was that people *avoid* pitting one against the 
> other, even if goaded. Let the flames die down, right?
>

I think Natasha's point is that there is no battle between ExI and WTA. 
  The recent problem with WTA Board's meltdown was an internal WTA 
problem.  Some people are trying to blame WTA problems on ExI, and 
other people (like you, no offense) are buying into the spin that maybe 
there is a current argument going on between ExI and WTA.  There isn't. 
  Some of the WTA Board refuses to work with duly elected WTA Board 
members like myself, Jose and Bruce, and consider us to be "Extropian 
plants" or moles into "their" organization.  They blame all our 
complaints about ethical problems on the WTA Board to be "ExI attacks" 
on "their" organization.  This is what Natasha is trying to defuse.  I 
know of no resent battles between the two organizations.  The big 
fireworks have all been internal to WTA itself.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sun Jun 13 17:03:09 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 13:03:09 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
In-Reply-To: <1087090085_29294@mail.cableone.net>
References: <1087090085_29294@mail.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <40CC88CD.2050806@cfl.rr.com>

starman2100 at cableone.net wrote:

>Hello Gregory,
>
>Welcome to the list!  You will be regularly finding nuggets of knowledge and 
>wisdom here & get to meet some interesting characters. lol  I recommend you also 
>join Cryonet (the cryonics list).  Rudi Hoffman is a regular contributor to it 
>and a fellow Floridian who is a very dedicated cryonicist and a gregarious 
>gentleman as well. 
>
>www.cryonet.org <http://www.cryonet.org>
>

I'll try to get on this today.  Didn't realize those guys were here in FL.

>
>I would encourage you to seriously consider getting a cryonics policy regardless 
>of your age.  Disease and/or accident can strike unexpectedly and suddenly make 
>you uninsurable.  Cryonics is the ultimate safety net (hopefully never needed 
>but...) should the unthinkable happen.
>
>www.alcor.org <http://www.alcor.org>
>

Yeah, I keep thinking about this.  Somehow, I just keep putting it off.  
Partly due to apprehension.  I don't know what I'm afraid of exactly.  
At 35 I could get cheap insurance.  And as they say "cryonics is the 
second worst thing that can happen to you" :)  Perhaps the idea of 
having to be "outed" at some point by my relatives.  I'm single so I 
don't have to have the "honey I'm going to be frozen" talk with wifey 
and I would never marry anyone who wasn't a THer herself anyway but I 
wonder how my uncles and parents might react.  They already think I'm 
pretty weird though, maybe this would just be filed as another "Greg 
thing". Hehehe :)







From brian at posthuman.com  Sun Jun 13 17:29:19 2004
From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 12:29:19 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
In-Reply-To: <40CC88CD.2050806@cfl.rr.com>
References: <1087090085_29294@mail.cableone.net> <40CC88CD.2050806@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <40CC8EEF.50705@posthuman.com>

Sometimes it helps to imagine yourself having a nice large surprise 
heart attack at oh around age 45. Or better yet that you get diagnosed 
with terminal cancer, and oops insurance is out of the question now. In 
those last few conscious moments are you going to feel ok that you 
aren't signed up for cryonics, or instead be kicking yourself because 
you let some vague social worries seal your fate?

P.S. I also found that irrationally but powerfully it did help to 
actually see some other people in person who are already signed up. So 
if there are people within driving distance who get together 
occasionally, then go visit them. Or perhaps you would enjoy this link:

"Facing" Cryonics
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=61&t=3311
-- 
Brian Atkins
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/


From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sun Jun 13 18:59:36 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 14:59:36 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
In-Reply-To: <00ea01c4510c$86275ac0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <00ea01c4510c$86275ac0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <40CCA418.3060105@cfl.rr.com>

Spike wrote:

>Central Florida?  Where in Central Florida?  Orlando?
>
>Welcome aboard Gregory.
>
Yeah.  Mousetown.



From spike66 at comcast.net  Sun Jun 13 19:45:31 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 12:45:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <40CCA418.3060105@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> >Central Florida?  Where in Central Florida?  Orlando?
> >
> Yeah.  Mousetown.

Harvey Newstrom is one of lads from central Florida.
I grew up in Titusville, about an hour to your right.  
Both geographically and politically.  {8^D

Regarding your family outing you because of being a
cryonicist, do get over that.  You might be surprised
by having several of them come to the same conclusion
you did: a long shot is better than no shot at all.

Gregory, a movie came out shortly after you were born
called the Poseidon Adventure.  I saw it when I was 11.
It is one of my all-time faves, inspiring as all hell.  
I haven't seen it since 1972, but as I recall the story 
went like this:

- New Years Eve aboard huge ocean liner, parties bigtime

- Tsunami capsizes ship, many proles perish

- Survivors in ballroom debate what to do

- Fiery young priest urges they climb to bottom of ship

- Ernie Borgnine objects: Bottom of the ship?  What the hell 
good will that do?  If you make it there alive, you still 
have an inch thick steel plate over your head!

- Fiery young priest: Ja, well, thats one inch less than
two inches.

- Survivors realize they can sit tight and perish when
the ship eventually sinks, or they can take the long shot
and start climbing up to the bottom of the ship.

If you do not already know what happened after that,
get thee to the video store and view that movie.  Go on,
do it today, do it now.  Additional incentive: there is
even a naked lady involved.  Hey, it was the 70s.  Back
then, sex was safe and violence was dangerous.

Cryonics is like the Poseidon Adventure.  Start climbing.

spike



From max at maxmore.com  Sun Jun 13 20:09:30 2004
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 15:09:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] Group Hug
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNAENMEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040613003601.02db8210@mail.earthlink.net>
	<FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNAENMEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040613145309.03812980@mail.earthlink.net>

The next issue of NeoFiles will publish an interview with me. This includes 
my most recent and extensive clarification of the relationship between the 
Principles of Extropy and compatible political views. As soon as it's 
published, I'll provide a pointer here.

In the meantime, there's a pretty good explanation in ExI's FAQ. I 
recommend consulting official sources like this before anyone makes claims 
based on their idiosyncratic perceptions. Here's the section:

http://www.extropy.org/faq.htm#5.1



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

Do extropian transhumanists have political or economic views in 
common?  Individuals will choose whether or not they feel comfortable 
describing themselves as extropian transhumanists depending on whether they 
share the values and attitudes expressed by The Principles of Extropy. 
Those principles do not proclaim any specific, detailed political or 
economic doctrine. The two principles most relevant here are "Open Society" 
and "Self-Direction". For the full version of each see The Principles of 
Extropy 3.1. In brief, these state:

OPEN SOCIETY: Supporting social orders that foster freedom of speech, 
freedom of action, and experimentation. Opposing authoritarian social 
control and favoring the rule of law and decentralization of power. 
Preferring bargaining over battling, and exchange over compulsion. Openness 
to improvement rather than a static utopia.

SELF-DIRECTION: Seeking independent thinking, individual freedom, personal 
responsibility, self-direction, self-esteem, and respect for others.

Clearly some political views will be incompatible with extropian thinking. 
That is one way in which the philosophy of extropy may differ from other 
forms of transhumanism. For instance, technocratic transhumanists may favor 
setting up an elite group to determine which genetic modifications are 
allowed or which are compulsory for the general population. Socialist 
transhumanists would want to centralize control over all economic activity 
in order to shape the future. It's worth noting that socialist 
transhumanists sometimes characterize themselves as "democratic 
transhumanists" but use the term "democracy" to refer to the socialist goal 
of using government power to compel everyone to fit into their notion of 
"equality". Democracy, in the more generally accepted sense, is one 
important way of implementing the principle of Open Society.

Extropian transhumanists generally favor market mechanisms over centralized 
government control, seeing this as the way to protect self-direction and 
open society. But the boundaries between market and government, especially 
when it comes to determining the legal rules according to which the market 
functions, are not always clear. Some extropian transhumanists, for 
example, favor the idea of private communities in which something that 
looks much like a government exists (but with universal consent of initial 
entrants). In addition, the distinction between government regulation 
(interference) and the clarification of the property rights underlying 
markets may not always be sharp.

While all extropian transhumanists generally prefer voluntary market 
approaches to economic issues, we may differ among ourselves about the 
extent of the proper role of government. Some may favor government subsidy 
of basic scientific research, or certain regulations they believe necessary 
to maintaining a maximally open society, or the provision of services they 
think will be poorly provided without state intervention. Others may favor 
a minimal government that does little or nothing other than maintain the 
legal order of the marketplace. And some would like to experiment with 
entirely novel social orders using "polycentric law", which turns 
law-making itself into a market function.

The fit between the philosophy of extropy and political views therefore is 
loose, but not infinitely so. Given commitments to Open Society and 
Self-Direction, there cannot be Stalinist or socialist or fascist or 
theocratic extropian transhumanists. Any other political positions that, 
upon reflection, fit with the goals of fostering open social orders, 
advancing technological progress, and personal responsibility is compatible 
with the philosophy of extropy. Which social orders and economic rules best 
further shared extropic values is a matter for ongoing consideration.

In the end, a crucial point is that extropian transhumanists are 
individualists, and so see political and economic institutions as means to 
the progress of (trans)humanity. Dogmatic adherence to any specific 
political doctrine in the face of developing thought is therefore 
inappropriate. It is equally inappropriate for non-extropian transhumanists 
to attempt to pigeonhole extropian transhumanists as all being cut from the 
same political cloth


Onward!

Max

_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org
_______________________________________________________




From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Jun 13 20:55:09 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 16:55:09 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <F4CF5FFF-BD7B-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 03:45 pm, Spike wrote:

>>> Central Florida?  Where in Central Florida?  Orlando?
>>>
>> Yeah.  Mousetown.
>
> Harvey Newstrom is one of lads from central Florida.

Yep.  Born and raised in Melbourne.  Unfortunately, I am currently 
working for SAIC as a Principal Security Architect on the National 
Archives and Records Administration in Washington, DC.  I only get back 
home about once a month.

> Regarding your family outing you because of being a
> cryonicist, do get over that.  You might be surprised
> by having several of them come to the same conclusion
> you did: a long shot is better than no shot at all.

Forget it.  Families will think you're weird no matter what you do.  
You have to do what you believe and not worry about what other people 
think.  Your family will get over it, or possibly not.  But you have a 
simple choice:  live your life the way you want to or the way others 
want you to.  It's not an easy decision, but I think it is obvious.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Jun 13 21:26:13 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 17:26:13 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
References: <F4CF5FFF-BD7B-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <002901c4518d$0e505200$86893cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, June 13, 2004 4:55 PM Harvey Newstrom mail at harveynewstrom.com
wrote:
> Forget it.  Families will think you're weird
> no matter what you do.

True.  I usually don't bring up the life extension thing to most people
these days.  If they ask me, I'll tell them, but I don't broadcast like
I used to.  (This brings up another point.  I recall several years
ago -- mid-1990s -- being at a cryonics meeting and half of the crowd -- 
it was a group of about 8 people -- were obese and eating junk food.
Cryonics is a long shot and probably worth taking, but why not also take
the even less chancey strategy of taking care of your overall health as
well?  The two should not be seen as mutually exclusive...)

> You have to do what you believe and not
> worry about what other people think.  Your
> family will get over it, or possibly not.  But
> you have a simple choice:  live your life
> the way you want to or the way others
> want you to.  It's not an easy decision,
> but I think it is obvious.

Words of wisdoms.

Verily,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Jun 13 21:57:27 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 14:57:27 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics
	andlegislation
In-Reply-To: <00b601c45099$eb528a50$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <00b601c45099$eb528a50$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <A8E64840-BD84-11D8-85E5-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Jun 12, 2004, at 9:25 AM, Spike wrote:
>
> There are some advantages to having the Fed up to
> its elected eyeballs in debt: it is less able to
> take on and screw up new areas of our lives.
>
>

Huh?  *We* are up to our eyeballs in debt.   Many hundred of billions 
of our wealth are extracted every single year just to pay the interest 
on this debt.    We are less able to take on and succeed at many things 
we fervently wish to do.

- samantha



From samantha at objectent.com  Sun Jun 13 22:02:35 2004
From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 15:02:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] New to the list
In-Reply-To: <40CC88CD.2050806@cfl.rr.com>
References: <1087090085_29294@mail.cableone.net> <40CC88CD.2050806@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <607DA902-BD85-11D8-85E5-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>


On Jun 13, 2004, at 10:03 AM, Gregory Propf wrote:
> Yeah, I keep thinking about this.  Somehow, I just keep putting it 
> off.  Partly due to apprehension.  I don't know what I'm afraid of 
> exactly.  At 35 I could get cheap insurance.  And as they say 
> "cryonics is the second worst thing that can happen to you" :)  
> Perhaps the idea of having to be "outed" at some point by my 
> relatives.  I'm single so I don't have to have the "honey I'm going to 
> be frozen" talk with wifey and I would never marry anyone who wasn't a 
> THer herself anyway but I wonder how my uncles and parents might 
> react.  They already think I'm pretty weird though, maybe this would 
> just be filed as another "Greg thing". Hehehe :)
>

Isn't it amusing (well, not really) that we (somewhat) evolved primates 
care more for what other primates may think of us than we care for what 
we ourselves reason is the right thing to do?   Don't let social 
[dis]approval rob you.

-s



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 01:52:33 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:52:33 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <40CD04E1.3040108@cfl.rr.com>

Spike wrote:

>
>Harvey Newstrom is one of lads from central Florida.
>I grew up in Titusville, about an hour to your right.  
>Both geographically and politically.  {8^D
>
>Regarding your family outing you because of being a
>cryonicist, do get over that.  You might be surprised
>by having several of them come to the same conclusion
>you did: a long shot is better than no shot at all.
>
Oh I know.  Mostly I just make excuses.  One concern though is 
insurance.  What are some of the policies people have had experience 
with?  Good companies perhaps friendly to the cryonics movement?  I 
really don't trust corporate bureacrats any more than the governmental 
sort and I don't want to get the "Ted Williams" treatment with people 
arguing over where the money is.  Also, how is the medical establishment 
(another bunch I don't trust) made aware of one's preference?  Is there 
a cryo tag you can wear like those allergy med-alert things?



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 02:04:59 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:04:59 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <F4CF5FFF-BD7B-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <F4CF5FFF-BD7B-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <40CD07CB.1070908@cfl.rr.com>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

>
> On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 03:45 pm, Spike wrote:


>
> Yep.  Born and raised in Melbourne.  Unfortunately, I am currently 
> working for SAIC as a Principal Security Architect on the National 
> Archives and Records Administration in Washington, DC.  I only get 
> back home about once a month.

Nice to meet you Harvey.  Been reading on imminst about the whole foobar 
at WTA.  Pity about all that but I must admit that it's too much to 
follow at the moment.  Bruce K. seems like a super nice guy.  Just the 
way he writes appeals to me.  Anyway, I post there as Kerr_Avon.  What 
is Principal Security Architect?  I take it you are in infosec.  I'm a 
programmer for your competitor Grumman myself.  I hate my job >:(

>
> Forget it.  Families will think you're weird no matter what you do.  
> You have to do what you believe and not worry about what other people 
> think.  Your family will get over it, or possibly not.  But you have a 
> simple choice:  live your life the way you want to or the way others 
> want you to.  It's not an easy decision, but I think it is obvious.

I have little to lose with cryonics itself actually.  It's that my 
family is a smart but conventional bunch.  They will quickly draw 
implications.  He wants to be frozen --> probably doesn't believe in the 
big Republican National Convention* in the sky --> probably doesn't 
believe in the nasty Hebrew sky-god anymore --> probably a fuckin Commie 
--> Needs to be killed ;-)

Ok, the last bit was exaggeration but you get the idea.

* Sorry, but that convention (the real one not the supernatural one) IS 
coming up guys and it seems politics is tolerated here to some extent.

- Greg



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 02:21:07 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:21:07 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <002901c4518d$0e505200$86893cd1@neptune>
References: <F4CF5FFF-BD7B-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<002901c4518d$0e505200$86893cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <40CD0B93.4030209@cfl.rr.com>

Technotranscendence wrote:

>True.  I usually don't bring up the life extension thing to most people
>these days.  If they ask me, I'll tell them, but I don't broadcast like
>I used to.  (This brings up another point.  I recall several years
>ago -- mid-1990s -- being at a cryonics meeting and half of the crowd -- 
>it was a group of about 8 people -- were obese and eating junk food.
>Cryonics is a long shot and probably worth taking, but why not also take
>the even less chancey strategy of taking care of your overall health as
>well?  The two should not be seen as mutually exclusive...)
>
>  
>
Bet they were a bunch of computer nerds.  The same memetic attractors 
bring people to transhumanist/extropian views seem to bring them into 
the IT field.  Unfortunately, the IT industry is one of the least 
healthy on the planet right now.  Workaholism, candy and soda as the 
majority of the diet, etc...  Where I work I went through the hallway in 
my mind one day and categorized the people there.  I could only think of 
1 or 2 who were in the "healthy" weight range out of like 25 people.  I 
used to be one of them too.  I never actually ate much sugar but I had a 
thing for cheese and starchy stuff and of course just ate whatever I 
wanted to in giant quantities.  I'm now doing calorie restriction, 
working out and I post on the CR list too.  Lost the weight and now 
people are hassling me over that though.  "You're too thin", "you look 
bony", "you're wasting away", etc... Yeah, but I bet I could bench press 
most of them.

Your handle reminds me of my current favorite poem "Technoliberation" by 
Greg Egan (a great writer of hard sci-fi packed with transhumanist 
ideas).  I won't post it here but look it up on google sometime.



From brian at posthuman.com  Mon Jun 14 02:34:28 2004
From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:34:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <40CD04E1.3040108@cfl.rr.com>
References: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<40CD04E1.3040108@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <40CD0EB4.4010007@posthuman.com>

Gregory there's a really super insurance guy down there in FL named Rudi 
Hoffman. He's a whiz with cryonics stuff - and he's glad to answer 
whatever questions you can think up. I highly recommend him, and I know 
many more people here and elsewhere do as well.
-- 
Brian Atkins
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Jun 14 03:00:18 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:00:18 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <40CD07CB.1070908@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <F7D24D4D-BDAE-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 10:04 pm, Gregory Propf wrote:

> Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 03:45 pm, Spike wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Yep.  Born and raised in Melbourne.  Unfortunately, I am currently 
>> working for SAIC as a Principal Security Architect on the National 
>> Archives and Records Administration in Washington, DC.  I only get 
>> back home about once a month.
>
> Nice to meet you Harvey.  Been reading on imminst about the whole 
> foobar at WTA.  Pity about all that but I must admit that it's too 
> much to follow at the moment.

Don't worry.  I'm not following WTA anymore either.

>   Bruce K. seems like a super nice guy.  Just the way he writes 
> appeals to me.  Anyway, I post there as Kerr_Avon.  What is Principal 
> Security Architect?  I take it you are in infosec.  I'm a programmer 
> for your competitor Grumman myself.  I hate my job >:(

Yep.  I design the enterprise architecture that enforces security 
across an entire enterprise's information technology infrastructure.  
For the first time in a long time, I don't hate my job right now.  I've 
given up the hectic world of contracting to take a "permanent" job for 
a government agency in Washington, DC.  I am hoping to relax and have a 
stable life for a while.

> I have little to lose with cryonics itself actually.  It's that my 
> family is a smart but conventional bunch.

If my family can get used to me, anybody can get used to anything.  But 
sometimes it's a long, slow process.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Jun 14 03:16:43 2004
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:16:43 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <40CD0B93.4030209@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <42BAF5FC-BDB1-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>


On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 10:21 pm, Gregory Propf wrote:
>  I never actually ate much sugar but I had a thing for cheese and 
> starchy stuff and of course just ate whatever I wanted to in giant 
> quantities.  I'm now doing calorie restriction, working out and I post 
> on the CR list too.  Lost the weight and now people are hassling me 
> over that though.  "You're too thin", "you look bony", "you're wasting 
> away", etc... Yeah, but I bet I could bench press most of them.

Same as me.  I now am much healthier, lower cholesterol, more energy, 
never sick.  But my relatives nag me that I'm too thin.  My brothers 
are overweight, have cholesterol problems, and are starting to have 
other health problems.  Besides the weight, I have the same reaction to 
being so pale.  Sun damaged skin ages faster.  I avoid sun damage and 
stay really pale.  I am often mistaken for being much younger than I 
am, yet people think I look funny because I am so pale.

I should go skinhead or dye my hair black for a "goth" skeletal look.  
But I digress....

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com>



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Jun 14 03:37:42 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:37:42 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death
	bioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <A8E64840-BD84-11D8-85E5-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com>
Message-ID: <000001c451c0$f2eb63e0$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Samantha Atkins
... 
> Spike wrote:
> >
> > There are some advantages to having the Fed up to
> > its elected eyeballs in debt: it is less able to
> > take on and screw up new areas of our lives.
> 
> Huh?  *We* are up to our eyeballs in debt.   Many hundred of billions 
> of our wealth are extracted every single year just to pay the 
> interest on this debt...

Ja.  The winning strategy is to save and invest in
government debt.  Then we become those to whom that 
interest is owed.

> We are less able to take on and succeed at 
> many things we fervently wish to do. - samantha

I fully agree, and support lower taxation.

My notion is that we must not look to government to
help us in any of our transhumanist goals.  Life
extentionists are inherently at cross purposes with
government in this: the government profits most if
we work hard all our lives, paying taxes in perfect 
health, then the day after we retire, suddenly fall 
dead of a massive heart attack.

Second notion, anything government can do, private
industry can do better.  Faster and cheaper too.  We 
must not have misguided medical ethicists making rules
for us.  Transhumanist goals can best be accomplished
by minimizing at every opportunity government 
participation.

spike 




From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Jun 14 03:53:12 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:53:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <42BAF5FC-BDB1-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <000001c451c3$1dd46d70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Harvey Newstrom
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday, June 13, 2004, at 10:21 pm, Gregory Propf wrote:
> >  ..."You're too thin", "you look bony", "you're wasting 
> > away", etc... Yeah, but I bet I could bench press most of them.
> 
> Same as me.  I now am much healthier, lower cholesterol, more energy, 
> never sick.  But my relatives nag me that I'm too thin...
> Harvey Newstrom


I've been getting that since... well, since always.  I've
always been a bony ass.  My relatives all think I must be
unhealthy, but after all the lip flapping comes to an end,
not one of them will take me on in any footrace or any 
actual contest of strength/weight ratio, such as pull-ups,
push ups, rope climbing, even those 20 yrs my junior, the 
cowardly flabmeisters.  

Actually the popular press has come to my rescue to some
extent: there has been a loooot of ink spilled about how
CR is good for one's health.  When they read that news in 
the mainstream press, they realize that of all the family
members, it is bony old Greg (spike = Greg) who is still
climbing, hiking, running, non-diabetic, non-getting-sick, 
still doing just as much of all the stuff at 43 that I 
enjoyed at 17, with the cheerful addition of sex.

spike  



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 04:25:28 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 00:25:28 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <42BAF5FC-BDB1-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <42BAF5FC-BDB1-11D8-BAE7-0030654881D2@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <40CD28B8.206@cfl.rr.com>

Harvey Newstrom wrote:

>
>
>
> Same as me.  I now am much healthier, lower cholesterol, more energy, 
> never sick.  But my relatives nag me that I'm too thin.  My brothers 
> are overweight, have cholesterol problems, and are starting to have 
> other health problems.  Besides the weight, I have the same reaction 
> to being so pale.  Sun damaged skin ages faster.  I avoid sun damage 
> and stay really pale.  I am often mistaken for being much younger than 
> I am, yet people think I look funny because I am so pale.

I've always been ghostly too and even though I live in FL I look more 
like I'm from Iceland for all the tan I ever get.

> I should go skinhead or dye my hair black for a "goth" skeletal look.  
> But I digress....

Heheh.  And get those small black "goggle" sunglasses.  Total cyberpunk.



From evmick at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 14 04:30:59 2004
From: evmick at earthlink.net (Everitt Mickey)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:30:59 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
Message-ID: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>

Hi folks...looks like i been gone for about two years?

Sorry bout that..but "things" happen.

I hauled about a hundred windmill tower sections last year....nine 
months away from the house non-stop.  Needless to say my AOL account 
choked.  I also got unsubscribed it appears...from  Extropians.

Things have happened.

I've changed companies....now I (mostly) specialize in construction 
equipment (dozers, trackhoes, etc) and pre-fabricated concrete 
buildings....( communications shelters for fiber-optic and 
Cell-phone....and Out-Houses for Rest Areas and Parks)

I've bought my own trailer....my rig is now an 8-axel (30 wheels) 
capable of hauling fifty tons...though I hardly ever do...mostly 90 
thousand lbs and less.

I'm wireless now.  Wi-fi as well as Sprint PCS....so I can count on 
"getting my mail" pretty regular.

I'm no longer AOL....Earthlink now..

I'm "open-source"....well partly....Mozilla and Thunderbird and thinking 
about Linux (Windows XP still)

Lots has happened...

EvMick


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Mon Jun 14 04:44:56 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:44:56 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
References: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <40CD2D48.BD52DB0F@mindspring.com>

Welcome back "EvMick."

I remember the windmills gig and wondered if you got blown away.

Terry

*****
Everitt Mickey wrote:
> 
> Hi folks...looks like i been gone for about two years?
> 
> Sorry bout that..but "things" happen.
> 
> I hauled about a hundred windmill tower sections last year....nine
> months away from the house non-stop.  Needless to say my AOL account
> choked.  I also got unsubscribed it appears...from  Extropians.
> 
> Things have happened.
> 
> I've changed companies....now I (mostly) specialize in construction
> equipment (dozers, trackhoes, etc) and pre-fabricated concrete
> buildings....( communications shelters for fiber-optic and
> Cell-phone....and Out-Houses for Rest Areas and Parks)
> 
> I've bought my own trailer....my rig is now an 8-axel (30 wheels)
> capable of hauling fifty tons...though I hardly ever do...mostly 90
> thousand lbs and less.
> 
> I'm wireless now.  Wi-fi as well as Sprint PCS....so I can count on
> "getting my mail" pretty regular.
> 
> I'm no longer AOL....Earthlink now..
> 
> I'm "open-source"....well partly....Mozilla and Thunderbird and thinking
> about Linux (Windows XP still)
> 
> Lots has happened...
> 
> EvMick


-- 
"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 wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun 14 05:40:35 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 22:40:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics
	andlegislation
In-Reply-To: <20040613040428.18630.qmail@web50701.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040614054035.31328.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- devon fowler <dfowler282004 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Interesting take on politics I'm not completely sure
> what you exactly mean by "Knucklehead's Council for
> Bioethics,"

He means it's the President's Council.  Ergo, it
derives its authority from (and can best be influenced
by) the President, not Congress.

> and I don't exactly know how to
> influence
> beyond my one vote unless I have some respectable
> position in politics which I don't.  

In theory, writing to your congressperson gives a bit
of extra attention towards your point of view,
especially if you send a handwritten postal note
(precisely because it takes more effort than printed
postal mail, email, or anything sent over the phone
wires - the effort discourages spammers and gives you
credibility).  In practice, I haven't found that it
helps much.

Now, there are ways into the system.  Certain events
that are open to anyone, but again it takes effort to
go there and put on a good performance.  Most
congresspeople, I hear, have occasions when they do
speak directly to their constitutents - for inquiries
about this, a simple email may suffice, since you're
not trying to influence them until you're at the
event.  Go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and find the
right links (probably under "Quick Links", in their
current layout) to get information about your local
Senators and Representatives.  (Warning: although you
will likely get contact informatoin, not all of them
make use of a Web presence; the less high-tech the
area they're representing, the worse the odds.)

Overall, these ways take effort.  Consider that there
are many people who make careers out of doing this for
others.  You may have some technical advantages over
them (specifically, by being on this list, you may
have seen posts about ways to get information and do
intellectual tasks faster, which definitely comes into
play here); they have the advantage of experience, and
possibly of being able to put more time per time (say,
40 hours a week) into this particular effort.  It's up
to you to make it balance out, or even unbalance in
your favor, should you wish to pursue this path.


From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 05:57:25 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:57:25 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
In-Reply-To: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
References: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <40CD3E45.4010802@cfl.rr.com>

Everitt Mickey wrote:

>
>
> I'm "open-source"....well partly....Mozilla and Thunderbird and 
> thinking about Linux (Windows XP still)
>
> Lots has happened...
>
> EvMick 

Welcome back.  I just joined a few days ago myself but feel free to ask 
me any Linux questions.  I've used it for 10 years.



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 05:59:55 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 01:59:55 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
In-Reply-To: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
References: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <40CD3EDB.4000905@cfl.rr.com>

Everitt Mickey wrote:

> Hi folks...looks like i been gone for about two years?
>
> Sorry bout that..but "things" happen.
>
> I hauled about a hundred windmill tower sections last year....nine 
> months away from the house non-stop.  Needless to say my AOL account 
> choked.  I also got unsubscribed it appears...from  Extropians.


Forgot to mention - must suck to be away from home but hey, windmills, 
cool.  Go alternative energy!



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Jun 14 06:12:16 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 23:12:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
In-Reply-To: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000001c451d6$8afd6510$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

 
> Everitt Mickey
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
> 
> 
> Hi folks...looks like i been gone for about two years?
> 
> Sorry bout that..but "things" happen... EvMick


EvMick!  Welcome back pal, we missed ya.  {8-]  spike



From amara at amara.com  Mon Jun 14 07:41:08 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 08:41:08 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Mars and Titan
Message-ID: <p05100300bcf306274999@[150.146.134.133]>



More about the atmospheres of Mars and Titan.. for curiousity's sake,
I calculated the escape velocities and molecular velocities in order
to see how well the two bodies kept their atmosphere. The depth of
the atmospheric pressure at each body is due to factors I don't
know very much about, so I won't talk about that, but perhaps the
following equations and numbers are interesting to you.

The key to know if a body can keep its atmosphere is a rule-of-thumb:
v_escape ~>= 10 * v_molecular velocity.
If it is true, then it can keep it, if it is not true, then it cannot.

v_escape = SQRT ( (2 * G * M_planet) / R_planet)

v_molecular_velocity = SQRT ( (3 * k_b * T_planet) / m_molecular_velocity)

G = gravitational constant
k_b = Boltzmann's constant

The v_escape is the the velocity of escape of any body from the
surface (=R_planet) of the planet. The mass of the body on the
surface doesn't matter (cancels out).

The v_molecular_velocity is the kinetic energy of the molecule,
which is strongly dependent on the temperature of the environment.
Titan is *much colder* than Mars.



Titan
------

Atmosphere
~82% N2
6% CH4
6% Ar
Then molecular weight =
(.82)(28.02) = (0.06)(16.042)+(0.06)(39.95)
= 26.336 amu = 4.375x10^(-26) kg

T ~70K
M_planet = 1.34x10^(23) kg
R_planet = 2.575x10^6 m

v_escape = 2.635x10^3 m/sec
v_molecular_velocity = 257.38 m/sec

2,635 m/sec >= 2,574 m/sec
Yes, can just barely hang onto its atmosphere


Mars
----

Atmosphere
95% CO2
2.7% N2
1.6% Ar
0.006% H2O
Then molecular weight =
(.95)(44.0)+(0.027)(28.03)+(0.026)(39.95)+(0.00006)(18.016)
= 43.20 amu = 7.18x10^(-26) kg

T ~300 K (>200km)
M_planet = 6.42x10^(23) kg
R_planet = 2.396x10^6 m

v_escape = 5.022x10^3 m/sec
v_molecular_velocity = 418.84 m/sec

5,022 >= 4188 m/sec
Yes, no problem to keep this atmosphere


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

So then compare parameters.

Mars atmosphere is ~1.5 x more massive by molecular weight than the
Titan atmosphere
Mars is ~5 x more massive than Titan
Mars is ~30% larger than Titan

The escape velocity of any object from Mars is ~2x higher
than for Titan (5 km/sec vs. 2.6 km/sec).

The molecular velocity of the Martian atmosphere is higher
than the molecular velocity of Titan's atmosphere
(419 m/sec vs. 257 m/sec).

* Would Titan be able to keep a Martian atmosphere? Yes.

* Would Mars be able to keep a Titan atmosphere? No.
(because then the molecular velocity would be higher: 533 m/sec
and the atmosphere would escape)

-- 

********************************************************************
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 avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 14 07:28:22 2004
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 00:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEMKEKAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <20040614072822.28115.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com>

     Well spoken Reason. I would go even farther. The
political irony of it all is the moral hypocrisy
evident in the current neo-con cabal intrenched in the
leadership of the Republican party. Their jingoism and
ruthless partisanship make for a lot of bizarre
contradictions. It's wrong to end life by abortion but
but it ok to end it with bombs and bullets? It's ok to
execute criminals but not ok to use stem cells to
rejuvenate oneself? It's ok to lie boldfaced to the
country and violate international law but wrong to get
a blow job in the oval office? I could go on and on
but I won't. They are willing to destroy the oldest
continuous civilation on earth and try to rebuild it
as long as they get awarded the no bid contract to do
both. In short... they suck... it's like they are the
metaphysical servants of death and chaos. And yet...
they claim to be god-fearing xtians when in reality
they worship a god of fear. That Jesus fellow they
love to name drop only ever spoke of love. 



--- Reason <reason at longevitymeme.org> wrote:
> For discussion, quoting below from myself and George
> Dvorsky. Read the
> articles.
> 
> http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000143.php
>
http://www.betterhumans.com/Features/Columns/Transitory_Human/column.aspx?ar
> ticleID=2004-06-10-1
> http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000092.php
> 
> Government mandated limits to life span: it's an
> ugly idea, frequently
> explored in Science Fiction. Is it likely to happen
> in the real world,
> however? Worse things have been done to people in
> the name of law and
> government in the past, even in the recent past. If
> you live in a developed
> country, the chances are that government employees
> already have a great deal
> of control over your life span: your opinions on the
> matter are usually
> irrelevant.
> 
> ...
> 
> Of late, I have started to explore the idea that
> present day opposition to
> serious anti-aging research (as led by Leon Kass,
> Francis Fukuyama and
> others) will lead to legislation blocking or
> limiting our access to healthy
> life extension technologies.
> 
> Politicians - even in comparatively free countries
> like the US - already
> exert a great deal of control over access to
> medicine, what you can and
> can't do with your body, and what medical research
> is permitted.
> Unfortunately, this power is already being abused -
> as power always is - in
> many areas, including stem cell research and
> therapeutic cloning. It is a
> small leap from the present day functions of the FDA
> to a body that sets
> maximum life spans by enforcing restrictions on new
> anti-aging medical
> technologies.
> 
> George Dvorsky has written an excellent article on
> this topic that is
> currently posted at Betterhumans. I quote a fair
> amount in this post, but
> there is a good deal more where that came from - so
> read the whole thing.
> 
> ...
> 
> I consider myself open to ideas and alternative
> perspectives, but as I
> consider the arguments of the bio-Luddites and look
> deeper into their
> meaning, I have come to realize that the
> death-promoting propaganda campaign
> is more than just a battle for hearts and minds. I
> get the impression
> that?should radical life extension technologies
> become readily
> available?these detractors, some of whom have the
> ear of the President,
> would go much further than fighting a war of words
> in their attempt to
> ensure that we never gain mastery over our
> mortality.
> 
> ...
> 
> At times the bio-Luddites sound parochial and
> authoritarian, and at their
> worst they sound downright ideological and even
> totalitarian.
> 
> Indeed, as Kass has repeatedly stated, "the finitude
> of human life is a
> blessing for every individual, whether he knows it
> or not." And
> frighteningly, when asked by Brian Alexander, the
> author of Rapture: How
> Biotechnology Became the New Religion, if the
> government has a right to tell
> its citizens that they have to die, Fukuyama
> answered, "Yes, absolutely."
> 
> ...
> 
> And as for the bio-Luddite deathists, they're
> offering Americans the worst
> and most useless kind of ethics. It is an ethics
> without foundation in
> reality and devoid of pragmatic guidance and
> practical solutions. It simply
> doesn't do for the coming realities of 21st century
> life.
> 
> ...
> 
> I couldn't agree more, and it's a great shame that
> the field once known as
> medical ethics has degenerated into a coven of high
> profile bioethicists set
> on finding the best way to prevent new medicines
> from saving lives.
> 
> Squashing the opposition to serious anti-aging
> medical research will require
> supporters of healthy life extension to start our
> side of the coming battle
> early. We can't afford to wait for entrenched
> pro-death bioethicists to gain
> even greater influence over our overbearing,
> winner-takes-all governments.
> 
> Reason
> Founder, Longevity Meme
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


=====
The Avantguardian 


"He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind."


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 


From amara at amara.com  Mon Jun 14 08:51:10 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:51:10 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethicsandlegislation
Message-ID: <p05100301bcf316b73405@[150.146.134.133]>

Spike:
>My notion is that we must not look to government to help us in any
>of our transhumanist goals.  Life extentionists are inherently at
>cross purposes with government in this.

I appreciate your perspective, and I know it's important for you. It
doesn't work for me, though. I'm on outside, dealing with the
fallout of the present US administration in my every day life, so my
perspective is alot different. I have to pay attention to how
governments influence me. Not only is no one is 'protecting' me, the
ground level from where I begin is as 'foreigner'

[meaning things already work against me or, on the other side, I
could say that I have a fresh perspective]

The big picture of my own transhumanist goals is to help build the
underlying foundation for people (of different cultures) to
appreciate and take joy in their lives, to know themselves well, and
explore the universe in which their lives are embedded. I can try to
ignore governments beyond their imposition of their immigration laws
on me, but I cannot ignore the influence of governments on the
attitudes of people around me (friends, acquaintances, coworkers).
If I can build a local environment of *people* that supports many of
things I like, then maybe it will spill over into larger and larger
arenas (= more people). Therefore, my focus in the transhumanist
realm is on local people.

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/
********************************************************************
"It's not the pace of life I mind. It's the sudden stop at the end."
--Calvin


From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Jun 14 14:40:52 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 07:40:52 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] June 2004 SpaceDev Newsletter
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040614073506.031cb9a0@mail.earthlink.net>

This has already been mentioned on this list, but I thought it might have 
something worth reading.
This press release from John Spencer (on ExI's advisory team).  John is a 
space architect and long-time space enthusiast.  His organization is Space 
Tourism, Inc.  You can read more about John 
here:  http://www.theargonauts.com/columns/brookmantia/070100_spencer.shtml


On June 21st SpaceDev's Hybrid Rocket Motor Technology Will Help Create the 
World's First Private Sector Astronaut!

>On June 21st SpaceShipOne?s fourth powered flight is scheduled to write a 
>new page in the history books.  Years of planning, hard work and hope will 
>be riding with the Scaled Composite test pilot as he attempts to fly 
>higher and faster than any privately funded aviation program has ever flown.
>
>  NASA, the Air Force and other organizations recognize that space begins 
> at 50 miles, and award astronaut status to those achieving the 50 mile 
> altitude.  If the June 21st flight meets the expected altitude of 100km 
> (62.5 miles), the flight will create the world?s first private sector 
> astronaut.
>
>In 1999 Jim Benson and the SpaceDev propulsion team began working with 
>Burt Rutan and his team of engineers at Scaled Composites to create safe, 
>inexpensive, private sector human space flight.  Only a year after 
>contracting with Scaled, SpaceDev successfully tested the world?s largest 
>nitrous oxide-based hybrid rocket motor.  The motor burns rubber (HTPB) 
>and laughing gas (N2O).
>
>  The SpaceShipOne rocket motor is a cooperative design executed by the 
> highly skilled engineers at SpaceDev and Scaled Composites.  SpaceDev 
> supplied the rocket science and most key components. Scaled Composites 
> designed the main concept, two large composite structures: the oxidizer 
> tank and composite Case-Throat-Nozzle (CTN).  This close team effort 
> since 1999 has been a key to the successful development of the unique, 
> record-setting hybrid motor for the historic, manned SpaceShipOne.
>
>  As they have on all previous powered flights, the SpaceDev propulsion 
> team will be on-site on June 21st at the Mojave, CA airport with the 
> Scaled team to provide critical ground, flight, and post-flight support 
> services.  Jim Benson, SpaceDev founding chairman and chief executive 
> officer who will attend the historic flight commented ?This is a 
> tremendously exciting time for everyone who has dreamed and worked to 
> bring low-cost human space flight closer to reality.  We are honored to 
> be part of the team that will achieve this goal.?
>
>NASA Centennial Challenges
>
>Jim Benson has been invited to make a presentation about the SpaceDev 
>Streaker?, a hybrid-based small launch vehicle, at the June 15 ? 16 NASA 
>Centennial Challenges Workshop in Washington, DC.  The panel is titled 
>?Launch Vehicles for Spacecraft Prize Competitions.? The SpaceDev 
>Streaker? is being developed under contract with the Air Force Research 
>Laboratory.  The SpaceDev Streaker? is designed to put up to 1,000 pounds 
>into low earth orbit, at an estimated price of $5 million.  The SpaceDev 
>Streaker? will use a variation of the SpaceShipOne motor as the upper 
>stage, and for the orbit insertion stage, SpaceDev will use a variation of 
>the ?space tug? motor SpaceDev is developing for the Air Force Research 
>Laboratory under a different contract.
>
>About SpaceDev
>
>SpaceDev (OTCBB: SPDV) creates and sells affordable and innovative space 
>products and solutions to government and commercial enterprises.  Upon 
>founding SpaceDev in 1996, Jim Benson started the trend of successful 
>computer entrepreneurs moving into the space development arena.  For more 
>information, visit 
><http://echo.bluehornet.com/ct/ct.php?t=591020&c=329360500&m=m&type=1>www.spacedev.com.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040614/7d7bcde0/attachment.html>

From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Jun 14 12:52:26 2004
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 08:52:26 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
In-Reply-To: <000001c451d6$8afd6510$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c451d6$8afd6510$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <04Jun14.085226-0400_edt.331662-12317+16097@ams.ftl.affinity.com>

Spike writes: 

>> Everitt Mickey
>> Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack) 
>> 
>> Hi folks...looks like i been gone for about two years? 
>> 
>> Sorry bout that..but "things" happen... EvMick
> 
> EvMick!  Welcome back pal, we missed ya.  {8-]  spike

Definitely!  Welcome Back! 

Where are you now?  What things?  Inquiring Jupiter Brains want to know!  (I 
miss the good ole days....) 

 --
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> 




From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Mon Jun 14 13:02:29 2004
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:02:29 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <000001c451c3$1dd46d70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <000001c451c3$1dd46d70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <04Jun14.090229-0400_edt.438416-26818+12941@ams.ftl.affinity.com>

Spike writes: 

> I've been getting that since... well, since always.  I've
> always been a bony ass.

We should start the "Bony-assed Extropian Club"! 

> it is bony old Greg (spike = Greg)

Greg?  Who the hell is Greg, and what have you done with Spike??? 

> who is still
> climbing, hiking, running, non-diabetic, non-getting-sick, 
> still doing just as much of all the stuff at 43 that I 
> enjoyed at 17, with the cheerful addition of sex.

Hmmm....  I never thought of adding sex to all those other activities.  No 
wonder they were so boring! 

 --
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> 




From megao at sasktel.net  Mon Jun 14 12:16:28 2004
From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 07:16:28 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Opera browser, Danny's system glitches
Message-ID: <40CD971C.B5D1FE3C@sasktel.net>

Had a friend , Danny who had a major glitch which locked him out of his
IE browser for an "illegal function" and seemed to even shut down his
access to his file manager.
He had an old email program that worked but barley.
I downloaded the only browser that makes the "under 10 megs" limit for
our
sasktel email boxes ... Opera without java and emailed it to him.
Even his disk utilities refused yesterday so I went back to the old DOS
prompt  in "safe mode" and did a precautionary scan and defrag  the old
fashioned way.

Then I tried using the opera browser myself and found it seems to work
really neat
so now have all 3 running on mine now.  I have always had both netscape
and IE running.
I have always liked the file cache from Netscape as a way to capture the
odd
slippery file that does not want to save except by scraping it out of
the cache.
I have an old P1 100 MHZ win95 system and at times have locked up the
IExplorer
with too large mail  archives and found that IE can get in  when
Netscape freezes.
We are on an old copper line phone system so speed is horrible so I find
the old stuff matches the
Telco's slow connection anyway.

So diversity is sometimes a real lifesaver.

Do you think my friend might also have a lurking virus as the root cause
of his windows
system problems?

Morris Johnson



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Mon Jun 14 13:29:41 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:29:41 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Heavy Metal (he's baaaaaaaaaaack)
In-Reply-To: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
References: <40CD2A03.3090004@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0406140926520.-92393@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


Welcome back, EvMick, I wondered where you'd got to! :)

The Extropian mailing list underwent some major changes, as AOL (and
some others) began blocking/bouncing the Extropy list mail in an
effort to eliminate spam. I had to change ISPs also, on that account
mostly. Sure do like this new one, though, it was a good change for
me. :)

Regards,
MB


On Sun, 13 Jun 2004, Everitt Mickey wrote:

> Hi folks...looks like i been gone for about two years?
>
> Sorry bout that..but "things" happen.
>
> I hauled about a hundred windmill tower sections last year....nine
> months away from the house non-stop.  Needless to say my AOL account
> choked.  I also got unsubscribed it appears...from  Extropians.



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Mon Jun 14 14:33:23 2004
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 10:33:23 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Opera browser, Danny's system glitches
In-Reply-To: <40CD971C.B5D1FE3C@sasktel.net>
References: <40CD971C.B5D1FE3C@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0406141028070.-214505@pentium.mb.main.nc.us>


Here is a virus removal tool that I've used:
http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/

I love Opera, it is my browser of choice. :) I also have Mozilla and
Netscape 4.x and IE, all of which are better at some things than
others.

For email I'm using PC-Pine. It takes some getting used to, but it
works for me. :)

I am running Windoze 98 SE on a Pentium 200MHz machine. We don't have
broadband available here for reasonable costs. I can hear the noise on
my phone line with my *ears* so I'm sure the computer has a time of
it.

Good luck to Danny.

Regards,
MB


On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote:

> Had a friend , Danny who had a major glitch which locked him out of his
> IE browser for an "illegal function" and seemed to even shut down his
> access to his file manager.
> He had an old email program that worked but barley.
> I downloaded the only browser that makes the "under 10 megs" limit for
> our
> sasktel email boxes ... Opera without java and emailed it to him.
> Even his disk utilities refused yesterday so I went back to the old DOS
> prompt  in "safe mode" and did a precautionary scan and defrag  the old
> fashioned way.
>
> Then I tried using the opera browser myself and found it seems to work
> really neat
> so now have all 3 running on mine now.  I have always had both netscape
> and IE running.
> I have always liked the file cache from Netscape as a way to capture the
> odd
> slippery file that does not want to save except by scraping it out of
> the cache.
> I have an old P1 100 MHZ win95 system and at times have locked up the
> IExplorer
> with too large mail  archives and found that IE can get in  when
> Netscape freezes.
> We are on an old copper line phone system so speed is horrible so I find
> the old stuff matches the
> Telco's slow connection anyway.
>
> So diversity is sometimes a real lifesaver.
>
> Do you think my friend might also have a lurking virus as the root cause
> of his windows
> system problems?
>
> Morris Johnson


From amara at amara.com  Mon Jun 14 15:36:13 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 16:36:13 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
Message-ID: <p05100300bcf374ba7c91@[150.146.134.133]>

Wow! it seems that most of my life I'm living and have lived in
the world's expensive cities  :-(

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

World's most and least expensive cities (looking at a 144 cities across the
world)

Source: Mercer Human Resource Consulting, 2004 Cost-of-Living Survey
2004

Rank	City
1	Tokyo, Japan
2	London, UK
3	Moscow, Russia
4	Osaka, Japan
5	Hong Kong
6	Geneva, Switzerland
7	Seoul, South Korea
8	Copenhagen, Denmark
9	Z?rich, Switzerland
10	St. Petersburg, Russia
11	Beijing, China
12	New York City, USA
13	Milan, Italy
14	Dublin, Ireland
15	Oslo, Norway
16	Shanghai, China
17	Paris, France
18	Istanbul, Turkey
19	Vienna, Austria
20	Sydney, Australia
21	Rome, Italy
22	Stockholm, Sweden
23	Helsinki, Finland
24	Abidjan, Ivory Coast
25	Douala, Cameroon
26	Amsterdam, Netherlands
27	Los Angeles, USA
28	Berlin, Germany
29	Hanoi, Vietnam
30	Shenzhen, China
31	Taipei, Taiwan
32	Guangzhou, China
33	Tel Aviv, Israel
34	Budapest, Hungary
35	Chicago, USA
36	Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
37	Beirut, Lebanon
38	San Francisco, USA
39	Luxembourg
40	D?sseldorf, Germany
41	Glasgow, UK
42	Frankfurt, Germany
43	Munich, Germany
44	Bratislava, Slovak Republic
45	Jakarta, Indonesia
46	Singapore
47	Dakar, Senegal
48	Riga, Latvia
49	Prague, Czech Republic
50	Athens, Greece
51	Birmingham, UK
52	White Plains, USA
53	Brussels, Belgium
54	Kiev, Ukraine
55	Miami, USA
56	Barcelona, Spain
57	Honolulu, USA
58	Hamburg, Germany
59	Zagreb, Croatia
60	Algiers, Algeria
61	Madrid, Spain
62	Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
63	Amman, Jordan
64	Kuwait City, Kuwait
65	San Juan, Puerto Rico
66	Casablanca, Morocco
67	Melbourne, Australia
68	Washington, USA
69	Lyon, France
70	Boston, USA
71	Lisbon, Portugal
72	Morristown, USA
73	Houston, USA
74	Almaty, Kazakhstan
75	Tallinn, Estonia
76	Warsaw, Poland
77	Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
78	Manama, Bahrain
79	Sofia, Bulgaria
80	Auckland, New Zealand
81	Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
82	Ljubljana, Slovenia
83	Dubai, United Arab Emirates
84	Mexico City, Mexico
85	Atlanta, USA
86	Wellington, New Zealand
87	Brisbane, Australia
88	Adelaide, Australia
89	Toronto, Canada
90	Seattle, USA
91	Vilnius, Lithuania
92	St. Louis, USA
93	Leipzig, Germany
94	Perth, Australia
95	Limassol, Cyprus
96	Vancouver, Canada
97	Accra, Ghana
98	Cleveland, USA
99	Cairo, Egypt
100	Denver, USA
101	Detroit, USA
102	Monterrey, Mexico
103	Kingston, Jamaica
104	Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
105	Portland, USA
106	Panama City
107	Winston Salem, USA
108	Guatemala City, Guatemala
109	Mumbai, India
110	Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
111	Lagos, Nigeria
112	Pittsburgh, USA
113	Montreal, Canada
114	Calgary, Canada
115	Tianjin, China
116	New Delhi, India
117	Dacca (Dhaka), Bangladesh
118	Lima, Peru
119	Bangkok, Thailand
120	Tunis, Tunisia
121	Nairobi, Kenya
122	Tehran, Iran
123	Santiago, Chile
124	Ottawa, Canada
125	Lusaka, Zambia
126	Johannesburg, South Africa
127	Colombo, Sri Lanka
128	S?o Paulo, Brazil
129	Bucharest, Romania
130	San Jos?, Costa Rica
131	Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
132	Karachi, Pakistan
133	Chennai (Madras), India
134	Caracas, Venezuela
135	Blantyre, Malawi
136	Quito, Ecuador
137	Bangalore, India
138	Manila, Philippines
139	Bogot?, Colombia
140	Harare, Zimbabwe
141	Buenos Aires, Argentina
142	Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
143	Montevideo, Uruguay
144	Asunci?n, Paraguay
-- 

********************************************************************
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 astapp at fizzfactorgames.com  Mon Jun 14 16:38:19 2004
From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 09:38:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E7EA@amazemail2.amazeent.com>

I've used this technique years ago in a Nissan Pulsar NX 
to get over 90MPG. You just have to be really, really,
really patient. Letting the car coast to a complete stop
takes a long time.

If you're driving a stick, around 15mpg you can put it
in 3rd or 4th and slowly release the clutch to smoothly 
start the engine again without destroying your starter or 
flywheel.

It's fun to try as an expirement, but be prepared for
some dirty looks from folks who expect you to maintain 
the speed limit +- 5 MPH.

Acy

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Spike
Sent: Friday, 11 June, 2004 21:35
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world
driving


BillK:
 
> This is very true. In Europe and UK they have annual competitive car
> economy runs where the drivers achieve unbelievable mileage figures,
> just by using careful driving techniques. BillK

True.  If one is ever in an emergency sitch where one
has enough fuel to go 20 km and one knows the next 
fuel station is 40 km away, i'll offer an old motorcyclists
trick to get you to the station without walking:
Accelerate to speed steadily, not too hard, put her in 
neutral, switch off the motor and coast to a stop.  
Start the motor and repeat.  It takes a looong time 
to get there that way, but it beats pushing the car.  
One can double the fuel economy on a typical car.

Motorcyclists, you can easily prove this by riding along
at highway speeds, reach down and shut off the fuel.
Note how long you can go on the gas in the carburetors.
Now stop, shut off the fuel, and do the above trick,
see how far you can go.  Betcha it will be over twice
as far.

The effect on a motorcycle is even more than twice
the fuel economy because bikes use a larger percentage
of their gas pushing air out of the way.  Recall that
the energy use increases as the square of the velocity.

Next time you run short and need to limp into the station 
on fumes, recall this post.

spike


  

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


From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Mon Jun 14 17:36:06 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:36:06 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E7EA@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E7EA@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <40CDE206.1060701@cfl.rr.com>


>The effect on a motorcycle is even more than twice
>the fuel economy because bikes use a larger percentage
>of their gas pushing air out of the way.  Recall that
>the energy use increases as the square of the velocity.
>  
>
I think you might get much the same effect by going really slow and 
keeping the engine in the highest gear you can without causing it to 
stall.  So the engine is just barely turning over and you aren't 
fighting the air as much.  This is basically why the simplest recipe for 
a high mileage car is just a well streamlined car with a really low 
power motor.



From jcorb at irishbroadband.net  Mon Jun 14 19:34:51 2004
From: jcorb at irishbroadband.net (J Corbally)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 20:34:51 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20040614203301.02343e20@pop3.irishbroadband.ie>

I hear ya.  Dublin may not _be_ the most expensive city in the world, but 
it sure feels like it.


James....
*Who'll likely not have to shell out for the priviledge of living here much 
longer*


>Message: 1
>Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 16:36:13 +0100
>From: Amara Graps <amara at amara.com>
>Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
>To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>Message-ID: <p05100300bcf374ba7c91@[150.146.134.133]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed"
>
>
>Wow! it seems that most of my life I'm living and have lived in
>the world's expensive cities  :-(
>
>
>--------------------
>
>
>World's most and least expensive cities (looking at a 144 cities across the
>world)
>
>
>Source: Mercer Human Resource Consulting, 2004 Cost-of-Living Survey
>2004
>
>
>Rank    City
>1       Tokyo, Japan
>2       London, UK
>3       Moscow, Russia
>4       Osaka, Japan
>5       Hong Kong
>6       Geneva, Switzerland
>7       Seoul, South Korea
>8       Copenhagen, Denmark
>9       Z?rich, Switzerland
>10      St. Petersburg, Russia
>11      Beijing, China
>12      New York City, USA
>13      Milan, Italy
>14      Dublin, Ireland




From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Mon Jun 14 19:44:35 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 21:44:35 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
In-Reply-To: <p05100300bcf374ba7c91@[150.146.134.133]>
References: <p05100300bcf374ba7c91@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406142142020.7021@zeus>



On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Amara Graps wrote:

>Source: Mercer Human Resource Consulting, 2004 Cost-of-Living Survey
>2004
>
>Rank	City
>1	Tokyo, Japan
>2	London, UK
>3	Moscow, Russia
>[...]
>11	Beijing, China
>12	New York City, USA
>13	Milan, Italy
>[...]
>21	Rome, Italy

They look at capitals and big cities, but you can find small cities waaay
up there. Put Florence, Italy somewhere between Rome and Milan, and
Venice, Italy near the top :-(( And I'm very surprised about the rating
Moscow abd Beijing get.

Alfio


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Mon Jun 14 20:01:08 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 13:01:08 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
Message-ID: <1087243268.29498@whirlwind.he.net>

> 11	Beijing, China
> 12	New York City, USA



It's when I saw this that I started to wonder what their criteria was. 
There are some other big question marks, but I cannot fathom how Beijing
could be more expensive than NYC.  I travel to both those cities, and
the cost of food, housing, transportation, etc often varies between
those two by integer factors, with Beijing being dirt cheap for roughly
equivalent goods as far as my experience goes.  I'm at a loss to figure
out where all this "expense" is that makes Beijing more expensive than NYC.

Any clue why this is?  Is it being normalized for per capita income of
the local population?


j. andrew rogers



From mike99 at lascruces.com  Mon Jun 14 23:10:15 2004
From: mike99 at lascruces.com (mike99)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:10:15 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Greg Egan's poem "Technoliberation"
Message-ID: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKOEKPDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>

Technoliberation

by nat (public)

It is not true that the map of freedom will be complete
with the erasure of the last invidious border
when it remains for us to chart the attractors of thunder
and delineate the arrhythmias of drought
to reveal the molecular dialects of forest and savanna
as rich as a thousand human tongues
and to comprehend the deepest history of our passions
ancient beyond mythology's reach

So I declare that no corporation holds a monopoly on numbers
no patent can encompass zero and one
no nation has sovereignty over adenine and guanine
no empire rules the quantum waves

And there must be room for all at the celebration of understanding
for there is a truth which cannot be bought or sold
imposed by force, resisted
or escaped.


[Greg Egan as Muteba Kazadi]
https://ideotrope.org/index.pl?node_id=28479

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

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




From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 00:53:37 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 20:53:37 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics = poseidon adventure
In-Reply-To: <40CD0EB4.4010007@posthuman.com>
References: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<40CD04E1.3040108@cfl.rr.com> <40CD0EB4.4010007@posthuman.com>
Message-ID: <40CE4891.2060506@cfl.rr.com>

Brian Atkins wrote:

> Gregory there's a really super insurance guy down there in FL named 
> Rudi Hoffman. He's a whiz with cryonics stuff - and he's glad to 
> answer whatever questions you can think up. I highly recommend him, 
> and I know many more people here and elsewhere do as well.

Can you send me his contact info (offlist if you want).



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Tue Jun 15 01:21:07 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:21:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cybertracker
Message-ID: <40CE4F03.C5DB08B0@mindspring.com>

[Maybe this made the lists recently, seems familiar, yet new to me -twc]


< http://www.cybertracker.co.za/ >

The most efficient way to gather large quantities of data for field
observations, even by non-literate users, at a level of detail not possible
before. 
 

The CyberTracker field computer is designed to be quick and easy to use in the
field, even by non-literate users. Scientists and conservationists benefit from
the icon interface enabling significantly faster data collection than text
interfaces or written methods. A user-friendly interface developed for PalmOS
handheld computers allows field workers to record hundreds of detailed 
observations per day. The handheld computer can also be linked to a GPS.

The CyberTracker software allows users with no programming skills to: 

Design and edit a database 
Customise screen sequences using the Screen Writer feature 
Gather data with the CyberTracker field computer 
View data with the CyberTracker Geographic Information System 
Export data for advanced analysis, e.g. to Excel, ArcView or Distance



-- 
"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 fortean1 at mindspring.com  Tue Jun 15 01:41:08 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 18:41:08 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] _In Praise of Slowness_ by Carl Honore
Message-ID: <40CE53B4.ECB913BE@mindspring.com>

I read a review in The Economist this week, 'Life at a different pace.'
< http://www.economist.co.uk/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=2745438 >

This seems fortean to me.

Terry


A couple of curiosities cited include Society for the Deceleration of Time
and a Slow Sex movement.

< http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPPrint/LAC/20040515/BKSLOW15/TPEntertainment/ >
< http://framework.v2.nl/archive/archive/node/actor/default.xslt/nodenr-129096 >


< http://www.startribune.com/stories/384/4714025.html >
A few years back, Canadian journalist Carl Honore decided to put the brakes on
his life after hearing about an absurd concept: The one-minute bedtime story.
Honor? was bothered by the idea of a 60-second "Little Red Riding Hood," but
he was bothered more by how much it initially appealed to him. However
hyperactive modern life is, he realized, fast-forwarding through quality time
is even worse. There is, he notes, "a gnawing disconnect between what we want
from life and what we can realistically have, which feeds the sense that there
is never enough time."


-- 
"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 thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 02:16:17 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 21:16:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] good journalistic treatment of Alzheimer's and pharma
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040614211521.01cb11c8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

 From the UK Observer, reprinted:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/14/1087065082699.html



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 02:30:27 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 21:30:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics & Rudi Hoffman
In-Reply-To: <40CE4891.2060506@cfl.rr.com>
References: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<40CD04E1.3040108@cfl.rr.com> <40CD0EB4.4010007@posthuman.com>
	<40CE4891.2060506@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040614212847.01caf290@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


>
>>Gregory there's a really super insurance guy down there in FL named Rudi 
>>Hoffman. He's a whiz with cryonics stuff
>
>Can you send me his contact info (offlist if you want).

Go to google and key in

"Rudi Hoffman" cryonics

Top response:

www.rudihoffman.com/

There are plenty of other cites as well. 



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 03:20:26 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:20:26 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Atlantis found again again
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040614221950.01ba3e30@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3766863.stm 



From sjvans at ameritech.net  Tue Jun 15 04:06:07 2004
From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen J. Van Sickle)
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 23:06:07 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] cryonics & Rudi Hoffman
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040614212847.01caf290@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <010901c4517e$fcd71620$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<40CD04E1.3040108@cfl.rr.com> <40CD0EB4.4010007@posthuman.com>
	<40CE4891.2060506@cfl.rr.com>
	<6.1.1.1.0.20040614212847.01caf290@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <1087272366.1022.28.camel@Renfield>


Also here:

http://alcor.org/SuspFunding/insuragents.html


On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 21:30, Damien Broderick wrote:
> >
> >>Gregory there's a really super insurance guy down there in FL named Rudi 
> >>Hoffman. He's a whiz with cryonics stuff
> >
> >Can you send me his contact info (offlist if you want).
> 
> Go to google and key in
> 
> "Rudi Hoffman" cryonics
> 
> Top response:
> 
> www.rudihoffman.com/
> 
> There are plenty of other cites as well. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 06:03:01 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 02:03:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Greg Egan's poem "Technoliberation"
In-Reply-To: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKOEKPDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>
References: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKOEKPDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>
Message-ID: <40CE9115.7060807@cfl.rr.com>

mike99 wrote:

>Technoliberation
>
>by nat (public)
>
>It is not true that the map of freedom will be complete
>with the erasure of the last invidious border
>when it remains for us to chart the attractors of thunder
>and delineate the arrhythmias of drought
>to reveal the molecular dialects of forest and savanna
>as rich as a thousand human tongues
>and to comprehend the deepest history of our passions
>ancient beyond mythology's reach
>
>So I declare that no corporation holds a monopoly on numbers
>no patent can encompass zero and one
>no nation has sovereignty over adenine and guanine
>no empire rules the quantum waves
>
>And there must be room for all at the celebration of understanding
>for there is a truth which cannot be bought or sold
>imposed by force, resisted
>or escaped.
>
>
>[Greg Egan as Muteba Kazadi]
>https://ideotrope.org/index.pl?node_id=28479
>
>  
>
Thanks!  Now I need find out about this Muteba Kazadi person.  The stuff 
on the web about him is all in Italian it seems./
/



From amara at amara.com  Tue Jun 15 08:51:14 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:51:14 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
Message-ID: <p05100302bcf467ea8fc9@[150.146.134.133]>

J. Andrew Rogers:
>  11	Beijing, China
>  12	New York City, USA

>It's when I saw this that I started to wonder what their criteria was.
[...]
>Any clue why this is?  Is it being normalized for per capita income of
>the local population?

It seems not. Here is from their web site:

http://www.mercerhr.com/pressrelease/details.jhtml?idContent=1096865

"The survey, which covers 144 cities, measures the comparative cost
of more than 200 items in each location. These include housing,
food, clothing, and household goods, together with transportation
and entertainment.  The data is used to assist multinational
companies and governments in determining compensation allowances for
their expatriate workers."

Maybe they didn't create a good sample of items in Beijing? Why don't
you write them and describe what you know?

Here's an anecdote: my professor from San Jose State University in
the Silicon Valley spent six months last year on a sabbatical in
Rome. He thought that the rental costs for flats was not too bad...
So why is that? (Silicon Valley is expensive too!)

21	Rome, Italy
[...]
38	San Francisco, USA

If the prices were normalized for per capita income of the local
population, then perhaps Rome would be higher. (It is mostly the
rent that is killing me, other prices are generally ok)

I know about the phenomena of the smaller cities too, Alfio. The
people in Heidelberg (population 150,000) claimed that their city
was the next most expensive place to live in Germany after Munich,
and Heidelberg was not listed (but, being relatively close to
Frankfurt, I grouped it with that). My experience with Florence and
Venice is that Venice should be at the top for Italian cities, and
then Florence tied with Milan. Another anecdote: A man who manages
the CNR network at my location lives in Milan and commutes, and he
says that my town of Frascati (population 15,000) is more expensive
for flat rentals than Milan! :-(


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/
********************************************************************
"It's not the pace of life I mind. It's the sudden stop at the end."
--Calvin


From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Jun 15 10:55:41 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:55:41 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] transhumantech RSS feed
Message-ID: <20040615105541.GV12847@leitl.org>


Yahoogroups has been offering RSS feeds of mailing lists.
The RSS feed for transhumantech is 

	http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/transhumantech/rss

This should make the drinking from the firehose easier.

-- 
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/20040615/967799e0/attachment.bin>

From cphoenix at CRNano.org  Tue Jun 15 13:39:53 2004
From: cphoenix at CRNano.org (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:39:53 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <200406141432.i5EEWjn31092@tick.javien.com>
References: <200406141432.i5EEWjn31092@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <40CEFC29.4000306@CRNano.org>

The Avantguardian wrote:
 > ".... the current neo-con cabal .... it's like they are the
 > metaphysical servants of death and chaos. And yet...
 > they claim to be god-fearing xtians when in reality
 > they worship a god of fear. That Jesus fellow they
 > love to name drop only ever spoke of love."

Note that they are currently engaged in global struggle with nihilists.

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a 
monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also 
into you. -- Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not 
come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against 
his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law 
against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own 
household. -- Jesus Christ, quoted in Matthew 10:34-42

Chris

-- 
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Tue Jun 15 14:06:24 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:06:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
Message-ID: <40CF0260.7090404@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Mon Jun 14 01:28:22 MDT 2004 The Avantguardian wrote:
> That Jesus fellow they love to name drop only ever spoke of love.

Tut, tut. You don't have to repeat their propaganda. ;)

The Gospels originated as lots of stories about Jesus and sayings
attributed to him. Centuries after his death, after substantial editing
by the Greco-Roman xians, they agreed on only four gospels and said all
the others were 'unapproved'.

Trying to find out what the original stories actually were, occupies 
many scholars. One school thinks that Jesus and his followers were 
violent revolutionaries against the Roman occupation (much like 
al-Qaeda). As were the majority of Jews at that time, of course. Before 
the 70AD rebellion destroyed the temple, wiped out most of the fighters 
and dispersed the population.

You can trace the hints still remaining in the gospels. They admit that
at least some disciples were officially zealots (guerrilla fighters).
The disciples were armed. Jesus told them to buy swords. They invaded
and took over the outer temple court, (despite the temple guards) when
Jesus used a whip on the traders there. He was killed by the Romans for
being a rebel leader. (Not unusual - the Romans killed thousands of
so-called rebels). And so on.

The 'love' sayings mostly come from Cynic philosophy and are suited to
non-jewish xians of the post-70AD period who were trying to show the
Romans that they were harmless.

And, of course, all the 'love' sayings haven't stopped Christianity
being one of the most warlike religions around.

BillK





From alex at ramonsky.com  Tue Jun 15 14:33:12 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 15:33:12 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Invitation
Message-ID: <40CF08A8.6040709@ramonsky.com>

  BCC/Neuroscience Alliance/Entelechy Institute
Invites you to:
*************
IA Day
*************

Location: Wolverton, Bucks, UK
Attendance Fee: $0:00 (?0:00) (please pay before arrival)

Schedule:
12 noon - 5pm

    * Meet at: The Albert Function Suite, The New Victoria hotel, 46
      Church Street, Wolverton, Bucks, Tel: (01908) 315447
    * Free beer/wine/beverages
    * IA lecture by Alex Ramonsky,
    * Demos of biofeedback & light/sound machines.
    * Transhumanist & Extropian news exchange & updates
    * Intro to the Entelechy Institute's new project -'Babylon 5.5'.
    * BCC's International Backup Exchange (bring your backups...it's
      nice to know if your house burns down you have a backup on the
      other side of the world).

5pm-at least midnight:

    * Alex's book launching party (at Alex's home; 5 minutes away)
    * Meal provided
    * More free drinks
    * Demos of TMS/NMS tech
    * Light/sound sessions
    * Free copy of book for all those who helped (if not available on
      the day, this will be posted to you)
    * The annual Russell Carter shooting competition with prizes
    * Music & videos

Accommodation choices:
1. Alex's house : free, but there may be a crowd and it may be just 
carpet space. How long you stay is up to you, so if you fancy a cheap 
holiday in London, here you go.
2. Local hotel:  The Crauford Arms or (nobbier) The Swan Revived Hotel, 
Newport Pagnell. Make your own booking arrangements.
Fee and bookings:
There is no fee, but it's important we know whether or not you are 
coming so as to estimate catering needs. It is also important to respond 
so that your name is left on the venue door and you can get in; this is 
a private booking. If you do not respond, we shall assume you're not coming!


So, RSVP to:
alex at ramonsky.com
Or by mail to:
The Entelechy Institute
Seventh Star Studios
27 Old Gloucester Street
London WC1N 3XX
Or
Tel: (UK) 07092 016095
Or: 07759 693908

Feel free to bring a partner or friend. We are not yet sure if under-16s 
are admissible but if you have a problem with this we can find out for you.
Any other inquiries please use the above contacts.
**************

The Entelechy Institute June 2004
This email is subject to IPMA law (Intellectual Property My Ass). You 
may therefore copy it and distribute it as you please. We know you have 
good taste enough not to spam people.

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040615/bba0a0ff/attachment.html>

From sentdev at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 15 14:16:23 2004
From: sentdev at hotmail.com (George Dvorsky)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:16:23 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] TTA Social this Sat. Jun 19
Message-ID: <BAY2-F47W4uFWjkOTGk0004c524@hotmail.com>

Hi Everyone,

The Toronto Transhumanist Association is having a social gathering at the 
Green Room this coming Saturday June 19. We'd love for you to join us. We're 
hoping to get a table on the patio, so go there first to look for us.

Members and non-members welcome! If you don't know what we look like, we're 
the ones with a copy of Ray Kurzweil's 'The Age of Spiritual Machines on the 
table' (shiny, silver book)

Please let me know if you'd like to attend. Or, just show up. You can e-mail 
me at george at betterhumans.com

Event: Toronto Transhumanist Association social
Date: Saturday June 19, 2004
Time: 8:30 PM
Location: The Green Room (patio)
296 Brunswick
Toronto, ON M5S2M7
Phone: (416) 929-3253
http://www.toronto.com/profile/149645/


George Dvorsky
President, Toronto Transhumanist Association
Deputy Editor, Betterhumans
george at betterhumans.com
http://www.sentientdevelopments.com

_________________________________________________________________
Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months 
FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Tue Jun 15 14:25:40 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 07:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
In-Reply-To: <p05100302bcf467ea8fc9@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406150715130.8246-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Amara Graps wrote:

[snip]
> Another anecdote: A man who manages
> the CNR network at my location lives in Milan and commutes, and he
> says that my town of Frascati (population 15,000) is more expensive
> for flat rentals than Milan! :-(

Amara, this doesn't make sense.  I've been to Italy [Rome, Florence,
Genova, Venice] (in the mid'70s and mid'80s) and to Heidelburg (in the
mid '90s).  None of those locations are exactly screaming out for lack
of surrounding land on which to build apartments.  (I'd guess that
for Genova and Venice, maybe Heidelburg one might argue for geographic
barriers -- but given modern transportation systems these and the
fondness for trains in Europe this should be a significant problem.)

There is not exactly a lack of laborers for construction given immigration
from Africa (or is there???).

So something strange is going on (bureaucracy? politics? culture?) if
there is a lack of affordable housing.  Or is wood based housing in
the U.S. really *that* much cheaper than brick or concrete based
housing in Europe?

Robert




From alex at ramonsky.com  Tue Jun 15 15:36:57 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:36:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Invitation
Message-ID: <40CF1799.9090406@ramonsky.com>


...and of course we forgot the date, didn't we?  --July 31st, 2004  :  )

BCC/Neuroscience Alliance/Entelechy Institute
Invites you to:
*************
IA Day
*************

Location: Wolverton, Bucks, UK
Attendance Fee: $0:00 (?0:00) (please pay before arrival)
Date: 31st July 2004

Schedule:
12 noon - 5pm

    * Meet at: The Albert Function Suite, The New Victoria hotel, 46
      Church Street, Wolverton, Bucks, Tel: (01908) 315447
    * Free beer/wine/beverages
    * IA lecture by Alex Ramonsky,
    * Demos of biofeedback & light/sound machines.
    * Transhumanist & Extropian news exchange & updates
    * Intro to the Entelechy Institute's new project -'Babylon 5.5'.
    * BCC's International Backup Exchange (bring your backups...it's
      nice to know if your house burns down you have a backup on the
      other side of the world).

5pm-at least midnight:

    * Alex's book launching party (at Alex's home; 5 minutes away)
    * Meal provided
    * More free drinks
    * Demos of TMS/NMS tech
    * Light/sound sessions
    * Free copy of book for all those who helped (if not available on
      the day, this will be posted to you)
    * The annual Russell Carter shooting competition with prizes
    * Music & videos

Accommodation choices:
1. Alex's house : free, but there may be a crowd and it may be just 
carpet space. How long you stay is up to you, so if you fancy a cheap 
holiday in London, here you go.
2. Local hotel:  The Crauford Arms, Wolverton or (nobbier) The Swan 
Revived Hotel, Newport Pagnell. Make your own booking arrangements.
Fee and bookings:
There is no fee, but it's important we know whether or not you are 
coming so as to estimate catering needs. It is also important to respond 
so that your name is left on the venue door and you can get in; this is 
a private booking. If you do not respond, we shall assume you're not coming!


So, RSVP to:
alex at ramonsky.com
Or by mail to:
The Entelechy Institute
Seventh Star Studios
27 Old Gloucester Street
London WC1N 3XX
Or
Tel: (UK) 07092 016095
Or: 07759 693908

Feel free to bring a partner or friend. We are not yet sure if under-16s 
are admissible but if you have a problem with this we can find out for you.
Any other inquiries please use the above contacts.
**************

The Entelechy Institute June 2004
This email is subject to IPMA law (Intellectual Property My Ass). You 
may therefore copy it and distribute it as you please. We know you have 
good taste enough not to spam people.

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040615/7f29f6f2/attachment.html>

From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Jun 15 16:05:39 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:05:39 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Resignation from moderator role
Message-ID: <00ee01c452f2$9a4939f0$852c2dcb@homepc>

Dear Natasha and extropes,

I'd like to be removed from the moderator list on the ExI site and for it to be known that I am no longer a moderator. 

I'm not feeling moderate much these days and neither read nor post the list as often as I used to. It often seems the best of the best of us (people) comes out only in adversity, while the worst of the worst gets off too lightly when dealt with only moderately. 

I still enjoy reading some posts to the list from time to time but I don't read enough to be comfortable being a moderator.  

Regards,
Brett Paatsch

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040616/6464e858/attachment.html>

From ml at gondwanaland.com  Tue Jun 15 15:45:20 2004
From: ml at gondwanaland.com (Mike Linksvayer)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:45:20 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
In-Reply-To: <p05100302bcf467ea8fc9@[150.146.134.133]>
References: <p05100302bcf467ea8fc9@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <20040615154520.GA8438@or.pair.com>

On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 09:51:14AM +0100, Amara Graps wrote:
> Maybe they didn't create a good sample of items in Beijing? Why don't
> you write them and describe what you know?

My understanding is that "cost of expat life" surveys are really
"cost of executive life" surveys and are thus pricing high end
accommodation, dining, and entertainment equivalent to what an exec
would expect in the US.  In some countries high security costs for
execs have to be taken into account as well, one explanation I've
heard for why Russian cities always rank high.

-- 
  Mike Linksvayer
  http://gondwanaland.com/ml/


From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Tue Jun 15 17:11:34 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:11:34 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
In-Reply-To: <p05100302bcf467ea8fc9@[150.146.134.133]>
References: <p05100302bcf467ea8fc9@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <40CF2DC6.4090700@cfl.rr.com>

Amara Graps wrote:

> J. Andrew Rogers:
>
>>  11    Beijing, China
>>  12    New York City, USA
>
>
>> It's when I saw this that I started to wonder what their criteria was.
>
> [...]
>
>> Any clue why this is?  Is it being normalized for per capita income of
>> the local population? 
>

In as much as cost of living is basically housing cost, I'm guessing 
this is something like what is going on.  An "average" dwelling in a 
typical third world city might be very cheap indeed.  But its lack of 
reliable and adequate heat, A/C, hot water, noise control, fire safety, 
physical security, etc... mean that it doesn't even get counted when 
these surveys are taken.  A relatively very small number of dwellings in 
such places are up to western standards for all those things and these 
places are correspondingly fantastically expensive.  The distribution 
would have a low median and average and be strongly "right skew".  New 
York, London or similar place by contrast would have almost all 
dwellings at a high quality level and a high cost as well.  The cost of 
a "western comfort level" in New York or London might be less though 
than in a third world capital.



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jun 15 17:59:10 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 10:59:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <40CEFC29.4000306@CRNano.org>
Message-ID: <20040615175910.31735.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Chris Phoenix <cphoenix at CRNano.org> wrote:
> The Avantguardian wrote:
>  > ".... the current neo-con cabal .... it's like
> they are the
>  > metaphysical servants of death and chaos. And
> yet...
>  > they claim to be god-fearing xtians when in
> reality
>  > they worship a god of fear. That Jesus fellow
> they
>  > love to name drop only ever spoke of love."
> 
> Note that they are currently engaged in global
> struggle with nihilists.
> 
> He who fights with monsters might take care lest he
> thereby become a 
> monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the
> abyss gazes also 
> into you. -- Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

You know, I sometimes wonder why people still cling to
labels that have long since been stretched so far that
they're practically meaningless.  Banning stem cell
research, for instance, is called "conservative", but
clamping down on research - even that which could
merely identify a threat - wasn't as widely used in
the past, so isn't promoting that change a "liberal"
move?  Likewise, a lover and a warmonger could both
claim to be the truest follower of Christ and honestly
(by their own understandings) call the other a heathen
against whom the world must be protected according to
Christ's teachings.

When a way has made enough compromises that it loses
all clear meaning of what is and is not the way, then
that way is lost.  It becomes a skin for politicians
to wear when useful, and discard when not.  But no way
is perfectly true and correct when first laid out, no
matter how much it may seem so to its initial
creators.  A way which could adjust and admit its
previous errors, such that that which was once thought
to be the way is now admitted not to be (and why, so
as to be sure the correction itself was not a mistake,
and to aid seeking the mistake out if it appears
elsewhere), would seem to be able to overcome this
weakness.  One wonders why such has not already
evolved.  Are the benefits of chameleonic
philosophical skins really that much more than the
benefits of a proper way of being?


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Tue Jun 15 18:06:52 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 11:06:52 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
Message-ID: <1087322812.4155@whirlwind.he.net>

Mike Linksvayer wrote: 
> My understanding is that "cost of expat life" surveys are really
> "cost of executive life" surveys and are thus pricing high end
> accommodation, dining, and entertainment equivalent to what an exec
> would expect in the US.  In some countries high security costs for
> execs have to be taken into account as well, one explanation I've
> heard for why Russian cities always rank high.


Yeah, that may make more sense.  I believe the apartment rental rate
they used for Beijing was $3700/month, which is substantially more than
the daily rate computed over a month at one of the very nice hotels
downtown.  There are apartment towers that cost that much in Beijing
(I've looked when I was there), but they are pretty posh and exclusive
-- usually marketed to foreign executives.  Arguably not a "typical"
living accommodation for the average person by western standards.

A pity that the tap water isn't potable in a city so theoretically
expensive.

j. andrew rogers




From scerir at libero.it  Tue Jun 15 18:31:21 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 20:31:21 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] World's most and least expensive cities
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406150715130.8246-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <1da401c45306$f5b64990$7ec01b97@administxl09yj>

From: "Robert J. Bradbury" 

> None of those locations are exactly screaming out for lack
> of surrounding land on which to build apartments.  

> There is not exactly a lack of laborers for construction 
> given immigration from Africa (or is there???).
 
> So something strange is going on (bureaucracy? politics? culture?) 
> if there is a lack of affordable housing.

Politics. Or law (if law is something different from politics,
which I doubt, I mean I doubt that law is something different
from politics here).

There are enough apartments in Italy. And there are enough
empty apartments in Italy. But the owners prefer not to
rent their apartments. There are many reasons for that.
The main reason is that (sometimes, or very often) you cannot 
get back your apartment at the end of location time. Where
is the judge? Who is the judge? What is the law? Years
and years to get the apartment back. So, when the owners 
actually rent, they also ask so much (and some "black" money
too, cash). 

Construction? New buildings? Right. But where is the land?
Is there enough land for new buildings? Yes there is,
but the urban plan usually says this land is not for construction,
but for agricolture. But you can change the urban plan,
is not it? It depends. It depends. The first question
politicians ask is this. "Whose is the land?". Because
you know, land for construction has huge values! And
politicians are *very* interested in those values ..... 

s.   





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Jun 15 18:38:51 2004
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:38:51 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <20040615175910.31735.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040615175910.31735.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <04Jun15.143852-0400_edt.564939-26270+26777@ams.ftl.affinity.com>

Adrian Tymes writes:
> Banning stem cell
> research, for instance, is called "conservative", but
> clamping down on research - even that which could
> merely identify a threat - wasn't as widely used in
> the past, so isn't promoting that change a "liberal"
> move?

No.  Conservatives don't want change or new things.  Clamping down on 
research or the discover of new things is conservative.  Preventing 
information that might support the need for change is conservative.  All of 
these seem consistent to me.  You have to look at the motives.  These "new" 
actions are not mean to change anything, but to enforce the status quo.  
Just because they are using more force and trying harder than ever not to 
change does not count as a liberal initiative for change. 

 --
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> 




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jun 15 19:50:11 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:50:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: the (scary) future of pro-death bioethics and
	legislation
In-Reply-To: <04Jun15.143852-0400_edt.564939-26270+26777@ams.ftl.affinity.com>
Message-ID: <20040615195011.56071.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Harvey Newstrom <mail at HarveyNewstrom.com> wrote:
> Adrian Tymes writes:
> > Banning stem cell
> > research, for instance, is called "conservative",
> but
> > clamping down on research - even that which could
> > merely identify a threat - wasn't as widely used
> in
> > the past, so isn't promoting that change a
> "liberal"
> > move?
> 
> No.  Conservatives don't want change or new things. 
> Clamping down on 
> research or the discover of new things is
> conservative.  Preventing 
> information that might support the need for change
> is conservative.  All of 
> these seem consistent to me.  You have to look at
> the motives.  These "new" 
> actions are not mean to change anything, but to
> enforce the status quo.  
> Just because they are using more force and trying
> harder than ever not to 
> change does not count as a liberal initiative for
> change. 

That's what it seems to me, too, but I've seen people
use arguments like this to claim they're liberals
because they want to change the vector of progress,
and make sure everything's "safe" (as in the
Precautionary Principle) before it's allowed, unlike
in the past.

Just providing an example of the kinds of warping
these labels are subject to.  (I think we can agree
that to call this "liberal" is contrary to the
original meaning.)


From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Jun 15 20:45:23 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:45:23 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Resignation from moderator role
Message-ID: <158510-220046215204523425@M2W038.mail2web.com>

Thanks Brett!

You have done an excellent job!  Let us know when you would like to
moderatoe again and we will put you back on the team.

my best to you,

Natasha


From: Brett Paatsch bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 02:05:39 +1000
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: [extropy-chat] Resignation from moderator role


Dear Natasha and extropes,

I'd like to be removed from the moderator list on the ExI site and for it
to be known that I am no longer a moderator. 

I'm not feeling moderate much these days and neither read nor post the list
as often as I used to. It often seems the best of the best of us (people)
comes out only in adversity, while the worst of the worst gets off too
lightly when dealt with only moderately. 

I still enjoy reading some posts to the list from time to time but I don't
read enough to be comfortable being a moderator.  

Regards,
Brett Paatsch



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




From natashavita at earthlink.net  Tue Jun 15 21:52:53 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 17:52:53 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] TTA Social this Sat. Jun 19
Message-ID: <200560-22004621521525328@M2W063.mail2web.com>

George Dvorsky worte:

>The Toronto Transhumanist Association is having a social gathering at the 
>Green Room this coming Saturday June 19. We'd love for you to join us.
>We're hoping to get a table on the patio, so go there first to look for us.

Since I cannot look for you in the Green Room, I looked for you at your
home page and was dazzled.  I like the way that you cross rigid boundaries
for a more balanced stance.

Natasha



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




From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jun 16 06:24:09 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:24:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death
	bioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <p05100301bcf316b73405@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <003201c4536a$8bd7f000$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Amara Graps
> 
> 
> Spike:
> >My notion is that we must not look to government to help us in any
> >of our transhumanist goals.  Life extentionists are inherently at
> >cross purposes with government in this.
> 
> I appreciate your perspective, and I know it's important for you. It
> doesn't work for me, though...

Amara, you have a most gentle and kind way of expressing
yourself, most worthy of emulation.  {8-]


> I'm on outside, dealing with the
> fallout of the present US administration in my every day life...
...
>Therefore, my focus in the transhumanist
> realm is on local people.
> 
> Amara

Ja, I agree with all of this.  My notion is much more narrowly
focused however: governments will be no help at all in the pursuit 
of life extension.  Good chance they will be rather a hindrance,
for governments pay out pensions to the elderly, and may perceive 
life extension as a threat to stability.  This is only the third 
biggest problem, however.  

The second biggest problem is that industry, with its collective
money and science behind it, is not particularly interested in
life extension.  Industry is very interested in *youth* extension,
giving us viagra and baldness treatments, along with a seemly
halfhearted scattering of cures for some diseases.  But overall, 
I see practically nothing from industry for true life extension.

But the biggest problem is that very few people are interested
in life extension.  As with industry, plenty of people will go
for youth extension.  Every day we see people vainly tossing 
their coins into the fountain of youth, seemingly none of it
aimed at living longer.  I suppose living better now is a form
of life extension.  But I want more.

spike






From amara at amara.com  Wed Jun 16 10:24:29 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:24:29 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] re: World's most and least expensive cities
Message-ID: <p05100305bcf58ff79f6f@[150.146.134.133]>

Robert Bradbury:
>Amara:
>>  Another anecdote: A man who manages
>>  the CNR network at my location lives in Milan and commutes, and he
>>  says that my town of Frascati (population 15,000) is more expensive
>>  for flat rentals than Milan! :-(

>Amara, this doesn't make sense.  I've been to Italy [Rome, Florence,
>Genova, Venice] (in the mid'70s and mid'80s) and to Heidelburg (in the
>mid '90s).  None of those locations are exactly screaming out for lack
>of surrounding land on which to build apartments.  (I'd guess that
>for Genova and Venice, maybe Heidelburg one might argue for geographic
>barriers -- but given modern transportation systems these and the
>fondness for trains in Europe this should be a significant problem.)

Hmm. Heidelberg. Look at a map of the city. On one side is a small
mountain. On the other side is the Neckar river. And on the other side
is that large land area where no streets are marked. That part is the
American military base. In addition to the physical barriers, you'll
find building laws that are similar to Boulder, Colorado, which
places strong limits all new buildings, in order to preserve the
natural beauty of the city.

During my first two years working (as PhD student) in Heidelberg,
I did live a distance away in a small village, where flats were
cheaper and more available, but the tradeoff was a three-hour daily
commute by trains and buses, and a flat that grew fungus on the walls
up to the height of my waist.

>There is not exactly a lack of laborers for construction given immigration
>from Africa (or is there???).

Immigration ??!! Italy and Germany doesn't want immigrants of any
kind (including older, female, educated astrophysicists who carry US
and Latvian passports :-( ). Both countries have passed a spate of
new laws in the last two years that strongly limits immigrants. For
example, in Germany, if you've been recently educated at a German
university (in other words, the government paid for your education),
but you're not a German citizen, you're placed in an immigrant
category that is no different from a person who is educated
elsewhere.

Even the ten 'new EU' members are limited- Yes, they can move
more-or-less freely (the Schengen Agreement doesn't apply to the ten
new countries, but the border guards wave you through without
inspection once they see the country of your passport). But the
existing phobic-EU member countries passed new laws last winter that
limit the number of new EU citizens to actually work (the laws
of Italy are those I know best, since I'm trying to use only
my Latvian passport now).

But those new laws don't stop many people (including moi *) from
trying, nor does anyone in Italy know what to do, now that the
permesso di soggiorno (permit-of-stay) system has collapsed. There
are hundreds of thousands of people walking around with expired
permessos. (Maybe someone should tell the EU that Italy's borders
are porous?)  So the immigrants _are_ here, mostly illegally. Are
they working? I don't know. I am (two fulltime jobs).

>So something strange is going on (bureaucracy? politics? culture?) if
>there is a lack of affordable housing.  Or is wood based housing in
>the U.S. really *that* much cheaper than brick or concrete based
>housing in Europe?

My experience in my part of Italy about why the lack of housing is
1) a huge number (65% say) of Italians live in their own owned flats
2) political, and 3) the standards of remaining available flats are
poor.

Regarding 1): Flats are many Italians' life investment because they
don't trust -- for good reason -- banks and other financial
mechanisms.

Regarding 2):  Some years ago Italy had laws that favored the renter
so much that renters could continue to live in someone's flat under
absurd conditions. The biggest result was that flat owners couldn't
get renters, who didn't pay their rent, to leave. It took years in
many cases for flat owners to get their flats back. Now they don't
want to rent them any more. I see these empty flats around my town
(Frascati). To try to rent them, you must take it upon yourself to
find the owner and ask if they are willing to rent, which might be
difficult if you don't know the neighbors in that neighborhood who
could tell you who is the owner. If you're a new resident or a
foreigner: 1) you wouldn't know about these empty flats, 2) you
might have language communication difficulties, 3) you are 'foreign'
to the neighborhood, and sometimes/often not welcome (Italians face
this too).

Another political facet is the tax laws for property owners. The
taxes are so high for property owners, that many Italians find
creative ways to compromise, or else work around the laws. The
result is an extremely high rent cost for flats, or else a rent
contract that is illegal. In my six months of searching, I didn't find
a flat owner willing to give me a legal contract. One could say,
'OK, that is Italy, accept it, all Italians do', but for immigrants
this is a major problem. You cannot own a car, get a bank account, a
credit card, telephone, other utilities unless you have an Italian
Identity card, and you cannot get an Identity card unless you have a
residenza certificate. You cannot get a residenza certificate unless
you have a legal rent contract (and a permesso di soggiorno). On the
day, last summer, that I showed my papers to the polizia to get my
residenza certificate, I was lucky to have an Italian friend with me
who could convince them that my unregistered rent contract was not a
problem, and they looked the other way.

Regarding 3: the standards of the remaining available flats are
poor: you might expect this of a location that has been occupied for
two thousand years. Roman columns appear suddenly in flats (they are
prized, in fact), and other building structures are unsound. Finding
a flat with good wiring for electricity and phone and a good system
for heating is a big accomplishment.

A rather long answer to your queries, Robert, but I hope that this
describes better the living situations I experienced.


Amara



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

(*) sent to two newspapers last week: Corriere della Sera and
La Repubblica, and no reply. I don't think "Letters to the
Editor" exists in Italy. :-(  )



Caro Sig. Berlusconi,

ho ricevuto una sua lettera che afferma che tre anni fa lei mi
scrisse per chiedere il mio voto. In verita', tre anni fa risiedevo
in Germania, dove lavoravo come astrofisica all'Istituto Max Planck
di Heidelberg. Nella sua lettera, lei elenca i risultati raggiunti
dal suo governo per motivarmi a votare per Forza Italia. Voterei
volentieri, se potessi, ma sono una cittadina statunitense che passa
larga parte del suo tempo lottando contro le restrizioni imposte
dalla nuova legge Bossi-Fini sull'immigrazione. Il mio permesso di
soggiorno deve essere rinnovato ogni anno dalle Questura di Roma, la
quale impiega almeno undici mesi per evadere la pratica, durante i
quali non posso espletare il mio lavoro al CNR, lavoro che
richiederebbe mie continue missioni all'estero, impossibili senza
permesso.

Che buffo paradosso, quindi, ricevere nella mia casella delle
lettere una missiva da un primo ministro che chiede il voto ad una
persona che non puo' votare; un primo ministro le cui leggi
impediscono a quella stessa persona di svolgere, in questo paese, il
proprio lavoro scientifico.


Cordialmente,

Amara Graps, PhD

-- 

***********************************************************************
Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario, CNR - ARTOV,
Via del Fosso del Cavaliere, 100, I-00133 Roma, ITALIA
************************************************************************


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Jun 16 08:52:43 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 01:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death
	bioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <003201c4536a$8bd7f000$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406160144130.31808-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Spike wrote:

> Ja, I agree with all of this.  My notion is much more narrowly
> focused however: governments will be no help at all in the pursuit
> of life extension.  Good chance they will be rather a hindrance,
[snip]

Not completely true spike.  The Chinese are throwing money at
stem cell research as a result of their fear of an aging population
and not enough children to care for their aged parents.

> for governments pay out pensions to the elderly, and may perceive
> life extension as a threat to stability.

I believe that the Japanese have slowly begun to raise the age
of retirement to deal with this problem (though this should be
verified).  The U.S. of course has yet to deal with it.

> The second biggest problem is that industry, with its collective
> money and science behind it, is not particularly interested in
> life extension. [snip]

See: http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/Aging/AntiAgingCompanies.html
We are at least an order of magnitude ahead of where we were a
decade ago.

> But the biggest problem is that very few people are interested
> in life extension. [snip]

But time is on our side -- as the numbers of aged people grow
the politicians will have to deal with the needs of that voting
block.

Robert




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Jun 16 10:19:30 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 20:19:30 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of
	pro-deathbioethicsandlegislation
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406160144130.31808-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <013001c4538b$694f9800$852c2dcb@homepc>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

> I believe that the Japanese have slowly begun to raise the age
> of retirement to deal with this problem (though this should be
> verified).  The U.S. of course has yet to deal with it.

Why don't you verify *before* you assert what you "be-lie-ve"
yet again Robert?  

Brett Paatsch




 




From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Wed Jun 16 17:26:16 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 10:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of
	pro-deathbioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <013001c4538b$694f9800$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406161018290.11231-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Brett,

Re:

> Why don't you verify *before* you assert what you "be-lie-ve"
> yet again Robert?

I have quickly reread, the IMF report on Japan (which was a source I
cited in my Genome Sequencing Priorities paper...):

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/03/muhleise.htm

I will stick by my "belief" that the Japanese are adjusting things.
See the paragraph that begins with: "The government has taken some
steps to prepare for the demographic change."  However the paper
is 3 years old and I do not understand the structure of the Japanese
economic & political systems to know for certain whether previously
proposed/enacted changes may still be valid.

There are situations where it might take days of reading, phone calls,
trips to the library, etc. to really "verify" something.  In such
situations it seems best (to me) to make qualified assertions.

I wish that I could make guaranteed to be accurate statements all
of the time but I suspect that is a pipe dream.

Robert



From max at maxmore.com  Wed Jun 16 22:15:25 2004
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:15:25 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death
	bioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406160144130.31808-100000@server.aeiveos.co
 m>
References: <003201c4536a$8bd7f000$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406160144130.31808-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040616171041.03afa848@mail.earthlink.net>

At 03:52 AM 6/16/2004, Robert wrote:


>I believe that the Japanese have slowly begun to raise the age
>of retirement to deal with this problem (though this should be
>verified).  The U.S. of course has yet to deal with it.

Not entirely true, Robert. The "US government" has mostly got in the way 
through skewing financial incentives (though individual financial 
innumeracy is also a major problem). My review of a relevant piece:


Redefining Retirement in the 21st Century
Knowledge at Wharton, June 2 2004
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=printArticle&ID=996
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/996.cfm

Researching and administering pension plans has increased in complexity and 
uncertainty. Shifting workforce demographics, and changes in employee 
expectations about retirement and the range of retirement options offered 
are the main drivers behind the challenges of retirement policy. This 
article reports on a recent Wharton conference titled ?Reinventing the 
Retirement Paradigm,? where academics, government officials, and industry 
leaders debated the fate of the baby boomers and the prospects for younger 
workers. Setting aside several retirement policy issues, this article 
surveys the conference participants? views on pension planning in relation 
to employment trends among both younger and older workers. Among the topics 
covered are retirement options such as ?phased retirement?, possible 
impending labor shortages, the economic impact of retiring baby boomers, 
and how retirement incentives might be adjusted. <BR><BR>

A major concern of the conference was the aging population and its effects 
on the availability of labor. The percentage of the population over 65 will 
expand greatly by 2035, while the main working age segment of 20-54 
year-olds, after brief gain, will drop sharply. Pension coverage as a whole 
has changed little over the last four decades, but defined benefit plans 
have lost ground to defined contribution plans. The latter typically create 
incentives for early retirement?an effect that is now the opposite of what 
is needed. One speaker examined the idea of ?phased retirement,? in which 
older workers continue with their employers on a part-time basis, but noted 
difficulties in freeing up some early retirement benefits. <BR><BR>

The long-term bias against employing older people may finally be weakening, 
as companies face the facts of changing workforce demographics. In a 
related change, some companies have abandoned prohibitions against rehiring 
retirees. However, many workers who claim they want to continue working 
after retirement age do not actually do so. Workers are more likely to 
retire if they have defined benefit pension plans. Other significant 
factors include health insurance and being self-employed. Researchers have 
found that workers either do not understand their finances or fail to 
incorporate them into retirement planning until they reach retirement age. 
Despite the demographic pressures, employers are resistant to changing 
their incentive plans.



_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
________________________________________________________________
Director of Content Solutions, ManyWorlds Inc.: http://www.manyworlds.com
--- Thought leadership in the innovation economy
m.more at manyworlds.com
_______________________________________________________ 




From max at maxmore.com  Wed Jun 16 22:28:54 2004
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 17:28:54 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of
	pro-deathbioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406161018290.11231-100000@server.aeiveos.co
 m>
References: <013001c4538b$694f9800$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406161018290.11231-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040616171802.03afa070@mail.earthlink.net>

A couple of other references on retirement and its economic effects. (Don't 
get too excited about the title of the first one!)

Max


Forever Young
More people will grow old this century than ever before. That will change 
the nature of retirement, says Frances Cairncross
The Economist
http://www.manyworlds.com/index.asp?from=CO&coid=CO3310413393552


It's Time to Retire Retirement
Harvard Business Review by Bob Morison; Ken Dychtwald; Tamara Erickson
http://www.manyworlds.com/index.asp?from=CO&coid=CO3310413393552




_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or more at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org <more at extropy.org>
________________________________________________________________
Director of Content Solutions, ManyWorlds Inc.: http://www.manyworlds.com
--- Thought leadership in the innovation economy
m.more at manyworlds.com
_______________________________________________________ 




From boriskg at verat.net  Wed Jun 16 22:59:20 2004
From: boriskg at verat.net (boriskg at verat.net)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 00:59:20 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid
Message-ID: <1066.217.26.66.185.1087426760.squirrel@webmail.verat.net>

This is the most stupid list on which I have ever been!


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Wed Jun 16 23:13:52 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:13:52 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid
References: <1066.217.26.66.185.1087426760.squirrel@webmail.verat.net>
Message-ID: <001901c453f7$9722e310$852c2dcb@homepc>

> This is the most stupid list on which I have ever been!

Then please put the second most stupid list in your view after
this line
-------



From riel at surriel.com  Wed Jun 16 23:27:57 2004
From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 19:27:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. James Hughes responds to Harvey Newstrom
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520406090838609fa7a8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20040609074843.037ec930@mail.earthlink.net>
	<470a3c520406090838609fa7a8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55L.0406161926190.6409@imladris.surriel.com>

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> I am with Natasha here, and I am not too worried of having separate
> versions of a document called "Transhumanist FAQ". It is normal that a
> common source spans out different offsprings (think of Linux
> distributions).

I would be extremely worried if transhumanists were
against diversity, steering the movement down into
stagnation before there even are any real transhumans!

Diversity includes different transhumanists having
different points of view, which should be encouraged,
IMHO.

Of course, you don't need to agree with me ;)

Rik
-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan


From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Thu Jun 17 10:14:33 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 03:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Technology and police states...
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406170253520.1193-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Well, as some of you may know Bill Joy is back at it again
arguing that technology(knowledge) should only be available
to science guilds and that science development [what about
software development???] should be required to carry insurance
against catastrophes.

See:
http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/15/0149240
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/06/1655234

Now of course we have the police state developing methods that
would allow them to electroshock (taser) entire crowds (and
vehicles):

Sweeping stun guns to target crowds
http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns99996014

Of course one has to wonder if they can stop this...

Build it Big (re: a 224 ton truck designed by Francis Bartley)
http://www.newscientist.com/opinion/opinterview.jsp?id=ns24521

And returning to the police state run amok...

Twisted Tale of Art, Death, DNA by Mark Baard
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,63637,00.html
or
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,63637,00.html

The story of the sealed search warrant obtained by the FBI and
the arrest of Steve Kurtz for manipulating bacteria at home
for the purpose of creating art.

An offshore enclave is starting to look more and more appealing
at this point...

Robert




From megaquark at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 17 15:47:57 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:47:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid
References: <1066.217.26.66.185.1087426760.squirrel@webmail.verat.net>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV7rGlSL3TB3900006c02@hotmail.com>

It's good to know that the list isn't "smart". That would be a bit
disturbing. :-)
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <boriskg at verat.net>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 5:59 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid


> This is the most stupid list on which I have ever been!
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From amara at amara.com  Thu Jun 17 17:14:23 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 18:14:23 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] ScienceMatters@Berkeley launches
Message-ID: <p05100300bcf781899497@[150.146.134.133]>

This note was posted at BoingBoing by David Pescovitz

<beginning quote>

ScienceMatters at Berkeley launches
Based on the model of Lab Notes, my online research digest from UC
Berkeley Engineering, we've now launched a new publication to focus on
the sciences at the university. In ScienceMatters at Berkeley, I'll
report on mind-bending research in physics, chemistry, biology, and
mathematics.

In the premier issue:
* Crystallizing Nanoscience
* Hunting the Achilles' Heel of Hepatitis
* The Mysterious Matter of Dark Matter

If hope you enjoy it! If you do, please feel free to subscribe to the
email or RSS

<end quote>

http://sciencematters.berkeley.edu/archives/volume1/issue1/index.php

-- 

********************************************************************
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/
********************************************************************
      "Trust in the Universe, but tie up your camels first."
                (adaptation of a Sufi proverb)



From jonkc at att.net  Thu Jun 17 16:15:57 2004
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:15:57 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Teleporting an atom
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406170253520.1193-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <029c01c45486$66a9c750$8aff4d0c@hal2001>

They've teleported a photon of light before but in today's Nature there is a
report on teleporting an atom for the first time, this is an article in the
New York Times about it.

John K Clark    jonkc at att.net
==========================

Scientists Teleport Not Kirk, but an Atom

By KENNETH CHANG

Published: June 17, 2004


And the beryllium atom said to the Starship Enterprise, beam me up!

Two teams of scientists report today that for the first time they have
teleported individual atoms, taking characteristics of one atom and
imprinting them on a second.

In physics, teleportation means creating a replica of an object, or at least
some aspect of it, at some distance from the original. The act of
teleporting always destroys the original - not entirely unlike the
transporters of the "Star Trek" television shows and movies - so it is
impossible produce multiple copies.

The prospect of using teleportation to move large objects or people remains
far beyond the current realm of possibility. But it could prove an important
component of so-called quantum computers. Scientists hope that one day such
computers will tap quantum mechanics to solve complex problems quickly by
calculating many different possible answers at once; computers today must
calculate each possibility separately.

The two teams, one at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in
Boulder, Colo., and one at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, worked
independently, but the experiments were similar, using a process proposed by
Dr. Charles H. Bennett, a scientist at I.B.M., and others in 1993.

"This will be an important part of attempts to build quantum computers,"
said Dr. H. Jeff Kimble, a professor of physics at the California Institute
of Technology. He co-wrote a commentary accompanying the two research papers
on the experiments, which appear today in the journal Nature.

"This is a complicated thing that begins to work," Dr. Kimble said. "We've
reached this point on our journey and it's really quite significant."

Several scientific groups, including one led by Dr. Kimble, previously
teleported photons, and scientists at the University of Aarhus in Denmark
reported in 2001 that they had teleported the magnetic field produced by
clouds of atoms.

In the new experiments, both teams of scientists worked with triplets of
charged atoms trapped in magnetic fields. The Colorado team used beryllium;
the Innsbruck researchers used calcium.

The feat of teleportation is transferring information from atom A to atom C
without the two meeting. The third atom, B, is an intermediary.

The three atoms can be thought of as boxes that can contain a 1 or a zero, a
bit of information like that used by a conventional computer chip. The
promise of quantum computers is that both a zero and a 1 can exist at once,
just like the perplexing premise described by the Austrian physicist Erwin
Schr?dinger in which a cat in a box can be simultaneously alive and dead
until someone looks inside.

First, atoms B and C were brought together, making them "entangled" and
creating an invisible link between the two atoms no matter how far apart
they were. Atom C was moved away. Next, A and B were similarly entangled.

Then the scientists measured the energy states of A and B, essentially
opening the boxes to see whether each contained a 1 or a zero. Because B had
been entangled with C, opening A and B created an instant change in atom C,
what Albert Einstein called "spooky action at a distance," and this, in
essence, set a combination lock on atom C, with the data in A and B serving
as the combination.

For the final step, the combination was sent and a pulse of laser light was
applied to atom C, almost magically turning it into a replica of the
original A. Atom A was teleported to atom C.

"It's a way of transferring the information," Dr. Rainer Blatt, leader of
the Innsbruck team, said.

A quantum computer could use teleportation to move the results of
calculations from one part of the computer to another. "Teleportation in
principle could be done pretty quick," said Dr. David J. Wineland, head of
the Colorado team, noting that directly moving atoms containing intermediate
results would almost certainly be too slow.

In the current experiments, the teleportation distances were a fraction of a
millimeter, but in principle, the atoms could be teleported over much longer
distances. The teleportation was also not perfect, succeeding about
three-quarters of the time.

"We're not doing very well yet," Dr. Wineland said. "All of these operations
have to be improved."

Teleporting a much larger object, like a person, appears unlikely, if not
entirely impossible, because too much information would have to be captured
and transmitted.

"It's certainly not useful for any beaming in the 'Star Trek' sense," Dr.
Blatt of the University of Innsbruck said. "Consider even some molecules or
something small like a virus. I cannot imagine it. As far as I can see, it's
not going to happen."



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spacer.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 45 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040617/d6cd0833/attachment.gif>

From amara at amara.com  Thu Jun 17 17:25:37 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 18:25:37 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death
	bioethicsandlegislation
Message-ID: <p05100301bcf784453a6f@[150.146.134.133]>

Spike:
>Ja, I agree with all of this.  My notion is much more narrowly
>focused however: governments will be no help at all in the pursuit
>of life extension.

The smarter governments will want their slaves to work longer, so that
their pensions won't kick in until much later.

('Smart' and 'Government'  ?  Nah... can't be true )

>The second biggest problem is that industry, with its collective
>money and science behind it, is not particularly interested in
>life extension.  Industry is very interested in *youth* extension,
>giving us viagra and baldness treatments, along with a seemly
>halfhearted scattering of cures for some diseases.  But overall,
>I see practically nothing from industry for true life extension.

I think that a smart industrialist could see the potential for
bootstrapping off of the beauty industry.

>But the biggest problem is that very few people are interested
>in life extension.

Because they don't trust that they can live *better* if they live
*longer*. Who wants to live longer if they are bedridden, attached
to tubes?

In my view, that is the angle on which to pay attention, that
is, Living *Well*, *Longer* .

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/
********************************************************************
"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work.  I want to
achieve it through not dying."  -- Woody Allen


From dgc at cox.net  Thu Jun 17 16:25:05 2004
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 12:25:05 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV7rGlSL3TB3900006c02@hotmail.com>
References: <1066.217.26.66.185.1087426760.squirrel@webmail.verat.net>
	<BAY9-DAV7rGlSL3TB3900006c02@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <40D1C5E1.4080804@cox.net>

Kevin Freels wrote:

>It's good to know that the list isn't "smart". That would be a bit
>disturbing. :-)
> 
>From: <boriskg at verat.net>
>  
>
>>This is the most stupid list on which I have ever been!
>>    
>>
Indeed. That would be emergent behavior, leading inevitably to a 
hard-takeoff singularity. And judging by some of the recent acrimony, I 
doubt the result would be "friendly."  :-)


From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com  Thu Jun 17 17:32:49 2004
From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:32:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E9A8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>

Amara Graps wrote:
> Spike:
>> But the biggest problem is that very few people are interested
>> in life extension.
> 
> Because they don't trust that they can live *better* if they live
> *longer*. Who wants to live longer if they are bedridden, attached
> to tubes?
> 
> In my view, that is the angle on which to pay attention, that
> is, Living *Well*, *Longer* .
> 
> Amara

Perhaps what is needed is a rebranding. Something like
"Youth Extension" or "Youth Maintenance" instead of "Life
Extension". Because people don't want to live longer, they
want to be young longer.

I unfortunately can't thing of another word meaning
"physical youth" that doesn't also imply adolescent
behavior.

Acy


From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Jun 17 19:04:17 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:04:17 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E9A8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E9A8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <20040617190416.GB12847@leitl.org>

On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 10:32:49AM -0700, Acy James Stapp wrote:

> Perhaps what is needed is a rebranding. Something like
> "Youth Extension" or "Youth Maintenance" instead of "Life
> Extension". Because people don't want to live longer, they
> want to be young longer.

If people *really* wanted to live longer in good health, they'd 
take the (minor) hassle of CR. It's the only thing that's known to
work, and giving you instant benefits.
 
> I unfortunately can't thing of another word meaning
> "physical youth" that doesn't also imply adolescent
> behavior.

Hey, nothing wrong with that. I've seen way too many geriatrically gifted
twinks. Revel in your immaturity! 

-- 
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/20040617/35c33dbf/attachment.bin>

From scerir at libero.it  Thu Jun 17 19:14:18 2004
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:14:18 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid (and polyhedra)
References: <1066.217.26.66.185.1087426760.squirrel@webmail.verat.net>
Message-ID: <002601c4549f$4a2a5cc0$f1bb1b97@administxl09yj>

[boris kg]
This is the most stupid list 
on which I have ever been!


"Stupid" from "stupere", which means 
to be amazed, confounded. So you are 
probably right.
s.


William C. Waterhouse in his "The Discovery 
of the Regular Solids", in "Archive for History 
of Exact Science", v.9, 1972-1973, pp. 212-221 writes:
"The history of the regular solids thus rests almost 
entirely on a scholium to Euclid which reads as follows: 
<<In this book, the 13th, are constructed the 5 figures 
called Platonic, which however do not belong to Plato. 
Three of these 5 figures, the cube, pyramid, and dodecahedron, 
belong to the Pythagoreans; while the octahedron and icosahedron
belong to Theaetetus>>". (I'm indebted to Paul Bien for
that).

But the "platonic solids" are neither Platonic nor Pythagorean.
They were known to the inhabitants of North East Scotland in the
late ***neolithic*** period. This is astonishingly little known.
The Ashmolean Museum has the 5 figures on display! You can see 
the amazing picture in this beautiful paper by M.Atiyah and 
P.Sutcliffe (I'm indebted to John McKay for that).
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0303071 (--> the pdf)






From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Thu Jun 17 22:22:55 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:22:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interstellar Dust (was: polyhedra)
In-Reply-To: <002601c4549f$4a2a5cc0$f1bb1b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406171517120.19273-100000@server.aeiveos.com>



On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, scerir wrote:

> But the "platonic solids" are neither Platonic nor Pythagorean.
> They were known to the inhabitants of North East Scotland in the
> late ***neolithic*** period. This is astonishingly little known.
> The Ashmolean Museum has the 5 figures on display! You can see
> the amazing picture in this beautiful paper by M.Atiyah and
> P.Sutcliffe (I'm indebted to John McKay for that).
> http://www.arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0303071 (--> the pdf)

Quite interesting (if only for the pictures)...

But the most interesting thing that caught my eye answers a question
that I think may have come up on the list before though I'm not
sure whether or not we answered it (perhaps I might have missed it).

"... Other Fullerenes are also common, particularly C_70, C_76 and C_84,
and have been found to exist in interstellar dust as well as in geological
formations on Earth. ..."

So yes folks there are Fullerenes in space (too bad the references aren't
cited).  Next question is are there Fullerenes with caged atoms or molecules
inside???  Now those would be really interesting.

Robert




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Jun 18 00:18:33 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:18:33 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E9A8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <002101c454c9$cab66fd0$852c2dcb@homepc>

Acy James Stapp wrote:

> Amara Graps wrote:
> > Spike:
> >> But the biggest problem is that very few
> >> people are interested
> >> in life extension.
> > 
> > Because they don't trust that they can live
> > *better* if they live *longer*. Who wants
> > to live longer if they are bedridden, attached
> > to tubes?
> > 
> > In my view, that is the angle on which to pay
> > attention, that is, Living *Well*, *Longer* .
> > 
> > Amara
> 
> Perhaps what is needed is a rebranding. Something
> like "Youth Extension" or "Youth Maintenance" instead
> of "Life Extension". Because people don't want to live
> longer, they want to be young longer.
> 
> I unfortunately can't thing of another word meaning
> "physical youth" that doesn't also imply adolescent
> behavior.
> 
> Acy

Words and memes can be so Vital to Vitality.

Brett Paatsch



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Fri Jun 18 01:29:35 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:29:35 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interstellar Dust
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406171517120.19273-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406171517120.19273-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <40D2457F.103@cfl.rr.com>

Robert J. Bradbury wrote:

>  
>
>
>So yes folks there are Fullerenes in space (too bad the references aren't
>cited).  Next question is are there Fullerenes with caged atoms or molecules
>inside???  Now those would be really interesting.
>
>Robert
>  
>

A really big and rare one (C1000 or so) as a possible solution to the 
abiogenesis problem?  Well, I doubt it since it's hard to image such 
diamandoid structures evolving into anything "alive" but it's fun to 
think about.



From reason at longevitymeme.org  Fri Jun 18 02:01:44 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 19:01:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <20040617190416.GB12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNMECOELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>

On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 10:32:49AM -0700, Acy James Stapp wrote:

> Perhaps what is needed is a rebranding. Something like
> "Youth Extension" or "Youth Maintenance" instead of "Life
> Extension". Because people don't want to live longer, they
> want to be young longer.

I rebranded it as "healthy life extension" for my part. I don't think that's
catching on in the right quarters, though. Or any quarters, for that matter.
Oh well.

Kronos went with "optimal health" I think. "Rejuvenation" is also a term not
yet brand-associated into a bad meaning like "anti-aging." A few companies
are going with that, and "Rejuvenation Research" is the new Aubrey de
Grey-led relaunch of the Journal of Anti-Aging Medicine.

But I agree with the need for rebranding. See:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000058.php
http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000064.php

Any new term must do better to overcome the common initial bad impressions
than "life extension" does.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Jun 18 02:23:39 2004
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 22:23:39 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNMECOELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNMECOELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <40D2522B.5000302@pobox.com>

Reason wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 10:32:49AM -0700, Acy James Stapp wrote:
> 
>>Perhaps what is needed is a rebranding. Something like
>>"Youth Extension" or "Youth Maintenance" instead of "Life
>>Extension". Because people don't want to live longer, they
>>want to be young longer.
> 
> I rebranded it as "healthy life extension" for my part. I don't think that's
> catching on in the right quarters, though. Or any quarters, for that matter.
> Oh well.

"Healthspan extension" is the best I've heard so far - the more so as it 
addresses an existing crisis in the medical system.

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


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jun 18 03:30:39 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 20:30:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01E9A8@amazemail2.amazeent.com>
Message-ID: <000001c454e4$a086ec10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> 
> I unfortunately can't thing of another word meaning
> "physical youth" that doesn't also imply adolescent
> behavior. Acy


But adolescent behavior is what makes adolescence
worthwhile.  {8^D  Such as what I plan to embark
upon tomorrow at 0400: a 3 megameter trip on an 
aging motorcycle with mechanical issues.  If all 
goes well, I shall be back Monday.  If not, not.

{8-]  

Onward Rocinante!

spike





From amara at amara.com  Fri Jun 18 09:18:50 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:18:50 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Interstellar Dust
Message-ID: <p05100303bcf85efa5722@[150.146.134.133]>

Robert Bradbury:

>But the most interesting thing that caught my eye answers a question
>that I think may have come up on the list before though I'm not sure
>whether or not we answered it (perhaps I might have missed it).

>"... Other Fullerenes are also common, particularly C_70, C_76 and
>C_84, and have been found to exist in interstellar dust as well as in
>geological formations on Earth. ..."

>So yes folks there are Fullerenes in space (too bad the references aren't
>cited).

Didn't we talk about this ?  I sent some paper references on
this topic to the list last March. A. Rotundi et al.'s paper
should have appeared in _Fullerenes, Nanotubes and Carbon
Nanostructures_ but I don't know if that is the paper of which
you and others were thinking.

Here is my message again:

http://www.lucifer.com/pipermail/extropy-chat/2004-March/004832.html



>Next question is are there Fullerenes with caged atoms or molecules
>inside???  Now those would be really interesting.

The structures look complicated.. From the text, the authors write:

"A transmission electron microscope study of individual soot grains
forming fluffy carbon particles produced using the arc-discharge
technique revealed close-packed arrangements of single -wall ring
structures with average diameters of 0.7, 1.1, 3.0, 5.5 and 8.2
nanometers."


"Soot Grains. Field emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM)
analyses showed a considerable degree of fusion of individual soot
grains arranged in chain-like aggregates."
[...]
"The soot grains have a typical internal texture of densely packed,
single -wall rings [Figure 2]. In addition to these grains, the ACAR
and ACH2(0.8) samples also contain rare, irregularly-shaped aggregates
of similar rings."

"Single -wall spheres. There is generally no ordering of rings in soot
grains that are thus crystallographically amorphous. Tilting
experiments during TEM imaging confirmed that the rings are hollow
spheres. The ring diameters from 0.7 nm to ~10 nm define the
populations I to IV in Table 2. The one-standard deviations [Table 2]
are similar to the error of measurement (see above) but each
population is accepted as a statistically-relevant distribution of
sphere diameters. We cannot exclude the possibility that each measured
diameter corresponds to a unique hollow carbon sphere. These
individual diameters then defining a continuous range of different
single -wall, hollow spheres. We do not think it was the case although
noting that a similar situation was found [20] for the range of single
-shell carbon nanotube diameters between ~0.7 nm and 1.6 nm that
included two significant peaks at 0.8 nm and 1.05 nm."
[...]
"The overwhelming majority of single -wall structures are spheres but
there are rare ellipsoidal shapes with their longest semi-major axis
parallel to the ultra-thin section [Figure 3]. The ellipsoidal single
-wall rings occur as isolated structures or in small clusters that are
randomly distributed within the amorphous soot grains. Single -wall
spheres can also be organized into rare "bunch-of-grape" domains both
within soot grains and as isolated structures among the other carbon
forms in the samples. Some "bunch-of-grape" 'domains are
cross-sections of small stacks of hollow, parallel-stacked,
ellipsoidal rings. "

"Carbon onions. Other soot grains contain spherical structures ~10 nm
to ~25 nm in diameter that have either a central single -wall sphere,
or a cluster of spheres. Concentric circular fringes without the
proto-fringe structure surround these spheres and clusters. These
unique structures are only a very small fraction of features found in
soot grains. The spacing of these particular fringes corresponds to
those of proto-fringes and single -wall spheres diameters [Table 2].
The origin of the resultant carbon onion domains is uncertain. They
could be a primary feature when condensed single-wall spheres acted as
nucleation centers for condensation of amorphous carbon. Lattice
fringe formation [Table 2] could be an experimental artifact caused by
exposure to the incident electron beam reminiscent of the formation of
nested-fullerenes [21]."


So, I don't know. Alessandra told me that these fullerene structures
are unstable, in any case.

Amara





-- 

***********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD
Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario, INAF - ARTOV,
Via del Fosso del Cavaliere, 100, I-00133 Roma, ITALIA
tel: +39-06-4993-4375       |fax:  +39-06-4993-4383
Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it  | http://www.mpi-hd.mpg.de/dustgroup/~graps
************************************************************************
I'M SIGNIFICANT!...screamed the dust speck. -- Calvin


From amara at amara.com  Fri Jun 18 15:28:04 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 16:28:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Cassini latest pictures
Message-ID: <p05100301bcf8b96f3769@[150.146.134.133]>

I hope that you saw the high resolution views of Phoebe earlier in the
week. Spectacular. Today the ISS (imaging subsystem) shows a beautiful
view of Saturn's cloud structure and part of the rings.

The following link is a good one to keep handy for checking every day
for a good view of the new images of Saturn and the Saturn system
from Cassini.

http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/Cassini

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 max at maxmore.com  Fri Jun 18 14:48:01 2004
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 09:48:01 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040618094503.03930260@mail.earthlink.net>



Bush Heading for Trouble on Stem Cells?
A new survey shows that almost 75 percent of Americans support Nancy 
Reagan's call for lifting restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem 
cell research. Is the Bush policy in jeopardy?
<http://www.uptilt.com/c.html?rtr=on&s=5fo,71ug,4rw,k8t9,jz0k,ses,lz26>http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/blog.asp?blogID=1453&trk=nl




_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org
_______________________________________________________  




From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Jun 18 15:28:46 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:28:46 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Hybrid cars not fuel economic in real world driving
In-Reply-To: <40CA05DD.7090009@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40CA05DD.7090009@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20040618152845.GB12847@leitl.org>

On Fri, Jun 11, 2004 at 08:19:57PM +0100, BillK wrote:

> Looks like the technology is still too new and needs a bit of work to
> optimize it.  Till then a normal small gas engine looks like a more
> efficient system.

The hybrid "technology" consists of an ICU driving a generator driving an
electric motor. E.g. Toyota Prius does seem to use a few features beyond of
that (somebody kindly shoot the webmokey responsible for below flash)

http://www.toyota.com/vehicles/2004/prius/key_features/hybrid_syn_drive.html

but this adds weight and complexity. Significant savings only kick in with a
total redesign as GM is attempting. Lower design complexity and switch to
largely solid-state design plus advanced composites allow to bring the weight
down radically, while retaining good acceleration and energy regeneration
features as well as structural safety on impact.

Economical realities enforces design continuity, preventing such shortcuts.

-- 
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/20040618/a8cd0215/attachment.bin>

From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 01:38:55 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] the (scary) future of pro-death
	bioethicsandlegislation
In-Reply-To: <p05100301bcf784453a6f@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <20040619013855.86629.qmail@web50705.mail.yahoo.com>

That is my view too, that also seems to be the crux of the whole problem who wouldn't want to live well longer?  or really well longer for that matter?  I'm a big advocate of biotech inhancement for quality of life and experiencing more nuanced and pleasant to really wonderful emotions that humans can't experience pre-bioenhanced

Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:Spike:
>Ja, I agree with all of this. My notion is much more narrowly
>focused however: governments will be no help at all in the pursuit
>of life extension.

The smarter governments will want their slaves to work longer, so that
their pensions won't kick in until much later.

('Smart' and 'Government' ? Nah... can't be true )

>The second biggest problem is that industry, with its collective
>money and science behind it, is not particularly interested in
>life extension. Industry is very interested in *youth* extension,
>giving us viagra and baldness treatments, along with a seemly
>halfhearted scattering of cures for some diseases. But overall,
>I see practically nothing from industry for true life extension.

I think that a smart industrialist could see the potential for
bootstrapping off of the beauty industry.

>But the biggest problem is that very few people are interested
>in life extension.

Because they don't trust that they can live *better* if they live
*longer*. Who wants to live longer if they are bedridden, attached
to tubes?

In my view, that is the angle on which to pay attention, that
is, Living *Well*, *Longer* .

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/
********************************************************************
"I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to
achieve it through not dying." -- Woody Allen
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat



Devon Fowler
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040618/7e8d5ade/attachment.html>

From mike99 at lascruces.com  Sat Jun 19 01:49:39 2004
From: mike99 at lascruces.com (mike99)
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 19:49:39 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] Cassini latest pictures
In-Reply-To: <p05100301bcf8b96f3769@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKIEOBDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>

The images of Phoebe were quite lunar, or maybe asteroidal.

Will Cassini get any closer to mysterious Titan? I'm sure we're all
wondering what's going on beneath those clouds. Except for Europa, Titan has
got to be the most tantalizing natural satellite in the solar system.

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

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: Friday, June 18, 2004 9:28 AM
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org; wta-talk at transhumanism.org
> Subject: [wta-talk] Cassini latest pictures
>
>
> I hope that you saw the high resolution views of Phoebe earlier in the
> week. Spectacular. Today the ISS (imaging subsystem) shows a beautiful
> view of Saturn's cloud structure and part of the rings.
>
> The following link is a good one to keep handy for checking every day
> for a good view of the new images of Saturn and the Saturn system
> from Cassini.
>
> http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/Cassini
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> wta-talk mailing list
> wta-talk at transhumanism.org
> http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk
>




From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sat Jun 19 12:22:33 2004
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:22:33 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: [wta-talk] Cassini latest pictures
In-Reply-To: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKIEOBDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>
References: <DAEGJDAIEMCEKLOPODAKIEOBDPAA.mike99@lascruces.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0406191420110.26410@zeus>


Cassini will get much closer to Titan than now. Actually, part of Cassini
(the probe Huygens) will be launched inside Titan's atmosphere and will
send measurements and images via radio link to the main probe. Hopefully,
it will be able to land on the surface (or splash, if there are methane
lakes like someone is speculating), and survive a little.

Alfio

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, mike99 wrote:

>The images of Phoebe were quite lunar, or maybe asteroidal.
>
>Will Cassini get any closer to mysterious Titan? I'm sure we're all
>wondering what's going on beneath those clouds. Except for Europa, Titan has
>got to be the most tantalizing natural satellite in the solar system.
>
>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
>
>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


From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 14:10:16 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 07:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.2.20040618094503.03930260@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20040619141016.76764.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com>

Thanks for the article!  I hope this little
conservative half wit loses to the progress of real
science.  It's funny that it takes the former first
lady of a conservative to get the ignorant American
public to wake up to embryonic stem cell research.

-- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Bush Heading for Trouble on Stem Cells?
> A new survey shows that almost 75 percent of
> Americans support Nancy 
> Reagan's call for lifting restrictions on federal
> funding of embryonic stem 
> cell research. Is the Bush policy in jeopardy?
>
<http://www.uptilt.com/c.html?rtr=on&s=5fo,71ug,4rw,k8t9,jz0k,ses,lz26>http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/blog.asp?blogID=1453&trk=nl
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
_______________________________________________________
> Max More, Ph.D.
> max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
> http://www.maxmore.com
> Strategic Philosopher
> Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org
>
_______________________________________________________
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Jun 19 17:25:37 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 10:25:37 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support
	stem cell research
In-Reply-To: <20040619141016.76764.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <6.1.1.1.2.20040618094503.03930260@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040619102501.02e126b0@mail.earthlink.net>

At 07:10 AM 6/19/04 -0700, devon fowler wrote:
>Thanks for the article!  I hope this little
>conservative half wit loses to the progress of real
>science.  It's funny that it takes the former first
>lady of a conservative to get the ignorant American
>public to wake up to embryonic stem cell research.

Devon, have you noticed any follow-ups on this article?  I hope it gets 
picked up by other magazines.

Natasha


>-- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bush Heading for Trouble on Stem Cells?
> > A new survey shows that almost 75 percent of
> > Americans support Nancy
> > Reagan's call for lifting restrictions on federal
> > funding of embryonic stem
> > cell research. Is the Bush policy in jeopardy?
> >
><http://www.uptilt.com/c.html?rtr=on&s=5fo,71ug,4rw,k8t9,jz0k,ses,lz26>http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/blog.asp?blogID=1453&trk=nl
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>_______________________________________________________
> > Max More, Ph.D.
> > max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
> > http://www.maxmore.com
> > Strategic Philosopher
> > Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org
> >
>_______________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> >
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
>
>
>=====
>Devon Fowler
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

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/20040619/9641382c/attachment.html>

From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sat Jun 19 18:34:36 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:34:36 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <20040619141016.76764.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040619141016.76764.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40D4873C.2090205@cfl.rr.com>

devon fowler wrote:

>Thanks for the article!  I hope this little
>conservative half wit loses to the progress of real
>science.  It's funny that it takes the former first
>lady of a conservative to get the ignorant American
>public to wake up to embryonic stem cell research.
>  
>
It makes me angry that the only way to advance science in this country 
is to wed it to the schmaltz and emotionalism surrounding the death of a 
president.  We can't seem to do anything in this country unless we get 
people worked into some sort of emotional frenzy.  This doesn't bode 
well for the future to say the least.



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Jun 19 18:59:01 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 11:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <40D4873C.2090205@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040619185901.58573.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Gregory Propf <gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> It makes me angry that the only way to advance
> science in this country 
> is to wed it to the schmaltz and emotionalism
> surrounding the death of a 
> president.  We can't seem to do anything in this
> country unless we get 
> people worked into some sort of emotional frenzy. 
> This doesn't bode 
> well for the future to say the least.

It's not the only way, by any means.  I recall the
stem cell ban getting attacked as it was anyway.  This
just happens to be a tool that's come along - so why
not take advantage of it?


From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sat Jun 19 19:46:49 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 15:46:49 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <20040619185901.58573.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040619185901.58573.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <40D49829.1070408@cfl.rr.com>

Adrian Tymes wrote:

>--- Gregory Propf <gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>It makes me angry that the only way to advance
>>science in this country 
>>is to wed it to the schmaltz and emotionalism
>>surrounding the death of a 
>>president.  We can't seem to do anything in this
>>country unless we get 
>>people worked into some sort of emotional frenzy. 
>>This doesn't bode 
>>well for the future to say the least.
>>    
>>
>
>It's not the only way, by any means.  I recall the
>stem cell ban getting attacked as it was anyway.  This
>just happens to be a tool that's come along - so why
>not take advantage of it?
>

I know.  Just ranting a bit.  We will probably need *more* of this in 
fact.  My own mom has MS and maybe some footage of her staggering around 
because her motor centers are damaged might wake the silly religious 
fuckers up.  Hopefully the business community, who own most of these 
political whores anyway, will quietly start pointing out how other 
countries that don't have so many Southern Baptists* will be, you know, 
getting all the money from commercializing this stuff.  Then the Shrubs 
of the world will start to find reasons to remove the ban.  The damage 
is done though, the time is lost.  People like my mom will suffer on.

* Apologies if anyone here is SB and reasonable-minded.



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Jun 19 20:23:03 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 13:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <40D49829.1070408@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040619202303.67768.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Gregory Propf <gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> * Apologies if anyone here is SB and
> reasonable-minded.

There are quite a few, in any large religion, who
insist that the "reasonable-minded", as we define it,
can not be true members of said religion.  Sadly, in
most large religions, those people tend to dominate
the public perception of what the religion is - and
worse, drive some of said religion's members towards
thoughtless extremism - mainly because they're so loud
about it.

If only it were possible to hack the religious memes
into a system where those willing to consider and
adapt new truths as they become available, rather than
those who cling to past teachings as if they can never
be disproven even when some of them are, would
naturally rise to power.


From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 19 21:19:00 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 14:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20040619102501.02e126b0@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <20040619211900.21741.qmail@web50706.mail.yahoo.com>

I'll keep my eyes open thanks Natasha

-- Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
> At 07:10 AM 6/19/04 -0700, devon fowler wrote:
> >Thanks for the article!  I hope this little
> >conservative half wit loses to the progress of real
> >science.  It's funny that it takes the former first
> >lady of a conservative to get the ignorant American
> >public to wake up to embryonic stem cell research.
> 
> Devon, have you noticed any follow-ups on this
> article?  I hope it gets 
> picked up by other magazines.
> 
> Natasha
> 
> 
> >-- Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Bush Heading for Trouble on Stem Cells?
> > > A new survey shows that almost 75 percent of
> > > Americans support Nancy
> > > Reagan's call for lifting restrictions on
> federal
> > > funding of embryonic stem
> > > cell research. Is the Bush policy in jeopardy?
> > >
>
><http://www.uptilt.com/c.html?rtr=on&s=5fo,71ug,4rw,k8t9,jz0k,ses,lz26>http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/blog.asp?blogID=1453&trk=nl
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>_______________________________________________________
> > > Max More, Ph.D.
> > > max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
> > > http://www.maxmore.com
> > > Strategic Philosopher
> > > Chairman, Extropy Institute.
> http://www.extropy.org
> > >
>
>_______________________________________________________
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > extropy-chat mailing list
> > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > >
>
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > >
> >
> >
> >=====
> >Devon Fowler
> >_______________________________________________
> >extropy-chat mailing list
> >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> 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
> > _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sat Jun 19 23:28:19 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 16:28:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <40D4873C.2090205@cfl.rr.com>
References: <20040619141016.76764.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com>
	<40D4873C.2090205@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <59132C30-C248-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


> It makes me angry that the only way to advance science in this country 
> is to wed it to the schmaltz and emotionalism surrounding the death of 
> a president.


The only way to advance science in any country is to do it yourself.  
It is a political issue in the US primarily because of the quantity of 
money actually spent on research; most countries have a negligible 
budget for this type of thing and therefore it isn't nearly as much of 
a political football.  The only thing that arguably makes the US unique 
is the sheer quantity of private research funding there is.

It isn't like the government is banning research, they simply aren't 
allowing federal money to be spent on it.  There is a hell of a lot of 
private research money, most of which is far better spent anyway.

More poignantly, stem cell research isn't the only valuable area of 
research that the government has largely chosen not to fund over the 
decades, whether by written or unwritten policy.  People just make a 
lot of noise when it is *their* pet research project that gets gored by 
the usual political process.  I have limited sympathy for people who 
want the government to fund research and then get upset when the 
politicians decide it won't spend money on the research they want.  
That was part of the deal, and always has been.

j. andrew rogers



From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sun Jun 20 00:02:28 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 17:02:28 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem
	cellresearch
In-Reply-To: <59132C30-C248-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>



--> J. Andrew Rogers

> It isn't like the government is banning research, they simply aren't
> allowing federal money to be spent on it.  There is a hell of a lot of
> private research money, most of which is far better spent anyway.

It is annoying that people make this argument while ignoring the effects of
government policy - existing and threatened - on private funding. In case
you hadn't noticed, the threat of a complete ban on therapeutic cloning and
stem cell research has been hovvering close over the industry in the US for
the past two years. The same or worse goes for Europe. Substantial private
funding just doesn't happen under those circumstances - the risk is too
great.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 20 02:21:43 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:21:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem
	cellresearch
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <20040620022143.2580.qmail@web50707.mail.yahoo.com>

It would certainly be better if we had a government
that cared about such research and I guess plenty of
effort has gone to waste trying to pursuade
politicians to care about such research, I assume you
all have thought about trying to change governemnt
policy to no avail?  --

- Reason <reason at longevitymeme.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> --> J. Andrew Rogers
> 
> > It isn't like the government is banning research,
> they simply aren't
> > allowing federal money to be spent on it.  There
> is a hell of a lot of
> > private research money, most of which is far
> better spent anyway.
> 
> It is annoying that people make this argument while
> ignoring the effects of
> government policy - existing and threatened - on
> private funding. In case
> you hadn't noticed, the threat of a complete ban on
> therapeutic cloning and
> stem cell research has been hovvering close over the
> industry in the US for
> the past two years. The same or worse goes for
> Europe. Substantial private
> funding just doesn't happen under those
> circumstances - the risk is too
> great.
> 
> Reason
> Founder, Longevity Meme
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Jun 20 04:03:48 2004
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:03:48 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support
	stemcellresearch
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>

"Reason" writes:

> --> J. Andrew Rogers
> 
> > It isn't like the government is banning research, they simply
> > aren't allowing federal money to be spent on it.  There is a 
> > hell of a lot of private research money, most of which is far
> > better spent anyway.
> 
> It is annoying that people make this argument while ignoring
> the effects of  government policy - existing and threatened 
> - on private funding. In case you hadn't noticed, the threat of
> a complete ban on therapeutic cloning and stem cell research
> has been hovvering close over the industry in the US for
> the past two years. The same or worse goes for Europe.
> Substantial private funding just doesn't happen under those
> circumstances - the risk is too great.

Good thread. Important topic. But I think the surface is still only
getting scratched here.  I'd like to see both  J. Andrew Rogers
and Reason develop their respective cases if they can.

Regards,
Brett Paatsch



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 20 05:52:48 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 22:52:48 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: ScienceMatters@Berkeley launches
Message-ID: <40D52630.A11B8901@mindspring.com>

--- In forteana at yahoogroups.com, "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at m...> fwded:
> In ScienceMatters at Berkeley, I'll
> report on mind-bending research in physics, chemistry, biology, and
> mathematics.

In a similar vein, Science Week (http://www.scienceweek.com) has
recently become a free-access site.

Rob


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia
veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sun Jun 20 07:12:53 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 00:12:53 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support
	stemcellresearch
In-Reply-To: <01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
	<01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <3F210C80-C289-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>

On Jun 19, 2004, at 9:03 PM, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> Good thread. Important topic. But I think the surface is still only
> getting scratched here.  I'd like to see both  J. Andrew Rogers
> and Reason develop their respective cases if they can.


My point was essentially that this hand-wringing is a classic 
historical myopia.  When granting the government abilities, powers, and 
resources, you should never ask what your friends and comrades would do 
with such things but what your enemies would.  Because eventually, your 
enemies will be in a position to utilize such things as *they* see fit. 
  Bad people frequently misuse powers granted by the foolish people to 
long gone benevolent people.

Is it a pity that Federal funds aren't being spent on stem cell 
research?  Yes, but you should have known this could happen when you 
foolishly allocated the funds of private citizens to the research whims 
of the government.  Everyone made a deal with the devil and they 
eventually got burnt.  Color me shocked.

The wide-eyed naivete of all these babes in the government research 
woods is just a tad irritating when you consider that this has been 
going on for decades.

To put it another way, if everyone thinks the people can be better 
trusted to decide what should and shouldn't be researched, then why the 
hell did they vote to take money away from the folks who fund private 
research and give it to the government for them to decide on such 
things?  People need to take responsibility for their decisions and 
have some kind of coherent sense of the consequences of those 
decisions.  The way to fix this isn't to demand that the government 
fund stem cell research, but to get the government out of research of 
this type altogether.  Otherwise, you are just deferring the same 
problem to another day, perhaps on an issue far more important than 
stem cells.



Fortunately for all of us, private research is typically funded for 
some combination of greed, philanthropy, and good old curiosity.  
Importantly, it is NOT funded to pander to a constituency or to keep 
their buddies paid because the only constituency to answer to are the 
guys who provided the money in the first place and the only reason they 
are doing it is to see results.

There isn't much in the way of oppressive regulation of most research, 
nor is there likely to be much of that despite the doomsday scenarios 
to the contrary.  Withdrawing the Federal government from an area of 
research is largely an empty gesture to make a constituency happy, and 
does not substantively stop research.  The fact that vast quantities of 
private money have been offered up to fill any nominal gaps caused by 
the withdrawal of Federal funds lends credence to this.  If there was 
so much private money willing to pick up the slack, why was the 
government funding it in the first place?

The withdrawal of Federal funding was a perfect political calculus.  
They throw a bone to an interest group, but don't actively prevent the 
majority from doing as they wish.  The politicians get a win, and the 
general population doesn't actually lose much in the bargain, so it is 
soon forgotten.

All the political rhetoric in the world cannot stop a cold pragmatic 
economic calculus.  If most people want something, they'll get it.  And 
the politicians will make damn sure they can get in on a taste of that 
action.  What they don't do is outright ban something that is popular 
with the public because there is no gain to be realized from it -- you 
generally don't get to be a politician without being a venal weasel.  
That same greedy self-interest is why even if politicians in one 
country actually ban something outright, you can always find another 
country where the politicians will see that as an opportunity to 
increase their own prestige and power.

No, the only mistake here was thinking that it was a good idea to let 
politicians decide what kind of research gets funded in the first 
place.  That was just idiotic.  For similar reasons, having any kind of 
global organization, like the UN, regulate this kind of thing is 
profoundly stupid as it eliminates the escape hatch of a competitive 
market in case the politicians in one sovereign entity all get together 
and decide to be imbeciles, which happens more often than it should.

j. andrew rogers



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sun Jun 20 07:27:44 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 00:27:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem
	cellresearch
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <5256218E-C28B-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Jun 19, 2004, at 5:02 PM, Reason wrote:
> Substantial private
> funding just doesn't happen under those circumstances - the risk is too
> great.


What is this hypothetical risk?  This is not a realistic analysis.

The only risk is perhaps the loss of some capital expenditure.  That's 
it.  If some day the government decided to ban research outright, all 
you've lost as a private funder is a little bit of upfront capital that 
wasn't amortized.

And it isn't like losing that bit of money is a big deal to private 
funding, since they were often never expecting to see a dime of return 
on the money they spent in the first place.

So where is the risk?  The biggest risk these folks face is that the 
blue sky research they are funding won't pan out.

Sounds like disasturbation to me.  Doom and gloom scenarios are 
exciting to talk about, but is generally based on dubious assumptions 
upon even a cursory inspection.

j. andrew rogers



From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sun Jun 20 07:35:55 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 00:35:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support
	stemcellresearch
In-Reply-To: <01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEEHELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Paatsch [mailto:bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au]
>
> > It is annoying that people make this argument while ignoring
> > the effects of  government policy - existing and threatened
> > - on private funding. In case you hadn't noticed, the threat of
> > a complete ban on therapeutic cloning and stem cell research
> > has been hovvering close over the industry in the US for
> > the past two years. The same or worse goes for Europe.
> > Substantial private funding just doesn't happen under those
> > circumstances - the risk is too great.
>
> Good thread. Important topic. But I think the surface is still only
> getting scratched here.  I'd like to see both  J. Andrew Rogers
> and Reason develop their respective cases if they can.

Thought experiment: you are a US biotech/pharma VC sitting on top of capital
itching to be invested. Knowing this

http://www.longevitymeme.org/projects/oppose_global_therapeutic_cloning_ban.
cfm

and this

http://www.longevitymeme.org/projects/oppose_the_therapeutic_cloning_ban.cfm

are you going to invest in any new medical venture that utilizes therapeutic
cloning (i.e. pretty much anything good involving stem cells)? Of course
not. No one invests in business plans that are in imminent danger of
criminalization. This has been the case for several years now in the US; ACT
lost a round because of it, and it hasn't been getting any better since
then.

What really irks me about this all is that free market conservatives who
also happen to be against embryonic stem cell research are using an
extremely dishonest argument resulting from this set of circumstances.
Ignoring the effects of pending and threatened legislation on the market for
private funding, they claim that embryonic stem cell research a) would be
funded by the free market if people really thought it was worthwhile, and b)
can be banned without any loss since it's obviously going nowhere. See here:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000127.php

This sort of thing makes me grind my teeth. The fact that any research has
happened at all in the past few years is a tribute to how much people want
it to happen.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme




From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sun Jun 20 07:56:21 2004
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 00:56:21 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support
	stemcellresearch
In-Reply-To: <5256218E-C28B-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNGEEIELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>


--> J. Andrew Rogers

> > Substantial private
> > funding just doesn't happen under those circumstances - the risk is too
> > great.
>
>
> What is this hypothetical risk?  This is not a realistic analysis.
>
> The only risk is perhaps the loss of some capital expenditure.  That's
> it.  If some day the government decided to ban research outright, all
> you've lost as a private funder is a little bit of upfront capital that
> wasn't amortized.
>
> And it isn't like losing that bit of money is a big deal to private
> funding, since they were often never expecting to see a dime of return
> on the money they spent in the first place.

The vast majority of private medical research funding is for-profit. If they
think there's a good chance of losing the money, they'll invest it something
else.

Some 1996/1997 figures: http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf00301/expendit.htm

$20 billion medical R&D in the top 500 corporations versus $11-12 billion or
so for the NIH that year.

http://www.infoplease.com/year/1997.html

US GDP (1998 dollars):   $8,110.90 billion
Federal spending:   $1635.33 billion (for suitable definitions of "Federal"
and "spending")

Total philanthropic spending was on the order of $160 billion (2% of GDP) in
1997, of which about $1 billion went to medical research if the
proportionality stays the same.

All these figures are, of course, subject to a a great deal of inaccuracy.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sun Jun 20 08:03:31 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 01:03:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support
	stemcellresearch
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEEHELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNKEEHELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <51DAA1CA-C290-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Jun 20, 2004, at 12:35 AM, Reason wrote:
> http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000127.php
>
> This sort of thing makes me grind my teeth. The fact that any research 
> has
> happened at all in the past few years is a tribute to how much people 
> want
> it to happen.


That's what every activist says about their cause.  "It is a miracle 
Disaster X hasn't happened, and it is only because people really care, 
but next year Disaster X is almost inevitable."  So on and so forth for 
a couple decades rain or shine whether anyone actually listens to them 
or not.  One has to be able to assign realistic probabilities to all 
the random "what-ifs" that pop into your head or all you'll do is burn 
all your energy generating heat rather than light.

I haven't seen much evidence that stem cell research has been slowed 
much at all.  There are activist factions on both sides that act like 
the world is coming to an end (which seems odd considering that they 
are predicting opposite outcomes), but back in the real world progress 
is managing to trudge along in a sane fashion like it always has.

It is far too easy to get caught up in the exciting rhetoric and lose 
sight of the dirty and bland reality.

j. andrew rogers



From amara at amara.com  Sun Jun 20 13:31:48 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:31:48 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Cassini latest pictures
Message-ID: <p05100301bcfb4183edb2@[150.146.134.133]>

>The images of Phoebe were quite lunar, or maybe asteroidal.

If they are correct that it is a captured object from the Kuiper
Belt region, then that shiny stuff that looks like ice makes
sense.

>Will Cassini get any closer to mysterious Titan?

I posted this last October. I thought it might be useful to post
again. (these are 'highlights' that I pulled out of the schedule)

Amara




Cassini-Huygens Mission Events Timeline, 2004-2005
===================================================

June 11, 2004: Flyby of Phoebe at about 2,100 kilometers.

July 1, 2004: Saturn orbit insertion. Main engine burn begins at
spacecraft-event time of 01:02 Universal Time (6:02 p.m. June 30
Pacific Daylight Time). Burn lasts about 97 minutes ending near
closest approach to Saturn. Then the antenna points earthward for a
quick call home to confirm the burn and new trajectory. Then the
spacecraft turns for scientific observations for about 74 minutes.
Then it points the antenna earthward again to transmit data from
those observations.  One-way light time is about 90 minutes.

October 26, 2004: Flyby of Titan at about 1,200 kilometers.
Observations may include radar and infrared imaging of surface
details, plus information about winds.

December 13, 2004: Flyby of Titan at about 2,350 kilometers.
Observations may include additional surface imaging and wind
information.

December 15, 2004:  Flyby of Dione at about 84,000 kilometers.

December 24, 2004:  Release of Huygens probe.

January 1, 2005:  Orbiter flyby of Iapetus at about 64,000 kilometers.

January 14, 2005:  Descent of Huygens probe onto Titan, lasting
about two and one-half hours.  A signal received about two hours
later should confirm that data has been collected. Orbiter flyby of
Titan at about 60,000 kilometers.

February 15, 2005:  Flyby of Titan at about 950 kilometers.

February 17, 2005:  Flyby of Enceladus at about 2,900 kilometers.

March 9, 2005:  Flyby of Enceladus at about 750 kilometers.

March 31, April 16, August 22, September 7, October 28 and December
26, 2005:  Flybys of Titan at about 950 to 11,000 kilometers.

July 14, 2005:  Flyby of Enceladus at about 1,000 kilometers.

August 2, 2005:  Flyby of Mimas at about 50,000 kilometers.

September 24, 2005:  Flyby of Tethys at about 28,000 kilometers.

September 26, 2005:  Flyby of Hyperion at about 1,100 kilometers.

October 11, 2005:  Flyby of Dione at about 1,600 kilometers.

November 26, 2005: Flyby of Rhea at about 1,300 kilometers.

September 10, 2007: Flyby of Iapetus at 1,700 kilometers.

December 3, 2007:  Flyby of Epimetheus at 6,400 kilometers.

-- 

***********************************************************************
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 bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Jun 20 12:19:04 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 05:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Cassini latest pictures
In-Reply-To: <p05100301bcfb4183edb2@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406200511230.9519-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, Amara Graps wrote:

> I posted this last October. I thought it might be useful to post
> again. (these are 'highlights' that I pulled out of the schedule)
[snip]

Boy, given Amara's Cassini schedule -- if Cassini were a human being
the descriptive term "flirt" would seem to be at the more complementary
end of terms that could be used to decribe her.   (Assuming of
course that spacecraft have a female gender quality.  If they
have a male gender quality "gigolo" is the only thing that
comes to mind.)

R.




From amara at amara.com  Sun Jun 20 14:45:07 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:45:07 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Soltices, Midsummer's Day and Ja'ni
Message-ID: <p05100300bcfb5072fa33@[150.146.134.133]>

Oops! My summer solstice crept up on me this year...

In 2004, For Northerners on Planet Earth:
          summer begins June 20, 8:57 P.M. EDT (June 21, 00:57 UT*)
          For Southerners on Planet Earth:
          winter begins June 20, 8:57 P.M. EDT (June 21, 00:57 UT*)

Those of you in the Northern Hemisphere, I hope you're enjoying the
long days and short nights. Those of you in the Southern Hemisphere,
the days will soon be getting longer.

Happy Solstice, folks!

and for Northerners: Happy Midsummer's Day and
                      Happy Ja'ni  (*)  !!


http://www.infoplease.com/spot/solstice.html

Solstice, from the Latin for sun stands still, in astronomy, either of
the two points on the ecliptic that lie midway between the equinoxes
(separated from them by an angular distance of 90?).

At the solstices the sun's apparent position on the celestial sphere
reaches its greatest distance above or below the celestial equator,
about 23 1/2? of arc. At the time of summer solstice, about June 22,
the sun is directly overhead at noon at the Tropic of Cancer.

In the Northern Hemisphere the longest day and shortest night of the
year occur on this date, marking the beginning of summer. At winter
solstice, about December 22, the sun is overhead at noon at the Tropic
of Capricorn; this marks the beginning of winter in the Northern
Hemisphere. For several days before and after each solstice the sun
appears to stand still in the sky, i.e., its noontime elevation does
not seem to change from day to day.


(*) Ja'ni:
http://www.latviansonline.com/features/article.php?id=348_0_11_0_C
-- 

***********************************************************************
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 bradbury at aeiveos.com  Sun Jun 20 12:45:25 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 05:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem
	cellresearch
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406200530410.9519-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, Reason wrote:

> It is annoying that people make this argument while ignoring the effects of
> government policy - existing and threatened - on private funding. In case
> you hadn't noticed, the threat of a complete ban on therapeutic cloning and
> stem cell research has been hovvering close over the industry in the US for
> the past two years. The same or worse goes for Europe.  [snip]

But you are thinking that medical research revolves around the U.S. or Europe.
Countries like Japan, Korea and China don't have some of the historic moral
(actually religious) problems that might exist in the U.S. or Europe.  And
I know that China has been throwing money at the construction of stem cell
research facilities.

You have to make an argument that pouring money on the problem would produce
results faster.  Over the years I've learned that with Science things happen
in two stages "research" and "development".  When things are in the "research"
stage they are very difficult to accelerate -- it is questionable how much
one can accelerate the search for the right combination of growth factors,
substrates, supporting cells, etc. that allow the support and differentiation
of stem cells.  A lot of the process requires the integration of many small
discoveries and observations into a picture of what is really going on.
You can't easily "brute force" that problem.  On the other hand once you
understand those processes the 'D' part (which is mostly engineering)
can use increased financial support to try different approaches to solve
problems.

Up until ~2001 we only had the tip of the iceberg with regard to what
the components were.  Now we are in the middle of looking at an extremely
large jigsaw puzzle (and only so many hands can work with a piece at the
same time).  Once the pieces begin to be assembled into much larger
blocks -- then will be the time to be pushing for more funding.

Robert




From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Jun 20 13:56:10 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 09:56:10 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's
	supportstemcellresearch
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org><01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<3F210C80-C289-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <004e01c456ce$582fdd00$f0893cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, June 20, 2004 3:12 AM J. Andrew Rogers
andrew at ceruleansystems.com
> My point was essentially that this hand-wringing
> is a classic historical myopia.  When granting
> the government abilities, powers, and resources,
> you should never ask what your friends and
> comrades would do with such things but what
> your enemies would.  Because eventually, your
> enemies will be in a position to utilize such
> things as *they* see fit.   Bad people frequently
> misuse powers granted by the foolish people to
> long gone benevolent people.

Well put!

Regards,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Jun 20 13:58:12 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:58:12 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
Message-ID: <20040620135812.GX12847@leitl.org>


If anyone is interested, I have several Gmail invitations to give away.
Ask me (privately) and ye shall receive.

-- 
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/20040620/83364d07/attachment.bin>

From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sun Jun 20 15:00:59 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:00:59 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's
	support	stemcellresearch
In-Reply-To: <3F210C80-C289-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
	<01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<3F210C80-C289-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <40D5A6AB.1050401@cfl.rr.com>

J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

>
> My point was essentially that this hand-wringing is a classic 
> historical myopia.  When granting the government abilities, powers, 
> and resources, you should never ask what your friends and comrades 
> would do with such things but what your enemies would.  Because 
> eventually, your enemies will be in a position to utilize such things 
> as *they* see fit.  Bad people frequently misuse powers granted by the 
> foolish people to long gone benevolent people. 

These are nice smug libertarian type positions.  Even assuming they are 
correct we must take into account the following

1) There is zero likelihood of getting the government out of the 
research business anytime before the singularity.

2) The threat of a hovering legislative ban combined with the lack of 
government monies will effectively stifle research in what is probably 
the single most promising field in medicine right now.  This is disastrous.

>
> No, the only mistake here was thinking that it was a good idea to let 
> politicians decide what kind of research gets funded in the first 
> place.  That was just idiotic.  For similar reasons, having any kind 
> of global organization, like the UN, regulate this kind of thing is 
> profoundly stupid as it eliminates the escape hatch of a competitive 
> market in case the politicians in one sovereign entity all get 
> together and decide to be imbeciles, which happens more often than it 
> should. 

And of course the same religious conservatives who lobbied for the stem 
cell funding ban will be pushing for this.  The hypocrisy of condemning 
the UN as the biblical "beast" when it doesn't do what they want, like 
invading Iraq on Shrub's schedule, while using it to push for a global 
stem cell ban won't even occur to them.



From neptune at superlink.net  Sun Jun 20 15:52:35 2004
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 11:52:35 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. Americans support stem cell
	research
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org><01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc><3F210C80-C289-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<40D5A6AB.1050401@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <00b901c456de$9be326a0$f0893cd1@neptune>

On Sunday, June 20, 2004 11:00 AM Gregory Propf gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com
wrote:
> These are nice smug libertarian type positions.
>  Even assuming they are correct we must take
> into account the following
>
> 1) There is zero likelihood of getting the
> government out of the research business
> anytime before the singularity.

Ah, but there is a chance to lower the amount of government involvement
and increase the amount of private funding.  It also depends on when a
singularity happens.  (There's a case to be made the government
involvement has actually held it back.)

> 2) The threat of a hovering legislative ban
> combined with the lack of government
> monies will effectively stifle research in
> what is probably the single most promising
> field in medicine right now.  This is disastrous.

If there's a government ban, I'm sure the government monies will be
taken away too.  So, what's your point?

My fear, too, is that government involvement will be used to politically
manipulate the research and also to focus more on military applications.

>> No, the only mistake here was thinking
>> that it was a good idea to let politicians
>> decide what kind of research gets
>> funded in the first place.  That was just
>> idiotic.  For similar reasons, having any
>> kind of global organization, like the UN,
>> regulate this kind of thing is profoundly
>> stupid as it eliminates the escape hatch
>> of a competitive market in case the
>> politicians in one sovereign entity all get
>> together and decide to be imbeciles,
>> which happens more often than it should.
>
> And of course the same religious
> conservatives who lobbied for the stem
> cell funding ban will be pushing for this.

Not just them, but also non-religious technophobes.

> The hypocrisy of condemning the UN as
> the biblical "beast" when it doesn't do
> what they want, like invading Iraq on
> Shrub's schedule, while using it to push
> for a global stem cell ban won't even
> occur to them.

I believe things are more complicated than that.  A lot of these people
don't disagree with the fundamental point of using government to further
their agenda, including international governmental bodies like the UN.
But the important point to them is the agenda -- not the means of
implementing it.  If they can get what they want through the UN,
they'll -- or some of them -- will be all for it.  If they can't,
they'll be as quick to condemn the UN.

Regards,

Dan
http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 20 16:15:33 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 09:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040620135812.GX12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040620161533.23230.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
using, anybody want some?"

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> 
> If anyone is interested, I have several Gmail invitations to give
> away.
> Ask me (privately) and ye shall receive.
> 
> -- 
> 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
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 1.2 application/pgp-signature 
> _______________________________________________
> 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!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 20 16:31:39 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 09:31:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Most Stupid
In-Reply-To: <40D1C5E1.4080804@cox.net>
Message-ID: <20040620163139.24404.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> Kevin Freels wrote:
> 
> >It's good to know that the list isn't "smart". That would be a bit
> >disturbing. :-)
> > 
> >From: <boriskg at verat.net>
> >  
> >
> >>This is the most stupid list on which I have ever been!
> >>    
> >>
> Indeed. That would be emergent behavior, leading inevitably to a 
> hard-takeoff singularity. And judging by some of the recent acrimony,
> I doubt the result would be "friendly."  :-)

I'm wondering where when and how Boris gave the list an intelligence
test?

"Stupid is as stupid does..." 

=====
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 eugen at leitl.org  Sun Jun 20 16:40:05 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:40:05 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040620161533.23230.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040620135812.GX12847@leitl.org>
	<20040620161533.23230.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040620164005.GB12847@leitl.org>

On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 09:15:33AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
> using, anybody want some?"

Sorry, all my spare germs are now accounted for :)

-- 
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/20040620/d9195887/attachment.bin>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 20 16:51:28 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 09:51:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [wta-talk] When did WTA turn socialist???
In-Reply-To: <470a3c52040612120446e09195@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040620165128.86429.qmail@web12908.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com> wrote:
> Harvey, next time please count up to ten and take the time to read a
> message before replying to it in such a misguided and aggressive
> fashion.
> I am referring to the main topic where there is heated discussion and
> disagreement on all list, including those run by WTA and ExI. I never
> said, or implied, that the WTA is a socialist organization.
> Or if I did say or imply it, could you please try to calm down and
> tell me just where I said or imply it?

It has been the overtly stated goal for a number of years of James
Hughes, the Changesurfing "sexy democratic transhumanist", that the WTA
be a socialist counterpoint to the ExI, which, while not overtly
libertarian, has tended to be membership-dominated by libertarians and
libertarian-leaning individuals since its inception.

=====
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 gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Sun Jun 20 16:53:01 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:53:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. Americans support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <00b901c456de$9be326a0$f0893cd1@neptune>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEEFELAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
	<01a401c4567b$96dae2f0$852c2dcb@homepc>
	<3F210C80-C289-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
	<40D5A6AB.1050401@cfl.rr.com>
	<00b901c456de$9be326a0$f0893cd1@neptune>
Message-ID: <40D5C0ED.1030905@cfl.rr.com>

Technotranscendence wrote:

>If there's a government ban, I'm sure the government monies will be
>taken away too.  So, what's your point?
>

The funding ban is a good indicator of the administration's "mood" 
towards the research.  We should work for a removal of the ban if only 
for that reason.  It certainly makes any kind of legislative ban less 
likely and would give a boost to private funding as well.  A long 
position in the stem cell companies on the day of the ban's removal 
would be a very good thing to have IMHO.


>>
>>And of course the same religious
>>conservatives who lobbied for the stem
>>cell funding ban will be pushing for this.
>>    
>>
>
>Not just them, but also non-religious technophobes.
>
Well, I forgot to mention them but yes.  Especially in Europe you see 
this.  Very few fundamentalists there but lots of eco-fundies and 
luddites.  This is going to be the "coalition against progress" for the 
early 21st century.  Religious types and "deep ecology" people united to 
keep us all dying young and having such a miserable time of it while 
we're here that we'll want to be dead anyway.  Nice acronym  - CAP.  I 
can hear the rap lyrics now...


>>The hypocrisy of condemning the UN as
>>the biblical "beast" when it doesn't do
>>what they want, like invading Iraq on
>>Shrub's schedule, while using it to push
>>for a global stem cell ban won't even
>>occur to them.
>>    
>>
>
>I believe things are more complicated than that.  A lot of these people
>don't disagree with the fundamental point of using government to further
>their agenda, including international governmental bodies like the UN
>

>But the important point to them is the agenda -- not the means of
>implementing it.  If they can get what they want through the UN,
>they'll -- or some of them -- will be all for it.  If they can't,
>they'll be as quick to condemn the UN.
>

Go visit Freerepublic.com (I can't believe I'm actually recommending 
someone visit this site :)  You will not believe the stuff the nutbar 
right puts out there about the evil "bluehelmets".



From bjk at imminst.org  Sun Jun 20 17:56:02 2004
From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 12:56:02 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update - Chat: Anti-Aging 
Message-ID: <40D5CFB2.3080406@imminst.org>

CHAT:  Dr. James R. Hughes - Anti-aging Therapy 
ImmInst Full Member, former member of the elite U.S. Navy Seals and 
co-founder of Hilton Head Longevity Center, James join ImmInst to discuss 
advancements being made in life extension and anti-aging therapy.

Chat Time: Sun June 20 @ 8 PM Eastern 
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=3689


MEMBER ARTICLE:  Paradigm Shifting - Life After 40?  
ImmInst  Member, Harold Brenner(prometheus) says, "So now we 
finally have empirical evidence. Life does not begin at 40. The brain 
begins to malfunction at 40 - due to ineffective DNA repair. This is scary." 
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=69&t=3808



From alex at ramonsky.com  Sun Jun 20 18:55:04 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 19:55:04 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Soltices, Midsummer's Day and Ja'ni
References: <p05100300bcfb5072fa33@[150.146.134.133]>
Message-ID: <40D5DD88.20206@ramonsky.com>

A question which seems to be difficult to resolve...
If Midsummer Solstice is the start of summer, why is it called Midsummer 
Solstice?
The ancient celts (who were very fond of their solstices) began their 
summer at the cross quarter day between spring equinox and summer 
solstice, ie, 'Mayday' or Bealtaine, around 4th May. Midsummer was, 
well, mid-summer, and summer ended in early August at Lughnasadh, in 
between summer solstice and autumn equinox. This makes sense to me. In 
the middle of summer, you get the most light...
Lots of people in the older generations still follow this pattern and 
treat June 20/21st as midsummer, likewise December 21/22 as Midwinter.
Where did the idea come from that midsummer solstice was the start of 
summer? Is it? Have we official confirmation of this?
In the UK it's very difficult to tell, because the weather is only 
slightly less nasty during june & july.
Best,
AR
***************

Amara Graps wrote:

> Oops! My summer solstice crept up on me this year...
>
> In 2004, For Northerners on Planet Earth:
>          summer begins June 20, 8:57 P.M. EDT (June 21, 00:57 UT*)
>          For Southerners on Planet Earth:
>          winter begins June 20, 8:57 P.M. EDT (June 21, 00:57 UT*)
>
> Those of you in the Northern Hemisphere, I hope you're enjoying the
> long days and short nights. Those of you in the Southern Hemisphere,
> the days will soon be getting longer.
>
> Happy Solstice, folks!
>
> and for Northerners: Happy Midsummer's Day and
>                      Happy Ja'ni  (*)  !!
>
>
> http://www.infoplease.com/spot/solstice.html
>
> Solstice, from the Latin for sun stands still, in astronomy, either of
> the two points on the ecliptic that lie midway between the equinoxes
> (separated from them by an angular distance of 90?).
>
> At the solstices the sun's apparent position on the celestial sphere
> reaches its greatest distance above or below the celestial equator,
> about 23 1/2? of arc. At the time of summer solstice, about June 22,
> the sun is directly overhead at noon at the Tropic of Cancer.
>
> In the Northern Hemisphere the longest day and shortest night of the
> year occur on this date, marking the beginning of summer. At winter
> solstice, about December 22, the sun is overhead at noon at the Tropic
> of Capricorn; this marks the beginning of winter in the Northern
> Hemisphere. For several days before and after each solstice the sun
> appears to stand still in the sky, i.e., its noontime elevation does
> not seem to change from day to day.
>
>
> (*) Ja'ni:
> http://www.latviansonline.com/features/article.php?id=348_0_11_0_C






From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jun 20 19:01:45 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 20:01:45 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
Message-ID: <40D5DF19.5030504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Sun Jun 20 10:15:33 MDT 2004 Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
> using, anybody want some?"

The main advantage of gmail (or any webmail) for me is that it means
that whatever the operating system or pc I am running, I can still get
my email. It would also be an advantage for people who travel a lot. The
problem with other webmail systems up to now is that they don't give you
enough disk space, so your webmail storage rapidly fills up.
Gmail's 1 gig should solve that problem.

If you are worried about privacy, then just don't use your gmail address
for your top secret world domination plans. If it was really important
it would be encrypted anyway.

The good news is that google are issuing a lot more gmail invitations
now, - as witnessed by the drop in Ebay prices for them. ;)

BillK


From bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk  Sun Jun 20 19:26:02 2004
From: bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk (BillK)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 20:26:02 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Soltices, Midsummer's Day and Ja'ni
Message-ID: <40D5E4CA.7060400@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>

On Sun Jun 20 12:55:04 MDT 2004 Alex Ramonsky wrote:
> Where did the idea come from that midsummer solstice was the start of
> summer? Is it? Have we official confirmation of this?
> In the UK it's very difficult to tell, because the weather is only
> slightly less nasty during june & july.

It is because of the time delay while the sun heats up the land and sea.

London average max temperatures:
Ja Fe Mr Ap My Jn Jl Ag Sp Oc Nv Dc
06 07 10 13 17 20 22 21 19 14 10 07

The other thing to bear in mind is that for such a small country the UK
weather is very variable. Scotland is surprisingly colder than London.

Oban average max temperatures:
Ja Fe Mr Ap My Jn Jl Ag Sp Oc Nv Dc
06 07 09 11 14 16 17 17 15 12 09 07

And it is even colder if you go a little further north into the Scottish
Highlands.

As the saying goes, if you have bad weather in England, just go 20 miles
down the road.

BillK


From GRUBER at biop.ox.ac.uk  Sun Jun 20 20:11:33 2004
From: GRUBER at biop.ox.ac.uk (Jan Gruber)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:11:33 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 9, Issue 26
In-Reply-To: <200406181800.i5II0Hn02386@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.VMS.3.91-2
	(vms).1040620210527.51550C-100000@nutmeg.biop.ox.ac.uk>


>> I unfortunately can't thing of another word meaning
>> "physical youth" that doesn't also imply adolescent
>> behavior. Acy
>
>
>But adolescent behavior is what makes adolescence
>worthwhile.  {8^D  Such as what I plan to embark
>upon tomorrow at 0400: a 3 megameter trip on an
>aging motorcycle with mechanical issues.  If all
>goes well, I shall be back Monday.  If not, not.
>
>{8-]
>
>Onward Rocinante!
>
>spike

spike,

I recently sold my bike - partly out of the desier to make it to my 400+
birthday - sometimes I am sorry I did though.

Good luck with the 3e6 m - hope you are wearing your safety gear ...

Jan


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jun 20 21:43:41 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 14:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <40D5DF19.5030504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20040620214341.56177.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>

Yeah, Yahoo just upped their limit from  a paltry 4 megs to 100 megs
the other day. Nearly danced a jig when I saw that.

--- BillK <bill at wkidston.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun Jun 20 10:15:33 MDT 2004 Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
> > using, anybody want some?"
> 
> The main advantage of gmail (or any webmail) for me is that it means
> that whatever the operating system or pc I am running, I can still
> get
> my email. It would also be an advantage for people who travel a lot.
> The
> problem with other webmail systems up to now is that they don't give
> you
> enough disk space, so your webmail storage rapidly fills up.
> Gmail's 1 gig should solve that problem.
> 
> If you are worried about privacy, then just don't use your gmail
> address
> for your top secret world domination plans. If it was really
> important
> it would be encrypted anyway.
> 
> The good news is that google are issuing a lot more gmail invitations
> now, - as witnessed by the drop in Ebay prices for them. ;)
> 
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> 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 is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Sun Jun 20 22:13:48 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 17:13:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
References: <20040620135812.GX12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV22F8BA94Ieo000126a1@hotmail.com>

I would like one if you have any left.:-)

Kevin Freels

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eugen Leitl" <eugen at leitl.org>
To: <transhumantech at yahoogroups.com>; <wta-talk at transhumanism.org>; "ExI
chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 2004 8:58 AM
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations


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


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Jun 20 22:49:04 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040620214341.56177.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040620224904.59929.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yeah, Yahoo just upped their limit from  a paltry 4
> megs to 100 megs
> the other day. Nearly danced a jig when I saw that.

You mean 2 gigs.  (Or is the limit different for
@yahoo.com versus @pacbell.net?)


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Jun 20 23:04:17 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:04:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem
	cellresearch
In-Reply-To: <5256218E-C28B-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <20040620230417.89324.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2004, at 5:02 PM, Reason wrote:
> > Substantial private
> > funding just doesn't happen under those
> circumstances - the risk is too
> > great.
> 
> What is this hypothetical risk?  This is not a
> realistic analysis.
> 
> The only risk is perhaps the loss of some capital
> expenditure.  That's 
> it.  If some day the government decided to ban
> research outright, all 
> you've lost as a private funder is a little bit of
> upfront capital that 
> wasn't amortized.
> 
> And it isn't like losing that bit of money is a big
> deal to private 
> funding, since they were often never expecting to
> see a dime of return 
> on the money they spent in the first place.

Actually, the risk and the significance are bigger
than you give them credit for.  The significance: it's
all about money, so losing quite a bit of money hurts
a lot whether or not one was expecting it.  The risk:
there's all the usual variables of whether or not any
business will succeed, but in this case, there's the
risk of imminent legislative ban in addition to all
the other risks (which are present no matter where the
money is spent), which increases the risk enough that
many investors would rather play elsewhere.  (More and
less risk are both "some" risk, but the amount of risk
definitely matters to investors!)


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sun Jun 20 23:11:43 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:11:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <59132C30-C248-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>
Message-ID: <20040620231143.71290.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
wrote:
> > It makes me angry that the only way to advance
> science in this country 
> > is to wed it to the schmaltz and emotionalism
> surrounding the death of 
> > a president.
> 
> The only way to advance science in any country is to
> do it yourself.  

Sure thing!  No problem.  But, how do I pay the bills
while I'm devoting my working hours to advancing
science?

(This is not a hypothetical question, BTW.  I'm
investigating something that's been distracting me
from real work, using my own savings until I'm
satisfied with the results.  But my savings will only
last so long.  Since I don't have a Ph.D. in the
field, and the issue is rather far from firmly
resolved and known science - even if it is a logical
extension of what's been demonstrated and measured -
getting funding for the work itself from any of the
usual sources seems so unlikely it might not be worth
the time to try...)


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Sun Jun 20 23:25:29 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:25:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: Cassini latest pictures
Message-ID: <40D61CE9.931501DF@mindspring.com>

--- In forteana at yahoogroups.com, "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1 at m...> fwded:
> December 24, 2004:  Release of Huygens probe.

My minor claim to fame is that I tested the prototype of the Thermal
Properties package (THP) of the Surface Science Package of the Huygens
probe back in 1991.

From
<
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=31193&fbodylongid=740
 >

"The thermal properties sensor assembly makes measurements of the
Titan ocean and lower atmospheric temperature and thermal
conductivity. It is housed in the SSP Top Hat. Conventional sensors
for this purpose are platinum wires 5 cm long and 10 and 25 microns in
diameter. The thermal conductivity measuring technique is to pass a
current through the wire to heat it and the surrounding medium. A
series of resistance measurements are taken at approx. 0.1 s intervals
to measure the rate of heating of the element and detect the onset of
convection."

This is what it looks like now:

http://pssri.open.ac.uk/images/thp.jpg

but the original wasn't nearly so pretty (certainly not after I'd
finished with the soldering iron).

Rob


-- 
"Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice


Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com >
     Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com >
Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html >
Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB *
      U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program
------------
Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List
   TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia
veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]


From paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz  Mon Jun 21 01:08:27 2004
From: paul.bridger at paradise.net.nz (paul.bridger)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:08:27 +1200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <40D5DF19.5030504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <40D5DF19.5030504@wkidston.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <40D6350B.9080009@paradise.net.nz>

BillK wrote:
> The main advantage of gmail (or any webmail) for me is that it means
> that whatever the operating system or pc I am running, I can still get
> my email.

IMO what makes gmail a killer app is the powerful search facilities. I don't 
plan to use my (hypothetical) account for email. I think the possibilities 
for knowledge management are much more interesting.

Today, a powerful use of blogging is to record your knowledge bit-by-bit so 
that over time your blog records become like a second memory (or third?). 
(Strictly this is klogging or knowledge logging). I very much like the idea 
of being able to search over everything I have ever known or thought about a 
particular topic.

1GB is plenty for a long running blog + email, and will undoubtedly be 
expanded  as required.

Paul Bridger


From riel at surriel.com  Mon Jun 21 02:24:27 2004
From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel)
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:24:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <179710-22004632183138606@M2W034.mail2web.com>
References: <179710-22004632183138606@M2W034.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55L.0406202223160.29081@imladris.surriel.com>

On Wed, 2 Jun 2004, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote:

> "The pilot of the craft, still to be announced, will become the first
> person to earn astronaut wings in a non-government sponsored vehicle, and
> the first private civilian to fly a spaceship out of the atmosphere."

As a reminder, SpaceShipOne is supposed to take off tomorrow
morning at 6:30 PDT, or 13:30 UTC.  The mission's FAQ is here:

http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/june21faq.htm

Rik
-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan


From cphoenix at CRNano.org  Mon Jun 21 04:35:33 2004
From: cphoenix at CRNano.org (Chris Phoenix)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:35:33 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <200406201800.i5KI0Jn21667@tick.javien.com>
References: <200406201800.i5KI0Jn21667@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <40D66595.3050105@CRNano.org>

Why is no one talking about the effects of U.S. policy on the supply of 
researchers?

I'm a biology student, deciding what career to go into.  (Or a lab 
director looking to expand into a new field.)  Should I go into one 
that's stable, or one that the US might well ban right after I graduate 
(create the program)?  That's a no-brainer...

Robert Bradbury wrote that the research side of R&D can't be accelerated 
by throwing money at it.  But I ask: can research be slowed by 
discouraging researchers from specializing in it?  And how much effect 
will the reduction in researchers have on subsequent development?

Reason and j. andrew rogers are hammer-and-tongs about public vs. 
private investment.  But money isn't the only thing that makes research 
happen.

ObNanotech: Research careers in molecular manufacturing are also being 
energetically discouraged in the U.S.

Chris

-- 
Chris Phoenix                                  cphoenix at CRNano.org
Director of Research
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology          http://CRNano.org


From pgptag at gmail.com  Mon Jun 21 06:18:53 2004
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:18:53 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040620164005.GB12847@leitl.org>
References: <20040620135812.GX12847@leitl.org>
	<20040620161533.23230.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20040620164005.GB12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <470a3c5204062023185870a40f@mail.gmail.com>

I have a few more. Kevin did you get yours?
What I like with Gmail is that for some reasons I go through my email
sessions much faster since I use Gmail. For those who are on many
mailing lists is a real time saver.
G.

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:40:05 +0200, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 09:15:33AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
> > using, anybody want some?"
> 
> Sorry, all my spare germs are now accounted for :)


From amara at amara.com  Mon Jun 21 07:53:55 2004
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:53:55 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Solstices, Midsummer's Day and Ja'ni
Message-ID: <p05100302bcfc4222e089@[150.146.134.133]>


Dear Alex,

The below text should help explain about the length of days not
coinciding like you think that they should.

Solstice has a precise astronomical definition, so there's not very
much that a person can do about that.

The 'midsummer' part comes from extra observational and cultural
factors, which are more interesting to me. It would be neat to
compile a book of stories of 'midsummer' celebrations all over
the world. I've participated in one in Sweden, and my father
tells me of the Ja'ni celebrations he experienced as a boy
in Latvia.

Buono luned?,
Amara


http://sciastro.astronomy.net/sci.astro.3.FAQ

Subject: C.10 Why isn't the earliest Sunrise (and latest Sunset) on the
          longest day of the year?
Author: Steve Willner <willner at cfa183.harvard.edu>

This phenomenon is called the "equation of time."  This is just a
fancy name for the fact that the Sun's speed along the Earth's equator
is not constant.  In other words, if you were to measure the Sun's
position at exactly noon every day, you would see not only the
familiar north-south change that goes with the seasons but also an
east-west change in the Sun's position.  A graphical representation of
both positional changes is the analemma, that funny figure 8 that most
globes stick in the middle of the Pacific ocean.

The short explanation of the equation of time is that it has two
causes.  The slightly larger effect comes from the obliquity of the
ecliptic---the Earth's equator is tilted with respect to the orbital
plane.  Constant speed along the ecliptic---which is how the "mean
sun" moves---translates to varying speed in right ascension (along the
equator).  This gives the overall figure 8 shape of the analemma.
Almost as large is the fact that the Earth's orbit is not circular,
and the Sun's angular speed along the ecliptic is therefore not
constant.  This gives the inequality between the two lobes of the
figure 8.

Some additional discussion, with illustrations, is provided by Nick
Strobel at
<URL:http://www.astronomynotes.com/nakedeye/nakedeyb.htm#A2.4>, though
you may want to start with the section on time at
<URL:http://www.astronomynotes.com/nakedeye/nakedeyb.htm#2>.
Mattthias Reinsch provides an analytic expression for determining the
number of days between the winter solstice and the day of the latest
sunrise for Northern Hemisphere observers,
<URL:http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/?0201074>.

The Earth's analemma will change with time as the Earth's orbital
parameters change.  This is described by Bernard Oliver (1972 July,
_Sky and Telescope_, pp. 20--22)

An article by David Harvey (1982 March, _Sky and Telescope_,
pp. 237--239) shows the analemmas of all nine planets.  A simulation
of the Martian analemma is at
<URL:http://apod.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030626.html>, and illustrations
of other planetary analemmas is at <URL:http://www.analemma.com/>.

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 andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Mon Jun 21 07:07:51 2004
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:07:51 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <20040620231143.71290.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20040620231143.71290.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <B5615806-C351-11D8-92CC-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com>


On Jun 20, 2004, at 4:11 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> --- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
> wrote:
>> The only way to advance science in any country is to
>> do it yourself.
>
> Sure thing!  No problem.  But, how do I pay the bills
> while I'm devoting my working hours to advancing
> science?


*shrug*

I can't answer that question for you, but I've managed just fine and 
would have managed even better if I made smarter choices and had been 
more disciplined in the past.

That last part about "smarter choices" is the important part.  Figure 
out where you want to go and be brutally realistic about the most 
efficient path to getting there.  And then go do it.  Just realize that 
you may not like answer because the best path is rarely the easiest, 
most comfortable, or fun.

It only seems hard because virtually all people are some combination of 
lazy, undisciplined, and/or have different goals in practice than they 
claim in theory.  That is the real stumbling block.  If you get past 
these things, it should be a breeze.


j. andrew rogers



From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Jun 21 07:08:30 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:08:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <000001c454e4$a086ec10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <000001c4575e$8f255f70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> ...a 3 megameter trip on an aging motorcycle with mechanical issues...

> 
> Onward Rocinante!
> 
> spike

Made it.  {8-]  spike



From alex at ramonsky.com  Mon Jun 21 07:40:44 2004
From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:40:44 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Invitation-revised schedule
Message-ID: <40D690FC.4080503@ramonsky.com>



BCC/Neuroscience Alliance/Entelechy Institute
Invites you to:
*************
IA Day
*************

Location: Wolverton, Bucks, UK
Attendance Fee: $0:00 (?0:00) (please pay before arrival)
Date: 31st July 2004

Schedule:
12 noon - 1.30pm

    * Meet at: The Albert Function Suite, The New Victoria hotel, 46
      Church Street, Wolverton, Bucks, Tel: (01908) 315447
    * Free beer/wine/beverages

1.30pm- 5pm

    * Lecture by Aubrey de Grey (biogerontologist and provocateur) --
      "Really curing aging: a foreseeable prospect and a reason for IA".
    * IA lecture by Alex Ramonsky,
    * Demos of biofeedback & light/sound machines.
    * Transhumanist & Extropian news exchange & updates
    * Intro to the Entelechy Institute's new project -'Babylon 5.5'.
    * BCC's International Backup Exchange (bring your backups...it's
      nice to know if your house burns down you have a backup on the
      other side of the world).

5pm-at least midnight:

    * Alex's book launching party (at Alex's home; 5 minutes away)
    * Meal provided
    * More free drinks
    * Demos of TMS/NMS tech
    * Light/sound sessions
    * Free copy of book for all those who helped (if not available on
      the day, this will be posted to you)
    * The annual Russell Carter shooting competition with prizes
    * Music & videos

Accommodation choices:
1. Alex's house : free, but there may be a crowd and it may be just 
carpet space. How long you stay is up to you, so if you fancy a cheap 
holiday in London, here you go.
2. Local hotel:  The Crauford Arms, Wolverton or (nobbier) The Swan 
Revived Hotel, Newport Pagnell. Make your own booking arrangements.
Fee and bookings:
There is no fee, but it's important we know whether or not you are 
coming so as to estimate catering needs. It is also important to respond 
so that your name is left on the venue door and you can get in; this is 
a private booking. If you do not respond, we shall assume you're not coming!


So, RSVP to:
alex at ramonsky.com
Or by mail to:
The Entelechy Institute
Seventh Star Studios
27 Old Gloucester Street
London WC1N 3XX
Or
Tel: (UK) 07092 016095
Or: 07759 693908

Feel free to bring a partner or friend. We are not yet sure if under-16s 
are admissible but if you have a problem with this we can find out for you.
Any other inquiries please use the above contacts.
**************

The Entelechy Institute June 2004
This email is subject to IPMA law (Intellectual Property My Ass). You 
may therefore copy it and distribute it as you please. We know you have 
good taste enough not to spam people.

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20040621/933db066/attachment.html>

From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Jun 21 14:20:56 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 07:20:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <000001c4575e$8f255f70$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210720120.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Spike wrote:

> > ...a 3 megameter trip on an aging motorcycle with mechanical issues...
> >
> > Onward Rocinante!

Ok, excuse my lack of knowledge -- who/what is Rocinante?

R.




From jpnitya at sapo.pt  Mon Jun 21 15:24:01 2004
From: jpnitya at sapo.pt (jpnitya at sapo.pt)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:24:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Adding a chromosome
Message-ID: <1087831441.7i1ksl3f8fwg@mail.sapo.pt>

Potentially useful development:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996018






O SAPO j? est? livre de v?rus com a Panda Software, fique voc? tamb?m!
Clique em: http://antivirus.sapo.pt


From spike66 at comcast.net  Mon Jun 21 15:29:59 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:29:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210720120.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <001001c457a4$9d5d3180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> Robert J. Bradbury

> > > Onward Rocinante!
> 
> Ok, excuse my lack of knowledge -- who/what is Rocinante?
> 
> R.

Don Quixote's stallion.  s







From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Jun 21 14:41:19 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 07:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.55L.0406202223160.29081@imladris.surriel.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, Rik van Riel wrote:

> As a reminder, SpaceShipOne is supposed to take off tomorrow
> morning at 6:30 PDT, or 13:30 UTC.  The mission's FAQ is here:

Ok, the news reports seem to have documented that it took
off with Mike Melvill as the pilot of SpaceShipOne but there
isn't any news as yet as to whether or not the ship has
returned successfully.

The reports do not seem to be reporting the expected times
well.  If takeoff was at 6:30 PDT and landing was expected
at 10:30 to 11:30 PDT this would make it a 4-5 hour flight.
In contrast I think the rocket engine was only supposed to
burn for 3 minutes.

Is the flight *really* 4-5 hours with perhaps less than ten
minutes "in" space?

Robert




From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Jun 21 16:00:43 2004
From: pharos at gmail.com (Bill K)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:00:43 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <001001c457a4$9d5d3180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
References: <001001c457a4$9d5d3180$6401a8c0@SHELLY>
Message-ID: <ee50357e040621090059ec8485@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:29:59 -0700, Spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > Robert J. Bradbury
> >
> > Ok, excuse my lack of knowledge -- who/what is Rocinante?
> >
> > R.
> 
> Don Quixote's stallion.  s
> 
Also, perhaps more familiar to US readers:

Rocinante is the truck author John Steinbeck drove across the United
States in 1960. He recounts the journey in Travels with Charley, a
bestseller that initially sold more volumes than any of Steinbeck's
other books and won the 1963 Paperback-of-the-Year Award.

In February of 1990, the Plates family generously offered to donate
Rocinante to the National Steinbeck Center. The truck was shipped to
Salinas and has been in storage. Rocinante was lovingly restored to
its original glory by Gene Cochetti and on April 1, 1998, Rocinante
was moved into its new home in the Main Exhibit Gallery of the Center.

BillK


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jun 21 16:11:15 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:11:15 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com
 >
References: <Pine.LNX.4.55L.0406202223160.29081@imladris.surriel.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040621111107.01cacec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>



Private Space Flight Is Successful

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: June 21, 2004

Filed at 11:30 a.m. ET

MOJAVE, Calif. (AP) -- A rocket plane soared out of Earth's atmosphere 
Monday in history's first privately financed manned spaceflight, then 
glided back to an unpowered landing.

SpaceShipOne pilot Mike Melvill was aiming to fly 62 miles above the 
Earth's surface. The exact altitude was to be confirmed by radar later.

For a few minutes after the ship started its descent, it was unclear 
whether Melvill had reached his goal. But the mission announcer finally 
said the flight had been successful.

``Beautiful sight, Mike,'' mission control said to Melvill as the gliding 
spaceship slowly circled toward its landing at Mojave Airport, accompanied 
by three chase planes.

The ship touched down to applause and cheers at 8:15, about 90 minutes 
after it was carried aloft slung under the belly of the jet-powered White 
Knight.



From bradbury at aeiveos.com  Mon Jun 21 15:24:42 2004
From: bradbury at aeiveos.com (Robert J. Bradbury)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 08:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210806400.3301-100000@server.aeiveos.com>


Ok, the news seems to have fixed the timeline.

Takeoff was at ~6:45 PT and landing was at ~8:15 PT.
See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5261571/

Bottom line: *it worked*  Private funding for space exploration
is feasible.

Mind you it requires some pretty large wallets (>$20 M) but
that is well within the range of quite a few individuals and
the costs will be lower in the future given that at least one
design is now done.

I would urge every extropian to go out on the town tonight to
stop at a bar and raise a toast to what humanity is capable of.
The news is so often focused on the negative -- let us celebrate
the positive!

Robert




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jun 21 16:44:11 2004
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:44:11 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210806400.3301-100000@server.aeiveos.com
 >
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210806400.3301-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20040621113851.01c38ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 08:24 AM 6/21/2004 -0700, Robert wrote:

>Bottom line: *it worked*  Private funding for space exploration
>is feasible.

< cough >

Not to be a spoilsport or anything (this is a very delightful and exciting 
event!), but I'm not sure how much can be explored at 62 miles above the 
Earth's surface. This trip covered, let's see, 1/3850th of the distance 
traveled 35 years ago by the govt guys who did at least manage to bring 
back some rocks.

Damien Broderick



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 17:06:59 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:06:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040620224904.59929.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040621170659.42247.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, Yahoo just upped their limit from  a paltry 4
> > megs to 100 megs
> > the other day. Nearly danced a jig when I saw that.
> 
> You mean 2 gigs.  (Or is the limit different for
> @yahoo.com versus @pacbell.net?)

Yeah, apparently. The status bar says I'm currently at 4% of 100.0 MB,
so I'm assuming that 100 megs is the limit for cheapskates like myself.

=====
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  Mon Jun 21 18:16:18 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:16:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040621113851.01c38ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040621181618.82131.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> At 08:24 AM 6/21/2004 -0700, Robert wrote:
> 
> >Bottom line: *it worked*  Private funding for space exploration
> >is feasible.
> 
> < cough >
> 
> Not to be a spoilsport or anything (this is a very delightful and
> exciting 
> event!), but I'm not sure how much can be explored at 62 miles above
> the Earth's surface. This trip covered, let's see, 1/3850th of the
> distance 
> traveled 35 years ago by the govt guys who did at least manage to
> bring back some rocks.

Ah, Damien the Curmudgeon... It's a similar trip as Alan Shepherd did
40  years ago or so, but at a tiny fraction of the cost, manpower, and
within a much better risk envelope. Its a similar flight to that
performed by the X-15 as well over a number of flights, also at much
lower cost, less manpower, and with a much smaller mothership than a
B-52.

A proper challenge would be to say that we've got ten years to put
private citizens on the moon, now.

=====
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 dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 18:43:53 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 11:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Three-quarters of N. American's support stem cell
	research
In-Reply-To: <40D66595.3050105@CRNano.org>
Message-ID: <20040621184353.87635.qmail@web50706.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Chris Phoenix <cphoenix at CRNano.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Robert Bradbury wrote that the research side of R&D
> can't be accelerated 
> by throwing money at it.  But I ask: can research be
> slowed by 
> discouraging researchers from specializing in it? 
> And how much effect 
> will the reduction in researchers have on subsequent
> development?

 I'm assuming you've already answered these questions:
-yes research can and is being slowed down
-and there is and will be a substantial effect on
develpment.  Correct me if my guesstimates are
wrong...
> 
> Reason and j. andrew rogers are hammer-and-tongs
> about public vs. 
> private investment.  But money isn't the only thing
> that makes research 
> happen.
> 
> ObNanotech: Research careers in molecular
> manufacturing are also being 
> energetically discouraged in the U.S.

Why is this happening?  I'd be curious to know is it
due to typical shock of the unknown?  Or just
government or private interests being nasty due to
power games or the like?
> 
> Chris
> 
> -- 
> Chris Phoenix                                 
> cphoenix at CRNano.org
> Director of Research
> Center for Responsible Nanotechnology         
> http://CRNano.org
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Jun 21 19:04:03 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:04:03 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040621113851.01c38ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210806400.3301-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
	<6.1.1.1.0.20040621113851.01c38ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040621190403.GK12847@leitl.org>

On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 11:44:11AM -0500, damien wrote:

> Not to be a spoilsport or anything (this is a very delightful and exciting 
> event!), but I'm not sure how much can be explored at 62 miles above the 
> Earth's surface. This trip covered, let's see, 1/3850th of the distance 
> traveled 35 years ago by the govt guys who did at least manage to bring 
> back some rocks.

It's less the distance, it's how close they came to being in LEO in terms of
horizontal velocity component (gravitational potential component Mojave
surface or 100 km doesn't really figure prominently).

It was a vertical launch, with helical descent. Repeating Gagarin (or even
Shepard) will take a very different design. I'm to lazy to look up whether
HTPB/N2O hybrids are at all suitable for the task.

Still, very impressive ROI for Allent's equivalent of cookie jar money. If
they're that efficient, a gigabuck could come a long way.

-- 
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/20040621/51617298/attachment.bin>

From natashavita at earthlink.net  Mon Jun 21 19:42:17 2004
From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:42:17 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support "Proactionary
	Principle"?
Message-ID: <24020-220046121194217296@M2W086.mail2web.com>

Greetings!

Extropy Institute is developing a list of scientists to publicly support
the Proactionary Principle.

Which scientists would you like to see supporting the Proactionary
Principle and whose names would you like to see on the masthead?

Thanks -

Natasha


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




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 20:10:06 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:10:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support "Proactionary
	Principle"?
In-Reply-To: <24020-220046121194217296@M2W086.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20040621201006.15153.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Greetings!
> 
> Extropy Institute is developing a list of scientists to publicly
> support
> the Proactionary Principle.
> 
> Which scientists would you like to see supporting the Proactionary
> Principle and whose names would you like to see on the masthead?

Stephen Hawking
Michio Kaku (don't expect it though)
John Cramer
It's a challenge, but Noam Chomsky (is he still considered a linguistic
scientist, or just a political flake?)
Someone from Sun Microsystems (to counter Bill Joy)
Marvin Minsky

=====
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 megaquark at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 21 20:21:57 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:21:57 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
References: <20040620135812.GX12847@leitl.org><20040620161533.23230.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com><20040620164005.GB12847@leitl.org>
	<470a3c5204062023185870a40f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV6VPWnOIwQO300016786@hotmail.com>

Nope. I'd like one for, but I may have to resort to purchasing an invitation
on ebay.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <pgptag at gmail.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 1:18 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations


> I have a few more. Kevin did you get yours?
> What I like with Gmail is that for some reasons I go through my email
> sessions much faster since I use Gmail. For those who are on many
> mailing lists is a real time saver.
> G.
>
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:40:05 +0200, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 09:15:33AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> >
> > > Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
> > > using, anybody want some?"
> >
> > Sorry, all my spare germs are now accounted for :)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From max at maxmore.com  Mon Jun 21 20:29:48 2004
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:29:48 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support
	"Proactionary Principle"?
In-Reply-To: <24020-220046121194217296@M2W086.mail2web.com>
References: <24020-220046121194217296@M2W086.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20040621152826.03b96ec0@mail.earthlink.net>

One quick suggestion:

Bjorn Lomborg

Everyone -- please do make suggestions. This is a great opportunity to make 
a real difference in our ability to continue making progress.

Max


At 02:42 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote:
>Greetings!
>
>Extropy Institute is developing a list of scientists to publicly support
>the Proactionary Principle.
>
>Which scientists would you like to see supporting the Proactionary
>Principle and whose names would you like to see on the masthead?




_______________________________________________________
Max More, Ph.D.
max at maxmore.com or max at extropy.org
http://www.maxmore.com
Strategic Philosopher
Chairman, Extropy Institute. http://www.extropy.org
_______________________________________________________  




From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Jun 21 20:36:29 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:36:29 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV6VPWnOIwQO300016786@hotmail.com>
References: <470a3c5204062023185870a40f@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY9-DAV6VPWnOIwQO300016786@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040621203629.GO12847@leitl.org>

On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 03:21:57PM -0500, Kevin Freels wrote:

> Nope. I'd like one for, but I may have to resort to purchasing an invitation
> on ebay.

Make sure you don't use your hotmail address for that. I send you one, but

	http://slashdot.org/articles/04/06/21/1150236.shtml?tid=126&tid=217&tid=95

Say thanks to Microsoft for that.

  	
Hotmail Blocks Gmail Emails (and Invites)



Posted by Hemos on Monday June 21, @09:19AM
from the intereting-tests dept.
bonhomme_de_neige writes "Emails and invitations sent to Hotmail from Gmail
accounts do not bounce, but nor do they arrive in the recipient's Inbox -
they vanish mysteriously into the aether. Joel Johnson writes in his Gizmodo
weblog that invitations he sent to a Hotmail address bounced (this even
received coverage from ZDNet). Search Engine Roundtable writes that several
ISPs are blocking Gmail. It's already well-documented that Yahoo moves Gmail
invites into the Bulk Mail folder. I've personally confirmed the Hotmail and
Yahoo blocking." Please note: I've not been able to verify this one way or
another.

> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <pgptag at gmail.com>
> To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 1:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
> 
> 
> > I have a few more. Kevin did you get yours?
> > What I like with Gmail is that for some reasons I go through my email
> > sessions much faster since I use Gmail. For those who are on many
> > mailing lists is a real time saver.
> > G.
> >
> > On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:40:05 +0200, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 09:15:33AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > >
> > > > Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm not
> > > > using, anybody want some?"
> > >
> > > Sorry, all my spare germs are now accounted for :)
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
-- 
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/20040621/0687cea6/attachment.bin>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 20:37:47 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 13:37:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV6VPWnOIwQO300016786@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040621203747.44600.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>

Harry Hawk says on Orkut that his gmail account now gets 70 spam
messages a day, that his SPAM folder has over 12,000 messages in it.

I've got to wonder how this makes gmail so great. Yahoo's spam filter
is outstanding. I get 10-20 spams a day which go automatically into my
'bulk' folder. Maybe 1 a day gets through to my inbox. I don't have to
maintain a folder of thousands of spam messages, I delete them. Yahoo
knows they are spam and is still able to use them to improve its
filtration without putting administration on to me.

And, while another poster said they like gmail cause they can access it
anywhere on any OS, I've done the same with Yahoo mail all over the US
on many machines and OS's.

Yahoo is 100 mb of space for free, 2 Gigs for $19.95 a year. What are
the real advantages of gmail?

--- Kevin Freels <megaquark at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Nope. I'd like one for, but I may have to resort to purchasing an
> invitation
> on ebay.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <pgptag at gmail.com>
> To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 1:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
> 
> 
> > I have a few more. Kevin did you get yours?
> > What I like with Gmail is that for some reasons I go through my
> email
> > sessions much faster since I use Gmail. For those who are on many
> > mailing lists is a real time saver.
> > G.
> >
> > On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:40:05 +0200, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 09:15:33AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > >
> > > > Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm
> not
> > > > using, anybody want some?"
> > >
> > > Sorry, all my spare germs are now accounted for :)
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From megaquark at hotmail.com  Mon Jun 21 20:51:43 2004
From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:51:43 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support
	"ProactionaryPrinciple"?
References: <20040621201006.15153.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY9-DAV23uWDZ9LtSL000169b7@hotmail.com>

How about Sydney Brenner?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
To: <natashavita at earthlink.net>; "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:10 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support
"ProactionaryPrinciple"?


> --- "natashavita at earthlink.net" <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Greetings!
> >
> > Extropy Institute is developing a list of scientists to publicly
> > support
> > the Proactionary Principle.
> >
> > Which scientists would you like to see supporting the Proactionary
> > Principle and whose names would you like to see on the masthead?
>
> Stephen Hawking
> Michio Kaku (don't expect it though)
> John Cramer
> It's a challenge, but Noam Chomsky (is he still considered a linguistic
> scientist, or just a political flake?)
> Someone from Sun Microsystems (to counter Bill Joy)
> Marvin Minsky
>
> =====
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Jun 21 21:11:44 2004
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:11:44 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040621203747.44600.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <BAY9-DAV6VPWnOIwQO300016786@hotmail.com>
	<20040621203747.44600.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040621211144.GP12847@leitl.org>

On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 01:37:47PM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Harry Hawk says on Orkut that his gmail account now gets 70 spam
> messages a day, that his SPAM folder has over 12,000 messages in it.

Wow, this means he's been using Gmail for some 170 days, assuming he started
getting 70 messages right from the start (telepathic spammers?). 70 spams/day
strikes me as way too low, some of my ancient user accounts going back a
decade get some 200-300/day. I use them to train Spamassassin's Bayesian
filter.
 
> I've got to wonder how this makes gmail so great. Yahoo's spam filter

What, the spam filter? It's purported to work. No idea how useful it is. 

> is outstanding. I get 10-20 spams a day which go automatically into my
> 'bulk' folder. Maybe 1 a day gets through to my inbox. I don't have to

I don't know what the spam filter, or Harry Hawk's spam has to do with anything.

> maintain a folder of thousands of spam messages, I delete them. Yahoo
> knows they are spam and is still able to use them to improve its
> filtration without putting administration on to me.
> 
> And, while another poster said they like gmail cause they can access it
> anywhere on any OS, I've done the same with Yahoo mail all over the US
> on many machines and OS's.
> 
> Yahoo is 100 mb of space for free, 2 Gigs for $19.95 a year. What are
> the real advantages of gmail?

I use Gmail as a free searchable scratch account I can access with realtime keystrokes 
as a pure text MUA which has 1 GByte I don't have to administer. For
everything else I have my dedicated root server, 30 EUR/month, 250 GByte
traffic/month included, plus 5 EUR/month for a second IP.

However, it's my personal problem once the box dies, and I have to restore it
from my nighly backup (which reminds me, I don't yet have a nightly backup,
in fact I don't have a backup 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/20040621/9e871f5f/attachment.bin>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jun 21 21:29:04 2004
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040621211144.GP12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040621212904.77791.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 01:37:47PM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>  
> > I've got to wonder how this makes gmail so great. Yahoo's spam
> > filter is outstanding. I get 10-20 spams a day which go
> > automatically into my
> > 'bulk' folder. Maybe 1 a day gets through to my inbox. 
 
> I don't know what the spam filter, or Harry Hawk's spam has to do
> with anything.

It's being sold as a feature of Gmail. Since my yahoo account is about
four years old, and it tends to be a given that older accounts get more
spam, it seems rather clear that gmail's spam filtration is less
capable than Yahoo's.

> > 
> > Yahoo is 100 mb of space for free, 2 Gigs for $19.95 a year. What
> are
> > the real advantages of gmail?
> 
> I use Gmail as a free searchable scratch account I can access with
> realtime keystrokes 
> as a pure text MUA which has 1 GByte I don't have to administer. For
> everything else I have my dedicated root server, 30 EUR/month, 250
> GByte traffic/month included, plus 5 EUR/month for a second IP.

Okay, I can search my yahoomail too, and I can allegedly, if I want,
access it via a text app like PINE (haven't felt the need up to now).
Is there a cost for the 1 GB gmail account? If not, is there planned to
be a cost after some introductory period?

=====
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 wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun 21 22:48:25 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 15:48:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040621203629.GO12847@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <20040621224825.20773.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

> It's already
> well-documented that Yahoo moves Gmail
> invites into the Bulk Mail folder.

False, or at least not always true.  I received (and
declined) a Gmail invite yesterday; it landed in my
Inbox.  But this would not be the first instance of
legit mail getting flagged by the spam filters; these
false positives happen just often enough that I at
least check the subject lines of all email in the Bulk
folder before wiping them.

(Most of my legit email is through lists like this
which have tags in front of them.  Any other legit
email is from someone I know or has a descriptive
subject - i.e., messages from complete strangers
labelled just "Hello" get tossed as spam unread,
especially if they have attachments.  You wanna get my
attention when I don't know you, you gotta put a bit
of thought into it.  Even a couple 10 year old newbies
- or so they seemed from their spelling and word
choices - were able to defeat this filter, and they
did have information of interest to me - specifically,
comments and questions about my work.)


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun 21 23:05:25 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:05:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support "Proactionary
	Principle"?
In-Reply-To: <24020-220046121194217296@M2W086.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <20040621230525.82558.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "natashavita at earthlink.net"
<natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Extropy Institute is developing a list of scientists
> to publicly support
> the Proactionary Principle.
> 
> Which scientists would you like to see supporting
> the Proactionary
> Principle and whose names would you like to see on
> the masthead?

It might be interesting to get both Richard Smalley
and Eric Drexler, just to prove that even their famous
debate leaves no question about the path to take.

Also, while he's not a scientist (or, at least, not
famous for being one), I wonder if it would be useful
to get Christopher Reeve to publically endorse this?


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun 21 23:48:09 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040621170659.42247.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040621234809.23226.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> > --- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Yeah, Yahoo just upped their limit from  a
> paltry 4
> > > megs to 100 megs
> > > the other day. Nearly danced a jig when I saw
> that.
> > 
> > You mean 2 gigs.  (Or is the limit different for
> > @yahoo.com versus @pacbell.net?)
> 
> Yeah, apparently. The status bar says I'm currently
> at 4% of 100.0 MB,
> so I'm assuming that 100 megs is the limit for
> cheapskates like myself.

I don't remember if I've ever paid for mine, and I've
had it for years.  But I may be an anomaly.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jun 21 23:52:21 2004
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040621113851.01c38ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20040621235221.22143.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> At 08:24 AM 6/21/2004 -0700, Robert wrote:
> >Bottom line: *it worked*  Private funding for space
> exploration
> >is feasible.
> 
> < cough >
> 
> Not to be a spoilsport or anything (this is a very
> delightful and exciting 
> event!), but I'm not sure how much can be explored
> at 62 miles above the 
> Earth's surface. This trip covered, let's see,
> 1/3850th of the distance 
> traveled 35 years ago by the govt guys who did at
> least manage to bring 
> back some rocks.

Yeah, but 10-20 years before that, where were we?
Stepping stones, not one giant leap - unless you want
to leap a few times and then never again.  Been
there, don't care to repeat it.


From Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au  Tue Jun 22 00:22:34 2004
From: Emlyn.Oregan at micromet.com.au (Emlyn ORegan)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:52:34 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
Message-ID: <34C3A25B1989094E9A50E5E4837D8AE70A3FCE@mmdsvr01.mm.local>

Not only did it work, but it appears to have only cost US$20 - did they
miss out an order of magnitude in the news stories? Wow!

One of my favourite things about this event is the look and shape of
SpaceShipOne and White Knight. Surely, with a decent promotional arm
they could have recouped the entire cost via merchandising; I would buy
a toy of those craft.

Damned exciting. This was a bit of a trophy effort, but hopefully it
heralds a move away from the big trophy efforts of the past (eg:
stupidly expensive Moon landings, very impressive though, I'm not
dissing it), and toward a real affordable space industry. 

I was thinking that someone could offer a longer range prize for the
first group to haul an asteroid back here, but I guess it isn't
necessary (ie: it's prize enough in itself).

Emlyn
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert J. Bradbury [mailto:bradbury at aeiveos.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 22 June 2004 12:55 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June
21
> 
> 
> Ok, the news seems to have fixed the timeline.
> 
> Takeoff was at ~6:45 PT and landing was at ~8:15 PT.
> See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5261571/
> 
> Bottom line: *it worked*  Private funding for space exploration
> is feasible.
> 
> Mind you it requires some pretty large wallets (>$20 M) but
> that is well within the range of quite a few individuals and
> the costs will be lower in the future given that at least one
> design is now done.
> 
> I would urge every extropian to go out on the town tonight to
> stop at a bar and raise a toast to what humanity is capable of.
> The news is so often focused on the negative -- let us celebrate
> the positive!
> 
> Robert
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document.
No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or
other defect.



From twodeel at jornada.org  Tue Jun 22 00:48:01 2004
From: twodeel at jornada.org (Don Dartfield)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:48:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
In-Reply-To: <20040621212904.77791.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406211742040.21539-100000@hplx.net>

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Okay, I can search my yahoomail too, and I can allegedly, if I want,
> access it via a text app like PINE (haven't felt the need up to now).

Wow, you can access Yahoo mail with Pine?  Is that a feature of the free 
mail accounts, or do you have to pay for that kind of thing?



From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com  Tue Jun 22 02:05:01 2004
From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:05:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
Message-ID: <BAY17-F38ZKxsu9cEpS00009a8e@hotmail.com>

I saw this article on fark and slashdot, but my invite came through ok. I 
guess it came through just in the nick of time.

Apparantly, Yahoo is blocking invites too. Rather lame of the two big free 
email servers. But I think the bad press they're getting is more than making 
up from any benefit gained from the blocked gmail accounts.

BAL

>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:36:29 +0200
>
>On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 03:21:57PM -0500, Kevin Freels wrote:
>
> > Nope. I'd like one for, but I may have to resort to purchasing an 
>invitation
> > on ebay.
>
>Make sure you don't use your hotmail address for that. I send you one, but
>
>	http://slashdot.org/articles/04/06/21/1150236.shtml?tid=126&tid=217&tid=95
>
>Say thanks to Microsoft for that.
>
>
>Hotmail Blocks Gmail Emails (and Invites)
>
>
>
>Posted by Hemos on Monday June 21, @09:19AM
>from the intereting-tests dept.
>bonhomme_de_neige writes "Emails and invitations sent to Hotmail from Gmail
>accounts do not bounce, but nor do they arrive in the recipient's Inbox -
>they vanish mysteriously into the aether. Joel Johnson writes in his 
>Gizmodo
>weblog that invitations he sent to a Hotmail address bounced (this even
>received coverage from ZDNet). Search Engine Roundtable writes that several
>ISPs are blocking Gmail. It's already well-documented that Yahoo moves 
>Gmail
>invites into the Bulk Mail folder. I've personally confirmed the Hotmail 
>and
>Yahoo blocking." Please note: I've not been able to verify this one way or
>another.
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" <pgptag at gmail.com>
> > To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> > Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 1:18 AM
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] gmail invitations
> >
> >
> > > I have a few more. Kevin did you get yours?
> > > What I like with Gmail is that for some reasons I go through my email
> > > sessions much faster since I use Gmail. For those who are on many
> > > mailing lists is a real time saver.
> > > G.
> > >
> > > On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 18:40:05 +0200, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> 
>wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 09:15:33AM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Gawd, that's like saying "Hey, I've got some spare syphylis I'm 
>not
> > > > > using, anybody want some?"
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, all my spare germs are now accounted for :)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
>--
>Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
>______________________________________________________________
>ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144            http://www.leitl.org
>8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
>http://moleculardevices.org         http://nanomachines.net
><< attach4 >>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jun 22 03:12:49 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:12:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Youth Extension
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e040621090059ec8485@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c45806$cd194550$6401a8c0@SHELLY>


> > > Ok, excuse my lack of knowledge -- who/what is Rocinante?
> > >
> > > R.
> > 
> > Don Quixote's stallion.  s
> > 
> Also, perhaps more familiar to US readers:
> 
> Rocinante is the truck author John Steinbeck drove across the United
> States in 1960. He recounts the journey in Travels with Charley, a
> bestseller that initially sold more volumes than any of Steinbeck's
> other books and won the 1963 Paperback-of-the-Year Award.
> 
> In February of 1990, the Plates family generously offered to donate
> Rocinante to the National Steinbeck Center. The truck was shipped to
> Salinas and has been in storage. Rocinante was lovingly restored to
> its original glory by Gene Cochetti and on April 1, 1998, Rocinante
> was moved into its new home in the Main Exhibit Gallery of the Center.
> 
> BillK

BillK, perhaps we should mention that the National Steinbeck
Center is less than 2 hrs drive south of the San Jose Airport.  

After reading Travels With Charlie and all the other books by 
Steinbeck, I went down to the annual Steinbeck Festival in 
Salinas/Monterey, where they had on display Rocinante and 
some other wonderful Steinbeck memorabilia.  This past year
was a major hootenanny for it was Steinbeck's the 100th
anniversary of Steinbeck's birth.  Behold this beautiful
truck, which Steinbeck commanded while creating a wonderful
literary work of art:  

http://www.steinbeck.org/Rocinante2.html

I looked all over for a 1960 model GMC fleetsider that I 
could rebuild, paint green and make into a replica of 
Rocinante.  When I learned that the V-6 would go only
11 miles on a gallon of fuel, (about 18 liters per 100 km) 
my enthusiasm cooled considerably.  I decided to settle
for a poster of Rocinante, and for naming my trusty
mechanical steed after those two characters, Don Quixote's 
horse and John Steinbeck's truck.

I have often been compared to Don Quixote.  Literary
critics have observed: "Spike, Don Quixote was a tall 
skinny cat, and so are you."

Yes, of course, but also consider that Don Quixote had
his own unique view of the world.  He treated his 
dilapidated old horse as a champion steed.  Where the 
others saw only the rough serving wench Aldunza, Quixote
saw a beautiful princess, Dolcinea.  (Of course Dolcinea 
is the stunning beauty Sophia Loren, so Peter O'Toole's 
optimistic vision is actually the most accurate.)

Cryonics has been described as a Quixotic vision, a
fantasy of the eventual defeat of inevitable death and
decay.  If so, let us all be Quixotic in our every vision 
of the future.

spike





   




  



From gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com  Tue Jun 22 04:43:43 2004
From: gpropf1 at cfl.rr.com (Gregory Propf)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 00:43:43 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0406210735200.2377-100000@server.aeiveos.com>
Message-ID: <40D7B8FF.5050601@cfl.rr.com>

Kudos to all at Scaled Composites for this!  I have to admit this was 
probably the only hopeful thing I've seen in the news in months.  One 
thing pissed me off though - I had actually planned to take the morning 
off, brew up some espresso and enjoy the media circus.  Except there was 
no media circus.  Almost nothing at all.  I tuned to Discovery Wings, 
surely they would be covering it!  Nope, just the usual WWII warplane 
documentary stuff.  Finally saw some cockpit footage this evening in the 
gym while working out.



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Tue Jun 22 05:03:11 2004
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:03:11 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (TLC-Brotherhood) Re: Rutan - Space Ship One
Message-ID: <40D7BD8F.B4CE79A3@mindspring.com>

[FAC - Forward Air Controller]


For you former Misty FACs.  I got this from Misty FAC Wells Jackson who is 
in Panama who got it from Misty FAC Don Sheppard, a TV analyst, who got it 
from Misty FAC Dick Rutan.  I think it has some interesting information in it.

Gene Rossel


Hi Mom,
This from Don Shepard who shared what Dick Rutan told him about the first 
successful space flight this morning....

>Subject: Rutan - space Ship One
>Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:36:21 EDT
>
>
>Talked to Rutan this PM - he was really, really high over Sapceship  One.
>Says they made space by 419' or something like that. Said lots  went 
>wrong. One
>of the trim tabs that control flight post supersonic went dead  (C/B popped)
>and that required Melville's diagnosis and intervention to control  the 
>pitching
>and shut down the engine (don't know if he shut it down, or the  system did).
>Without him on board the vehicle would have been toast - another  plus for
>"manned" space flight. Also, the loud "POP" was a "cowling" they put on  as a
>result of the bigger booster recently added - don't know if heat or dynamic
>pressure caused. Says they have great cockpit video.
>
>Dick said Burt is not the least bit interested in providing a "public
>shuttle" to space, but predicts he will soon tire of this and be on the "next
>project." Great question for an interview - What next, Mr. Rutan?
>
>Said Buzz Aldrin walked on to the stage and shook Melville's hand and said,
>"Welcome to a very special fraternity." Melville was stoked.
>
>Dick wants to go to Mars - think about it - the first Misty on Mars -
>wonder
>if there is any Martian triple-A? - Shep


-- 
"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 spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jun 22 05:38:30 2004
From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike)
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:38:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Private spacecraft blast offs June 21
In-Reply-To: <40D7B8FF.5050601@cfl.rr.com>
Message-ID: <004801c4581b$26a33d10$6401a8c0@SHELLY>

> Gregory Propf
> ... - I had actually planned to take 
> the morning off, brew up some espresso and enjoy the media circus.  
> Except there was no media circus...

Patience, my good man.  Recall that the media circus runs
on money.  When they go for the X-prize and the ringmasters
can report to the eager proletariat that 20 million bucks 
are at stake, then there will be plenty of news coverage.
I was thinking of taking off on a ride down there and 
watching in person if they go again in two weeks.

spike 










From natasha at natasha.cc  Tue Jun 22 14:28:49 2004
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 07:28:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support
	"Proactionary Principle"?
In-Reply-To: <20040621230525.82558.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <24020-220046121194217296@M2W086.mail2web.com>
Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20040622072633.02dd63f0@mail.earthlink.net>

Thank you all for the suggestions and team effort!


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/20040622/81db6af0/attachment.html>

From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 12:47:53 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 05:47:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support
	"ProactionaryPrinciple"?
In-Reply-To: <BAY9-DAV23uWDZ9LtSL000169b7@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20040622124753.18269.qmail@web50704.mail.yahoo.com>

Ray Kurzweil, Michael West, Michael Rose, Aubrey de
Grey these come to mind as their already prominent in
their respected fields.


--- Kevin Freels <megaquark at hotmail.com> wrote:
> How about Sydney Brenner?
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> To: <natashavita at earthlink.net>; "ExI chat list"
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists
> to Support
> "ProactionaryPrinciple"?
> 
> 
> > --- "natashavita at earthlink.net"
> <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > Greetings!
> > >
> > > Extropy Institute is developing a list of
> scientists to publicly
> > > support
> > > the Proactionary Principle.
> > >
> > > Which scientists would you like to see
> supporting the Proactionary
> > > Principle and whose names would you like to see
> on the masthead?
> >
> > Stephen Hawking
> > Michio Kaku (don't expect it though)
> > John Cramer
> > It's a challenge, but Noam Chomsky (is he still
> considered a linguistic
> > scientist, or just a political flake?)
> > Someone from Sun Microsystems (to counter Bill
> Joy)
> > Marvin Minsky
> >
> > =====
> > 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
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 22 12:50:03 2004
From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 05:50:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Query: Which Scientists to Support "Proactionary
	Principle"?
In-Reply-To: <20040621230525.82558.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20040622125003.25521.qmail@web50708.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- "natashavita at earthlink.net"
> <natashavita at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Extropy Institute is developing a list of
> scientists
> > to publicly support
> > the Proactionary Principle.
> > 
> > Which scientists would you like to see supporting
> > the Proactionary
> > Principle and whose names would you like to see on
> > the masthead?
>  
> It might be interesting to get both Richard Smalley
> and Eric Drexler, just to prove that even their
> famous
> debate leaves no question about the path to take.
> 
> Also, while he's not a scientist (or, at least, not
> famous for being one), I wonder if it would be
> useful
> to get Christopher Reeve to publically endorse this?

This is a great idea why not get a public figure to
endorse as well since he's become prominent figure for
potential stem cell research advocacy.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


=====
Devon Fowler


From info at extropy.org  Tue Jun 22 14:35:40 2004
From: info at extropy.org (Extropy Institute)
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 10:35:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropy Institute Sponsors TransVision 2004
Message-ID: <1011298312459.1011086851128.2058.1.191029@scheduler>

ExI is a Sponsor of TransVision 2004

Greetings!

We encourage you to join us at the upcoming 
TransVision 2004 conference in Toronto, Canada, 
August 6-8.  
Toronto is a beautiful, illustrious city and a 
perfect location for the gathering.  At the 
conference you will meet 
with Keynotes Steve 
Mann and Stellarc.  But that is not all, as there will 
be plenty of presentations by dozens of speakers. 



I hope to see you at TransVision 2004!

Natasha Vita-More, President Extropy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Upcoming Conference
* TransVision '04
 "Art and Life in the Posthuman Era"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TransVision '04
 "Art and Life in the Posthuman Era"
August 6-8, 2004

TransVision 2004 keynotes include such heavy hitters 
of the art world as Steve Mann and Stelarc.  Other 
speakers include famed scientist Aubrey de Grey 
and "Reason" magazine's thought-provoking Ronald 
Bailey. 




Where & When
University of Toronto
Toronto, Canada
August 6 - 8, 2004

Cloning, stem cell research, cybernetics and other 
novel reproductive and health technologies illustrate 
the rapid pace at which society and culture are 
changing. Our sense of who and what we are is 
rapidly expanding and diversifying, as are our means 
of expression and self-actualization. Consequently, 
an exciting and provocative new community of social 
activists, artists and cultural facilitators is emerging. 
As art and life continue to reflect and create each 
other, both are changing as we move into a 
posthuman form and into a posthuman era. 

TransVision 2004 seeks to capture and highlight 
these trends by bringing together a wide array of 
transhumanist thinkers, artists, scientists and 
ethicists. In a celebration and investigation of the 
new culture, TV04 will provide captivating and avant-
garde performance art and exhibitions, in concert 
with academic discussions, debates and 
presentations.

Cloning, stem cell research, cybernetics and other 
novel reproductive and health technologies illustrate 
the rapid pace at which society and culture are 
changing. Our sense of who and what we are is 
rapidly expanding and diversifying, as are our means 
of expression and self-actualization. Consequently, 
an exciting and provocative new community of social 
activists, artists and cultural facilitators is emerging. 
As art and life continue to reflect and create each 
other, both are changing as we move into a 
posthuman form and into a posthuman era. 

TransVision 2004 seeks to capture and highlight 
these trends by bringing together a wide array of 
transhumanist thinkers, artists, scientists and 
ethicists. In a celebration and investigation of the 
new culture, TV04 will provide captivating and avant-
garde performance art and exhibitions, in concert 
with academic discussions, debates and 
presentations.

Register for TransVision 2004 N