From nanogirl at halcyon.com Mon Nov 1 00:08:28 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:08:28 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl News~ References: <4160977F.8070009@imminst.org> <00ac01c4acb6$97abf1b0$1db71218@Nano> Message-ID: <00f401c4bfa6$ea495f90$1db71218@Nano> The Nanogirl News October 31, 2004 Reconstructing Neural Circuits in 3D, Nanometer by Nanometer. The authors' custom-designed microtome holds the tissue block in a way that ensures image alignment and maintains focus; all the while the specimen surface is positioned close enough to the objective lens to allow high-resolution imaging. Denk and Horstmann expect that with this method they might ultimately be able to cut sections thinner than the 50 nanometers that their current setup manages. This then would allow them to cut sections even thinner than what is routinely possible in conventional transmission electron microscopy. While the authors doubt that the lateral resolution will ever reach that of transmission electron microscopy, they also argue that such high resolution may not actually be needed to trace neuronal connectivity. On the other hand, the method accelerates 3D electron microscopic data collection "by several orders of magnitude" by obviating the need for the labor-intensive adjustments to correct alignment and distortion required by other methods, an advance that is crucial for large-volume neuroanatomy and might, in addition, open up many hitherto inaccessible problems to ultra-structural investigations. (Plosbiology November 04) http://www.plosbiology.org/plosonline/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020388 The National Cancer Institute (NCI) announced today at a media briefing a new $144.3 million, five-year initiative to develop and apply nanotechnology to cancer. Nanotechnology, the development and engineering of devices so small that they are measured on a molecular scale, has already demonstrated promising results in cancer research and treatment. "Nanotechnology has the potential to radically increase our options for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer," said Andrew von Eschenbach, M.D., director of the National Cancer Institute. "NCI's commitment to this cancer initiative comes at a critical time. Nanotechnology supports and expands the scientific advances in genomics and proteomics and builds on our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of cancer. These are the pillars which will support progress in cancer." (Medicalnewstoday 10/13/04) http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=14905 CRN Announces the Wise-Nano Project. The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (CRN) has initiated the Wise-Nano project, a collaborative online effort to study the facts and implications of advanced nanotechnology. Wise-Nano.org is a website for researchers worldwide to work together, helping to build an understanding of the technologies, their effects, and what to do about them. (PRWEB Oct 16, 2004) http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/10/prwebxml168143.php Tumbleweeds in the Bloodstream. Molecule-size sensors inside astronauts' cells could warn of health impacts from space radiation. Wouldn't it be nice if the cells in your body would simply tell you when you're starting to get sick, long before symptoms appear? Or alert you when a tumor is growing, while it's still microscopic and harmless? The ability to detect changes inside of individual cells while those cells are still inside your body would be a boon to medicine. NASA-supported scientists are developing a technology right now that could, if it works, do exactly that. (Yubanet 10/30/04) http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_14835.shtml New Study: Nanotechnology Poised to Revolutionize Tech, Manufacturing Markets; Market Will Rival Sales Volume of Combined Tech and Telecom Markets. Sales of products incorporating nanotechnology will total $2.6 trillion in 10 years, approximately one-fifth of the current Gross Domestic Product (GDP (news - web sites)), greatly exceeding previous estimates, according to a new report released by a leading Wall Street financial analyst. Nano- enhanced products will account for 50 percent of all electronics and information technology products and 16 percent of all healthcare products by 2014, according to the report. (U.S. Newswire 10/29/04) http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=39155 It's time for an alternative fuel. The era of human development with oil and gas as energy source is nearing its end and in the next 30-40 years, there will be a 'clean break' to produce energy from renewable, non-fossil fuels, mostly from hydrogen. The rise in global temperature due to emission of green house gases will force man to seek alternatives so that life is viable on earth, M S Srinivasan, additional secretary, Union Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, said today... 'By combining nanotechnology manipulating subatomic particles for new products and hydrogen for alternative fuel, a way can be found on how to store hydrogen and discharge into the usage system,' he said. (Regionalfare 10/30/04) http://newstodaynet.com/30oct/rf14.htm DuPont Becomes Founding Sponsor of International Council on Nanotechnology. The Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN) at Rice University in Houston, Texas, recently announced the formation of the International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON). The ICON is a collaboration among academic, industry, regulatory and non-governmental interest groups that will work to assess, communicate, and reduce potential environmental and health risks associated with nanotechnology. (A2Znano 10/29/04) http://www.azonano.com/news.asp?newsID=387 (Book) Inner Limits A novel by Frank John Ingersoll. An Eye-Opening Glimpse Into An Immediate Future. Is it possible that man might recreate himself without flaws? Medicine, Science, technology and religion are all racing towards the prize in mankind's quest to attain perfection. The novel, Inner Limits explores the possibilities that realistically, now appear to be within our grasp...Nanotechnology is creating nanomachines that are so small that 2-billion of them can fit on the point of a needle. Can they be programmed to rid a body of cancer, rebuild cartilage in a knee, help you loose weight or improve your sex life? Can Nanotechnology also be programmed to get rid of all evil or create evil? Can it overcome Satan's power over so many? Can man program over God's plan for you? (Christian Magazine Online 10/29/04) http://www.saworship.com/article-page.php?ID=1557&Page=couples.php Drug-dispensing Contact Lens Developed. Could treat eye diseases better than drops. Drug-loaded contact lenses have been developed that could treat eye conditions such as glaucoma far more effectively than drops. Usually sufferers of glaucoma and many other eye conditions are prescribed eye drops. These can mix with tears, however, and drain into the nose where they enter the bloodstream and cause side-effects. As well, drops are inconsistent and difficult to regulate. Researchers from the Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (IBN) in Singapore recognized this problem and have created a contact lens material that can deliver drug treatments directly into the eye. (Betterhumans 10/29/04) http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2004-10-29-3 Nanodevices target viruses. Physicists are used to detecting inanimate objects like photons and particles but two teams of researchers in the US have now turned their attention to very different targets -- viruses. Harold Craighead and colleagues at Cornell University used a nanoelectromechanical device to detect an insect baculovirus, while Charles Lieber and co-workers at Harvard University employed a nanowire field-effect transistor to detect single influenza viruses. The new methods could be scaled up for applications in medicine or the detection of biological weapons. (Physicsweb 10/8/04) http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/10/6/1 Total of $80,000 Awarded to Eight Promising Nanotechnology Ideas. QD Vision, Inc. of Cambridge, Mass., was awarded the top prize today in the first International Nanotechnology Business Idea Competition for its idea to produce the next generation of flat panel displays. The startup company received $50,000 in cash, plus business plan writing assistance and additional business advisory services."We couldn't be happier," said Greg Moeller, vice president of sales and marketing for the company. "Winning this competition is going to allow us to secure the intellectual property [behind the company's flat panel displays]."..Judges from the ranks of nanotechnology research, venture capital and business reviewed entries from 14 states and four countries. Twenty-five teams were selected to participate in a semifinal round of judging, which took place Thursday, October 28. Eight teams competed in today's finals at Case. (PR Newswire 10/29/04) http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/10-29-2004/0002317805&EDATE= UCLA Chemists Report New Nano Phenomenon: Welding in Response to an Ordinary Camera Flash. UCLA chemists report the discovery of a remarkable new nanoscale phenomenon: An ordinary camera flash causes the instantaneous welding together of nanofibers made of polyaniline, a unique synthetic polymer that can be made in either a conducting or an insulating form. The discovery, which the chemists call "flash welding," is published in the November issue of the journal Nature Materials..."I was very surprised," Kaner said. "My graduate student, Jiaxing Huang, decided to take some pictures of his polyaniline nanofibers one evening when he heard a distinct popping sound and smelled burning plastic. Jiaxing recalled a paper that we had discussed during a group meeting reporting that carbon nanotubes burned up in response to a camera flash. By adjusting the distance of the camera flash to his material, he was able to produce smooth films with no burning, making this new discovery potentially useful." (UCLA 10/28/04) http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=5602 ASU Biodesign Researcher to Explore Revolutionary Gene Sequencing: Threading the Molecular Needle. A radical new method of DNA sequencing currently being explored by Stuart Lindsay, Director of the Center for Single Molecule Biophysics in the Biodesign Institute at Arizona State University and Professor of Physics at ASU, could make the long-dreamt-of era of true genetic medicine possible with extremely rapid, accurate and low cost sequencing of single DNA molecules...Lindsay's new sequencing technology involves using Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM), which is customarily used to analyze the surface structure of materials at molecular resolution with the ultra-small tip of a sensitive probe, in combination with naturally occurring ring-shaped sugar molecules called cyclodextrins. Lindsay believes that the ring molecules, when paired with the AFM probe tip, can effectively be used as sensors to "read" the sequence of amino acid code (DNA "bases") in the human genome that comprises many millions of bases. (ASU 10/29/04) http://www.asu.edu/asunews/research/lindsay_sequencing_102904.htm Researchers watch water inside nanotubes. Researchers from Drexel University, US, the University of Illinois at Chicago, US, and the Tokyo Institute of Technology in Japan have filled closed multiwalled carbon nanotubes between just 2 and 5 nm in diameter with water. The team says its work is of fundamental importance for understanding liquid behavior at the nanoscale. (nanotechweb 10/27/04) http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/10/19/1 UK government report warns of potential nanotechnology risks. A report by the UK's Health and Safety Executive has concluded that the safety of the tiny particles created by the emerging nanotechnology industry has not been fully assessed. (Drugresearcher 10/28/04) http://www.drugresearcher.com/news/news-ng.asp?n=55715-uk-government-report A Nanowire with a Surprise. New research may advance the nanoelectronics field. Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory and their collaborators have discovered that a short, organic chain molecule with dimensions on the order of a nanometer (a billionth of a meter) conducts electrons in a surprising way: It regulates the electrons' speed erratically, without a predictable dependence on the length of the wire. This information may help scientists learn how to use nanowires to create components for a new class of tiny electronic circuits. (Brookhaven 10/18/04) http://www.bnl.gov/bnlweb/pubaf/pr/PR_display.asp?prID=04-92 Report: Nano-product sales to $2.6 trillion by 2014. Global sales of products incorporating nanoscale technologies could rise to more than $2.6 trillion in 2014, according to a new industry report. Lux Research Inc.'s "Sizing Nanotechnology's Value Chain" predicts that revenues from products incorporating nano-based approaches will total $13 billion, $8.5 billion of which lies in automotive and aerospace applications. Most are high-end uses, and the amount represents about 0.1 percent of the global manufacturing output. (Smalltimes 10/28/04) http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?section_id=51&document_id=8403 (PDF document) Research News from the MRS Bulletin: Silica-coated SWNTs form unique nanostructures; Novel liquid-crystal phases formed with introduction of chirality; High-strength reticulated porous ceramics; Cracks in rubber propagate faster than the speed of sound; F-containing molecules serve as structure-directing agentsin synthesis of molecular sieves; Flame-spraying technique yields aluminate bulk glasses and nanoceramics; Composite polymer-carbon nanotubes function as optoelectronic memory devices (MRS October 04) http://www.mrs.org/publications/bulletin/2004/oct/oct04_researchers.pdf Taiwan on cusp of nanotech rewards. From the harvesting of rice to the harnessing of nano products, Taiwan's skill based industries are expected to utilize this new-found scientific breakthrough. Long Qiang Nano Technology Corporation and Taiwan textile Research Institute (TTRI) announced their joint venture in exploring and planning more nano-based applications yesterday in Taipei County. (The China Post 10/30/04) http://www.chinapost.com.tw/business/detail.asp?GRP=E&id=53922 Nanotech group's invitations declined. A new effort by industry leaders and others to engender public trust in nanotechnology, the young science of making invisibly small materials, has run into difficulties on the eve of its first meeting after environmental and citizen groups declined to join for now because of doubts the initiative will serve the public interest. None of the three invited representatives of environmental groups has agreed to join the newly created International Council on Nanotechnology at its inaugural meeting in Houston today. (The Smalltimes 10/28/04) http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=8401 Happy Halloween! Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org My New Project: Microscope Jewelry http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 00:35:33 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:35:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041101003533.41967.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> I've heard that morale in the lower levels of management is generally quite poor today because those at the top are allegedly rewarded much more than mid & lower level managers are. Do you know anything about this? Having said that, I regard the "race to the bottom", that some large companies seem to be holding, to be a danger to the world economy. The reason for this is that irresponsible exploitation and huge inequality inevitably leads to social and political tensions. Tensions that lead to crime, violence, destruction and, as an extreme, protectionism and even revolution and/or war. Unsurmountable inequality is a problem. The only good inequality is one that can be overcome by individuals that simply outperform others. IMHO inequality should act as a motivation for people to do their very best; the moment inequality becomes so big it demotivates people we have a problem. > Should there be requirements to return such wealth beyond a certain > point? IMHO, the sharing of wealth should be done only up to the point where it helps to give everybody the opportunity to be successful. I believe this includes things like basic healthcare, education and safety. Too much more than that, and people might lose the motivation to be productive. Too much less than that, and you reduce the ability of people to be productive. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nanogirl at halcyon.com Mon Nov 1 00:51:58 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:51:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidents 2005 NNI budget References: <20041101003533.41967.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <016601c4bfac$fddd85d0$1db71218@Nano> Read the "Research and Development Funding in the Presidents 2005 Budget" which currently provides a billion dollars for the NNI - National Nanotechnology Initiative. Download the PDF. http://www.ostp.gov/html/budget/2005/FY05NNI1-pager.pdf Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org My New Project: Microscope Jewelry http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fortean1 at mindspring.com Mon Nov 1 00:56:22 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:56:22 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS Message-ID: <418589B6.31E41C99@mindspring.com> Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. Science Frontiers, No. 156, Nov-Dec, 2004, p. 2 < http://www.science-frontiers.com > BIOLOGY LIMBOIDS What, if anything, separates life from nonlife? To be alive, it is widely promulgated that such entities must metabolize, reproduce, and evolve in the Darwinian sense. It is also popularly believed that living matter is intrinsically different from nonliving matter, although one no longer speaks of "the breath of life" or of an "elan vital." Even so, knowing all we now know, there does still *seem* to be a fundamental gap between life and nonlife. Is this gap illusory or perhaps filled by entities of which we are not yet aware?? Generally speaking, there is no known profound difference between physical and biological phenomena. In nonliving entities, such as inorganic crystals, the energy ground states are deep. In living systems, entities such as proteins, are characterized by several shallow energy states. Proteins, many exist in several different conformational states with nearly the same energy levels. Life, as we know it, therefore, involves macromolecules that are more "pliable," more malleable by weak forces, such as those that might be imposed by the environment. Some proteins such as prions, may change their shapes spontaneously. Despite these possibilities of easy manipulation of macromolecules by small forces and spontaneous shape-shifting, many scientists---the reductionists--- are confident that all of biology is describable by the extant laws of physics and chemistry. So, the apparent gap we discern between living and nonliving matters seems primarily a matter of energy-well depths. This being so, the gap does *seem* to be bridgeable by reductionist science. (Stec, Boguslaw; "Living and Nonliving Matter," *Science*, 305:41, 2004.) Comments. But humans and their instruments do not observe everything. There may be an unappreciated limbo separating life from nonlife. This limbo could be occupied by entities that we'll call "limboids." Science may not yet recognize this hypothesized realm of the natural world because: (1) The limboids are too small---smaller than the controversial nonolife and still inaccessible to today's science. (2) The limboids are too large for us to grasp intellectually or instrument-wise. F. Hoyle's fictional "black cloud" would be an example. (3) The metabolisms of limboids are too slow and their lifetimes too long (millions of years) for us to discern them. In other words, they *seem* inanimate. (This potential attribute was suggested by P. Gunkel.) (4) The lifetimes of limboids may be too short for us to register them. (5) The limboids live outside the ranges of our eyes and instruments. (6) The limboids may incorporate considerable dark matter and be hard to detect. Conceivably some manifestations of dark matter could exist in recognized visible organisms and perform organizing functions that "breathe life" into inanimate matter! Scientists have not seriously looked for limboids, but they may have caught fleeting glimpses of them, and "laid them back in the closet," as Omar mused poetically. [Science Frontiers is a bimonthly collection of digests of scientific anomalies in the current literature. Published by the Sourcebook Project, P.O. Box 107, Glen Arm, MD 21057. Annual subscription: $8.00.] -- "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 sahynepu at concentric.net Mon Nov 1 01:26:31 2004 From: sahynepu at concentric.net (Sahyinepu) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:26:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators In-Reply-To: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <0F84FE78-2BA5-11D9-909A-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> On Sunday, October 31, 2004, at 03:20 PM, Hal Finney wrote: > > > Some might argue that we should give all of our wealth until we are > at the same level of the poor we have donated to. In this way, one > life is made more difficult, while many others are greatly improved. > The net happiness in the world would almost certainly be increased if > each of us adopted this policy. > > How can we turn away from this logic? Though I agree that at least one part of growing up, as an individual, is to realize that a mass grab of anything and everything is not necessary for one's being, I also don't think that one can necessarily "save" anyone from their fate. I do believe that people should have the opportunity to improve their condition, and for many in other countries, that is greatly hindered. But here in this country, we see evidence that even when great opportunity is given, some just do not want to take it, and continue to make bad decisions. We have countless scientists and medical professionals telling us we need to take care of both our environment and ourselves, and yet many ignore them, preferring to look outside of themselves for boogymen(like terrorists) to focus on. Realistically, we are probably in greater threat of having a major health crisis in the next coming years than we are of facing the threat of a dirty bomb. This is one thing I see over and over again. Be it science, government, or religion, many continue to look outside of themselves for a savior. And yet many still continue to ignore advice. We set up systems upon systems to babysit ourselves as we continue to fall deeper and deeper asleep at the wheel of our conscious minds. And then we throw fits when we realize how much our individual powers have slipped away. I find it difficult to tackle the question of how we can help others when so many here, with so much opportunity, continue to make as stupid if not even dumber mistakes than those around us. If we think we can fix anything by giving out money/creating financial security, minimum wage jobs would have all but created a utopia here....or something like that. Sah From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 1 01:29:57 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:29:57 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing asdownregulators In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041031120633.01ad87c8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <002701c4bfb2$4fea5e20$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > At 12:29 PM 10/31/2004 -0500, Rik wrote: > > >... > >IMHO, the sharing of wealth should be done only up to the > >point where it helps to give everybody the opportunity to > >be successful. I believe this includes things like basic > >healthcare, education and safety. > > > >Too much more than that, and people might lose the motivation > >to be productive. Too much less than that, and you reduce > >the ability of people to be productive. > > This sums up my own current estimate, too. Nicely expressed. > > Damien Broderick I second Damien's comment. If we still had post of the month, I would nominate Rik's post. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 1 01:34:24 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:34:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <000e01c4bf7a$e16da0b0$d0c51b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <002801c4bfb2$f14dd3f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Whoa! Im impressed! Who is this Atkinson guy? spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir > Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 10:53 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] glat test > > > http://www-th.phys.rug.nl/~atkinson/dapubl.html > see paper # 122 (pdf) > > D. Atkinson and F.J. van Steenwijk, > 'Infinite Resistive Lattices' From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 1 02:05:08 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:05:08 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041031235027.63014.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003a01c4bfb7$36b46950$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria > > > OK, so how many civilian dead do you reckon there > > are? > > I haven't the faintest idea. My point is, given the > published confidence interval of this study, neither > do they... > One of the many, many, many > reasons war really sucks... On a distantly related note, I went down to Monterey Taxifornia today to see a memorial to the soldiers slain in Iraq, the 1100 Americans. They had white posts with their pictures and a short description of how they perished. I noticed that *all* the deaths were included in the 1100 number, even those that died of natural causes in Iraq, the suicides, the auto accidents, the accidental shootings, the traditional fights between soldiers, etc. Looks like as many as a quarter of these deaths might as easily have happened had they stayed home. I guess suicides might be a grey area: perhaps they were called to active duty, were taken away from a shaky marriage, they got a dear John or Jane letter, shot selves in their dispair. There were cases of leukemia and cancer that were apparently unrelated to being in the military. Interesting point tho, of the soldiers slain in action, it looked like about two thirds of them were killed by crude homemade bombs. I can imagine a lot of Iraqi civilians that were killed were actually done in by these homemade bombs, from being accidentally near them when they went off or from being hoist upon their own petard when making same. Has anyone seen an estimate of these statistics? spike From riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 1 04:19:43 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:19:43 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators In-Reply-To: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> References: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: On Sun, 31 Oct 2004, Hal Finney wrote: > One of the principles that I find useful in considering issues like > inequality and wealth sharing is to focus on the personal aspect. A tangentially unrelated tidbit that nontheless illustrates the problem: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3969693.stm It would appear that both obesity and malnutrition are near the top of the world's health problems... 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 sjvans at ameritech.net Mon Nov 1 04:38:26 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 20:38:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <003a01c4bfb7$36b46950$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041101043826.48525.qmail@web81210.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > I noticed that *all* the deaths > were included in the 1100 number, even those that > died of natural causes in Iraq, the suicides, the > auto accidents, the accidental shootings, the > traditional > fights between soldiers, etc. The 1100 number is for those who are designated Killed in Action. Traditionally, the standards have been pretty liberal, and include accidents of most kinds in a combat zone, as well as most suicides, since KIA status carries much better benefits for next of kin. I understand it is not unheard of for reports to be fudged a bit if there is some question because of this (one story I've heard involves a Saigon brothel...no doubt there is more than one name with a similar story on the Wall). > Looks like as many as a > quarter of these deaths might as easily have > happened had > they stayed home. Not really. Accident rates do way up in a combat zone. For instance, it is almost impossible to get soldiers to wear seatbelts, since they (probably correctly) judge the risk of not being able to bail out quickly a greater danger than traffic accident. > I guess suicides might be a grey > area: > perhaps they were called to active duty, were taken > away from a shaky marriage, they got a dear John or > Jane letter, shot selves in their dispair. I have heard that to be considered KIA, a military psych has to investigate and rule the suicide the result of combat fatigue or something similar, but that they grasp the barest straw to make that happen, for the benefits reason stated above. > There were > cases of leukemia and cancer that were apparently > unrelated to being in the military. I would be surprised if that was included in the official KIA list. > Has anyone seen an estimate of these statistics? I don't know about Iragis, but there is a pretty good breakdown here: http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=403&issue_id=35 It is a Quaker organization, so I doubt they have much incentive to minimize things. steve From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Mon Nov 1 05:17:56 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:17:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041101043826.48525.qmail@web81210.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041101043826.48525.qmail@web81210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <63D31B5C-2BC5-11D9-998F-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Oct 31, 2004, at 8:38 PM, Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > I understand it is not unheard of for reports to be > fudged a bit if there is some question because of this > (one story I've heard involves a Saigon brothel...no > doubt there is more than one name with a similar story > on the Wall). I think the US military actually keeps more detailed statistics, but most people use the aggregate statistics which causes a lot of confusion if the discussion gets technical. KIA stats usually include very substantial in-theater non-combat deaths. For example, most people have heard that there were a over 50k KIA in Viet Nam. Per the US military statistics in the National Archives, the actual combat "got-shot-or-blowed-up" deaths are just over 40k, with another 10-12k in-theater KIA that had nothing to do with actual combat. Other than diving into the National Archive statistics these deaths are very rarely separated out. In the first Gulf War, non-combat in-theater deaths were something like >50% of the total KIA IIRC. j. andrew rogers From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Mon Nov 1 06:28:02 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 17:28:02 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing asdownregulators References: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <02a401c4bfdb$f0af9b80$b8232dcb@homepc> Hal Finney wrote: > .... How much should we feel obligated to give to help the poor? > This is the question of wealth and redistribution, applied at the > personal level, and it's a hard question indeed. > Some might argue that we should give all of our wealth until we are > at the same level of the poor we have donated to. In this way, one > life is made more difficult, while many others are greatly improved. > > The net happiness in the world would almost certainly be increased > if each of us adopted this policy. > How can we turn away from this logic? With respect its not logic. It is a castle in the air. > How can we allow people > to suffer when we each have it in our power to ease their suffering? Individually and collectively people are a part of the natural world. In history, and indeed before it, there have always been people who were not only poor relative to other people but starving in absolute terms simply because they could not get enough to eat. Parents do not as a matter of policy ensure that their is suffient food for their offspring to survive before having them. They just have them because they can. Because sex is fun and feels good and offspring are a consquence of acting naturally even if they are not a direct aim. And sex isn't just fun and pleasant for bright people or for animals that are likely to have offspring that can thrive its fun for everybody so everybody does it. Human societies didn't invent poverty or starvation or disease (though ways of living do influence the types of disease) and to some extent human societies have been in part attempts to mitigate against poverty and starvation but human societies and the ways in which humans organised themselves are works in progress. If everyone in the world was suddenly infected by a meme that caused them to want to to distribute all their wealth downwards such that there would be no one else alive less wealthy than themselves (as a matter of policy) then you would still have some impossible problems of implementation unless you did other things (ie acted on other politices as well). In practice there has never yet been the enabling technology (information and distribution systems to name just two things) and levels of enlightened(?) thinking for such a meme to become widespread. First you'd have to have a reliable worldwide census so that people could know who everyone else in the world at any given instant was in order to know who was less wealth than you. Meanwhile the poorest people are running around trying to determine who might be still poorer than them as they are inflicted with the same meme. You'd need some sort of complex system to implement species wide altruism. You can't get species wide altruism even in principle without complexity. Some information systems and distribution systems have to be global to be able to implement the species wide altruistic act. I could go on and on but I think its easy for people to get the point themselves. Immediately you'd discover its not just a problem with one prong - the lack of desire to give wealth away, its ALSO a problem of there not being a global mechanism for implementing the policy. When we look around at the state of the world (and how we don't like it) it is worth bearing in mind that we didn't make the mess collectively any more than we are responsible for it individually. Everyone is trying to deal with the stuff life throws at them and no one including the very very wealthy currently have the resources to solve all human suffering. Brett Paatsch From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 1 06:47:42 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 07:47:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Boston Globe on Kurzweil Message-ID: <470a3c52041031224739a4ada8@mail.gmail.com> Taking proper care of the body today, Kurzweil believes, is a necessary step on the path to immortality for himself and his fellow baby boomers. In 20 years, he predicts, biotechnology will be able to block the circuits that cause disease and will radically slow aging. After that, what he calls the "full blossoming of nanotechnology" will allow us to replace the fragile and diseaseprone cells we were born with, swapping our fading neurons with nano-engineered neurons that keep our memory forever sharp. He plans to be around for both those revolutions, whenever they occur. http://www.kurzweilai.net/news/frame.html?main=news_single.html?id%3D3915 Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2004/10/31/the_futurist?mode=PF From reason at longevitymeme.org Mon Nov 1 07:44:57 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:44:57 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] the Scientific Conquest of Death on Amazon In-Reply-To: <02a401c4bfdb$f0af9b80$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/9875611352/qid=1099293927/sr=8 -1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-0895723-0640139?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 The first book produced by the Immortality Institute ( http://www.imminst.org ) is available at Amazon.com, at the link above. More details can be found here: http://www.imminst.org/book1/ Chapter I: SCIENCE: Biomedicine, Nanotechnology and other strategies Biological Immortality - Michael Rose The War on Aging - Aubrey de Grey The Dream of Elixir Vitae - Joao de Magalh?es Therapeutic Cloning - Michael West Nanomedicine - Robert Freitas Human Body Version 2.0 - Ray Kurzweil Progress Toward Cyberimmortality - William Bainbridge Will Robots Inherit the Earth? - Marvin Minsky Medical Time Travel: A Question of Science - Brian Wowk Chapter II: PERSPECTIVES: Ethics, Sociology and Philosophy Some Ethical and Theological Considerations - Brad Mellon Superlongevity without Overpopulation - Max More Upsetting the Natural Order - Michael Treder The Self-Defeating Fantasy - Eric Rabkin Time Consciousness in Very Long Life - Manfred Clynes Confessions of a Proselytizing Immortalist - Shannon Vyff Some Problems with Immortalism - Ben Best An Introduction to Immortalist Morality - Marc Geddes Should We Fear Death? - Russell Blackford Who Wants To Live Forever? - Nick Bostrom In addition, Imminst is currently filming a documentary about the healthy life extension community. Details on that can be found here: http://www.imminst.org/film.php A second book is in the works, so anyone who feels up to submitting an original essay for inclusion should have at it. Submission cut-off is tentatively scheduled for February 2005: http://www.imminst.org/book Reason Founder, Longevity Meme From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 1 07:45:04 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 08:45:04 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test References: <002801c4bfb2$f14dd3f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <013101c4bfe6$b41ab910$2ab21b97@administxl09yj> > Who is this Atkinson guy? spike http://www-th.phys.rug.nl/~atkinson/ A smart and non-orthodox theorist, professor emeritus too. Another non-orthodox Dutch is Wim Rietdijk http://www.xs4all.nl/~bcb/rietdijk.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~bcb/rietdijk8.html http://members.chello.nl/p.cooijmans/essay/int_rietdijk.html Both seem to believe in retrocausation. That is to say that in the quantum domain dynamics is time-symmetric [if time exists, in there]. There are "causes" in the backward light cone, there are also "causes" in the forward light cone. That would explain weird quantum effects. Like EPR non-separability, Young's two-slit complementarity, the "missing" quantum information channel in teleportation, and so on. Not so different from Feynman's approach in terms of "negative" probabilities. At least if one thinks that a "negative" probability could be a probability for things going "the other way around". Saluti, s. "If, without in any way disturbing a system, we can predict with certainty (i.e. with probability equal to unity) the value of a physical quantity, then there exists an element of physical reality corresponding to this physical quantity." - E.P.R. (1935) From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Mon Nov 1 08:13:09 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 19:13:09 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Boston Globe on Kurzweil References: <470a3c52041031224739a4ada8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <02ef01c4bfea$9fbc8080$b8232dcb@homepc> Giu1i0 wrote: Subject: [extropy-chat] The Boston Globe on Kurzweil > Taking proper care of the body today, Kurzweil believes, is a > necessary step on the path to immortality for himself and his fellow > baby boomers. . > In 20 years, he predicts, biotechnology will be able to block the > circuits that cause disease and will radically slow aging. The article doesn't say what disease causing "circuits" he was referring too. If the Globe reporter didn't ask then how could either the reporter or reader tell, even in 20 years time, whether or not the Kurzweil's prediction was true? Its like the reporter doesn't care and doesn't think the reader will either. Ray Kurzweil gets a plug just for being Ray Kurzweil. Brett From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 13:12:38 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 05:12:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030201939.39156.qmail@web81208.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101131238.52517.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> > > --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > > > The survey methods of Roberts et al. are better than > > any previous estimates > > provided, which is itself startling. All except, of course, for Red Cross/Red Crescent statistics ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 13:15:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 05:15:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041031015949.2155.qmail@web81203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101131558.86745.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > Doesn't matter. Your comments do not fit the excuse > > making that Damien > > states. What you are saying is that productive > > people owe a living to > > the unproductive or else, period. > > That isn't what was said. What I got out of it was > that it can be in the interests of the productive to > sometimes support the unproductive. Not right, but > expedient. "in the interests" is a euphemism for saying "if you don't pay these louts off, they are going to run riot, loot, and pillage", which fits exactly my description of "pay up or else". Yes it is in the interests of the productive classes that civilization not be torn down by the unproductive, just as it is in the interests of families to pay up the demanded ransom when their kids are kidnapped. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 13:22:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 05:22:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041101132207.44672.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alfio Puglisi wrote: > On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > >--- Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > >> > >> I am not a statistician, so I would be very interested > >> in the opinions of anyone on this list with a more > >> extensive background than I have. In particular, if I > >> am reading it correctly, they are extrapolating the > >> 100,000 figure from 21 violent deaths. This does not > >> fill me with a great deal of confidence, but I'm > >> willing to be set straight. > > > >Well, as I warned, they are apparently cherry picking data (just > like > >they've done in the past with gun crime stats) and extrapolating > >completely unrealistic conclusions to fit their political agenda. > > Except that they are cherry picking the data to lower the total > amount, the way someone trying to make the war look better would > do. So if this is to fit some political agenda, this agenda would > be fairly aligned with Bush. On the contrary, their rationale is that they can reliably avoid the most violent areas where they would be at risk of kidnapping and avoid all the areas where nothing is going wrong and just pick the low intensity conflict 'middle' areas, but they are screwing up because they are making that selection based on no prior data about what the 'middle' really is, or whether areas of medium violence actually reflect the mean for the whole population. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 14:41:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 06:41:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041101144158.66335.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sat, 30 Oct 2004, RobKPO wrote: > > > How about accuracy, empathy, and awareness that the public will not > be > > told everything regarding strategic decision making. > > Some interesting facts were presented in a PBS documentary > a few days ago, though. > > For example, the army's battle plan for Iraq calls for over > 400,000 soldiers, with the understanding that it is harder > to make peace than it is to make war. > > In the run-up to the Iraq war, Rumsfeld sat down with the > army and started cutting the number of deployed troops, at > times down to individual units. "You don't really need 3 > brigades here, you'll get 2." > > Meanwhile, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz testify in congress that > "it is ridiculous that making peace could require more troops > than making war". > > We can all see the end results of these leadership decisions. I do agree on this. Rummy and Wolfowitz have apparently fallen into the same micromanaged trap that Robert McNamara did during Vietnam, which Powell refused to allow during the first Gulf War. Now, if whoever winds up in the White House decides to send more troops, they need to be trained in policing. On this note, I'd suggest the government send a good chunk of its own cops here in the US who are surplusage in the Drug War. It wouldn't be a draft since they are already public servants. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 15:12:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 07:12:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041031120633.01ad87c8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041101151224.71576.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 12:29 PM 10/31/2004 -0500, Rik wrote: > > >The only good > >inequality is one that can be overcome by individuals that > >simply outperform others. IMHO inequality should act as > >a motivation for people to do their very best; the moment > >inequality becomes so big it demotivates people we have a > >problem. > >... > >IMHO, the sharing of wealth should be done only up to the > >point where it helps to give everybody the opportunity to > >be successful. I believe this includes things like basic > >healthcare, education and safety. > > > >Too much more than that, and people might lose the motivation > >to be productive. Too much less than that, and you reduce > >the ability of people to be productive. > > This sums up my own current estimate, too. Nicely expressed. The best motivators, in the words of many wealthy persons who started with nothing, was the determination to never live in poverty again. When people are spared that negative reinforcement, there is less motivation resulting. Large inequalities only demotivate people when they see that the state has put in place barriers to themselves ever reaching similar heights of wealth. These include barriers to escaping poverty (means testing for welfare support), barriers to accessing capital (excessive government debt raising interest rates), and barriers to accessing clientele. "Big businessmen are what small businessmen know they could be if government got out of the way." - Ronald Reagan ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 15:32:22 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 07:32:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041101003533.41967.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101153222.61227.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > I've heard that morale in the lower levels of management is generally > quite poor today because those at the top are allegedly rewarded much > more than mid & lower level managers are. Do you know anything about > this? Those I know in management tend to have poor morale because the primary ethic of those at the top these days seems to be figuring out many ways to screw the workforce, loot the company, and get rewarded by the stockholders for doing so, all while making the lower and middle management do all the dirty work of implementing it. >From an austrian economic point of view, one might say that they are forcing an uncompetitive company to survive or die as it should in a darwinian plenum, but those in lower and middle management who believe in the mission of the company often see that they and their workers are an irreplaceable component of that company's success. Part of the problem is a factor which has been much talked about, but never fixed: that government regulations force corporate managment to focus on short term gains rather than long term growth. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Mon Nov 1 15:40:27 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:40:27 +0100 (MET) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041101132207.44672.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041101132207.44672.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: > >--- Alfio Puglisi wrote: > >> Except that they are cherry picking the data to lower the total >> amount, the way someone trying to make the war look better would >> do. So if this is to fit some political agenda, this agenda would >> be fairly aligned with Bush. > >On the contrary, their rationale is that they can reliably avoid the >most violent areas where they would be at risk of kidnapping and avoid >all the areas where nothing is going wrong and just pick the low >intensity conflict 'middle' areas, but they are screwing up because >they are making that selection based on no prior data about what the >'middle' really is, or whether areas of medium violence actually >reflect the mean for the whole population. As I see it, it's very simple. There was a group of houses in Falluja that was by far the worst and gave very high death counts like 200,000+. Removing this group gets the average down to 100,000 and this is what they published. There are no other assumption on what the relative violence rate is here and there, just that they had an unusual data point and they removed it. Keeping it would have mean an even higher count, that could render unbelievable the study. So they made a mistake (ignoring data) to avoid negative publicity. Their total body count is lower than it would be if all of the households were included. There's no need for elaborate thinking about hidden motives or whatever. Of course the standard deviation is so high that the actual number could be anywhere. Alfio From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 15:56:41 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 07:56:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing asdownregulators In-Reply-To: <02a401c4bfdb$f0af9b80$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041101155641.65517.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > Hal Finney wrote: > > > .... How much should we feel obligated to give to help the poor? > > This is the question of wealth and redistribution, applied at the > > personal level, and it's a hard question indeed. > > > Some might argue that we should give all of our wealth until we are > > at the same level of the poor we have donated to. In this way, one > > life is made more difficult, while many others are greatly > improved. > > > > The net happiness in the world would almost certainly be increased > > if each of us adopted this policy. > > > How can we turn away from this logic? > > With respect its not logic. It is a castle in the air. Quite so. It is one more zero sum game that the redistributionistas. Spreading around capital only ensures it is no longer treated as interest earning principal, but as consumer cash. You only get growth when those with a proven ability to invest wisely are allowed to do so without restraint. You get even higher growth when the interest earned by that investment is allowed to compound without tax. Those who invest wisely and keep the rewards of that wisdom, spend that money into the economy and thus redistribute it to those who are most productive. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 16:02:26 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 08:02:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041101160226.80224.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alfio Puglisi wrote: > Of course the standard deviation is so high that the actual number > could be anywhere. That is the crux of the problem, isn't it? They are using a handful of cases to extrapolate for an entire nation, to a degree that even presidential pollsters wouldn't dare. 20 cases can only give you a reliable estimate for a population of 2000, not 50 million. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 16:52:21 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:52:21 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria References: <20041101144158.66335.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006e01c4c033$28d17fe0$e9ebfb44@kevin> > Now, if whoever winds up in the White House decides to send more > troops, they need to be trained in policing. On this note, I'd suggest > the government send a good chunk of its own cops here in the US who are > surplusage in the Drug War. It wouldn't be a draft since they are > already public servants. > Now there's an idea worth investigating. I would suggest that they volunteer. Being a public servant doesn;t make it right to just force you to pick up and leave the country. With the right financial incentives, they would volunteer and the overall cost should still be less than the current combined expense of military operations and the "war on drugs"...which I personally think to be a worst waste of expense than the war in Iraq by far since at least something was accomplished. Kevin Freels From hal at finney.org Mon Nov 1 17:22:18 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:22:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing asdownregulators Message-ID: <20041101172218.0F6B457E2A@finney.org> Brett Paatsch writes: > Human societies didn't invent poverty or starvation or disease (though > ways of living do influence the types of disease) and to some extent > human societies have been in part attempts to mitigate against poverty > and starvation... > > If everyone in the world was suddenly infected by a meme that > caused them to want to to distribute all their wealth downwards ... > > You'd need some sort of complex system to implement species wide > altruism.... Apologies for the truncation, but I chose these excerpts because they suggest that this line of analysis is collective and global, not personal. You're talking about human societies and collective action. What would happen if everyone in the world behaved altrustically, how could we get species wide altruism. That's the opposite of my point. I am talking about personal, individual actions. When we make most choices, we don't consider the implications for the grand scope of human society. If I'm hungry, I get a sandwich. If I want to get the latest news, I go online or turn on the TV. These are the kinds of personal actions I am talking about. To choose to save someone from starvation by my personal sacrifice does not require considerations like those you have raised above. I can give money to a charitable organization and have considerable confidence that it will ease human suffering. Real people feeling real pain will be helped by my sacrifice. Again, I am not trying to decide what other people should do. I face a quandary in considering what I, personally, should do. I ask myself, under what circumstances would I sacrifice to save the life of a stranger? Or perhaps just to improve a life which is full of suffering and hardship? What should I consider my obligations in this area to be? I still say that these are hard problems, and that in some ways they are harder than those global issues of species altruism and such. In fact those abstract considerations can in some cases be a defense mechanism, a way for the mind to turn away from facing the brute reality of a world full of suffering, by recasting it in academic abstractions which make it easier to evade consideration of the effects of our decisions. Hal From max at maxmore.com Mon Nov 1 17:34:12 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 11:34:12 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators In-Reply-To: <20041031221101.47856.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> <20041031221101.47856.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041101113236.03889a00@mail.earthlink.net> I recently reviewed a book that contains some good tales about people ("social entrepreneurs") who leveraged resources effectively to help out others: How To Change The World Social Entrepreneurs and the Power of New Ideas by David Bornstein The review is here: http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.asp?coid=CO6140411604986 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 17:41:37 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:41:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <006e01c4c033$28d17fe0$e9ebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041101174137.88291.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > Now there's an idea worth investigating. I would suggest that they > volunteer. Being a public servant doesn;t make it right to just force > you to pick up and leave the country. Sure it does. A public servant accepts as implicit that the government they work for has the right to use force to make people do what the government wants, ergo a public servant accepts in whatever oath of service they swear to to do what they are ordered to do. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 18:19:23 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:19:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <418589B6.31E41C99@mindspring.com> References: <418589B6.31E41C99@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041101101816.02983b90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> When I was a baby I had damage to my limboid system because they rush around too much. BIOLOGY >LIMBOIDS > >What, if anything, separates life from nonlife? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From alex at ramonsky.com Mon Nov 1 19:52:40 2004 From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:52:40 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control References: <004a01c4be45$172f4050$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <41869408.6080000@ramonsky.com> I have always had impeccable birth control. -Don't have sex. AR ********** Spike wrote: > > > >>On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, Olga Bourlin wrote: >> >>It is almost impossible for today's women to realize how >>reproductive life was like without the almost impeccable birth control >>we now have... >> >> > > >Our modern birth control techniques are so impeccable >that many women use them until it is too late to have >children, perhaps to their desperate regret. Perhaps >technologically advanced societies will come to depend >on their most irresponsible elements and unwed teenagers >to carry out most of the actual reproduction. > >spike > > > >_______________________________________________ >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: From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 1 20:26:19 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 21:26:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS References: <418589B6.31E41C99@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <008601c4c051$0c1da590$f4b41b97@administxl09yj> > LIMBOIDS > What, if anything, separates life from nonlife? [miscellanea] At Caltech, Chris Adami is studying exactly that, imo. http://dllab.caltech.edu/avida/ http://dllab.caltech.edu/research/ "According to our approach living organisms and computer programs are beautiful structures and are pretty much the same thing." (?!) http://physis.sourceforge.net/ John Baez wrote: 'Is life improbable?', in Found. Phys. 19 (1989), 91-95, and sometimes this paper appears here too http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/improbable.pdf According to J.B. his paper explains the flaw in a famous proof by Wigner. What his [Wigner's] argument actually proves is something much weaker than what he wanted to prove. Roughly, he proves that if you first pick a specific design of a machine and then randomly choose the laws of physics, it's unlikely this machine will be able to reproduce itself in a specific amount of time. This should not be surprising: to design a machine that does a specified task, one usually needs to know a little about the laws of physics ahead of time. When I restated the problem - says J.B. - and redid Wigner's calculation, I got drastically different results. See also: quant-ph/0303124 'Quantum Mechanical Universal Constructor' by Arun K. Pati, and Samuel L. Braunstein " Arbitrary quantum states cannot be copied. In fact, to make a copy we must provide complete information about the system. However, can a quantum system self-replicate? This is not answered by the no-cloning theorem. In the classical context, Von Neumann showed that a 'universal constructor' can exist which can self-replicate an arbitrary system, provided that it had access to instructions for making copy of the system. We question the existence of a universal constructor that may allow for the self-replication of an arbitrary quantum system. We prove that there is no deterministic universal quantum constructor which can operate with finite resources. Further, we delineate conditions under which such a universal constructor can be designed to operate deterministically and probabilistically. " For now, beautiful manmade boids are here http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/ (no need of a universal quantum constructor!) From benboc at lineone.net Mon Nov 1 20:21:10 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:21:10 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Youthful Characteristics In-Reply-To: <200410311730.i9VHU9028016@tick.javien.com> References: <200410311730.i9VHU9028016@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <41869AB6.8040607@lineone.net> Al Brooks wrote: >What do you mean "you suspect" we have a hard time thinking realistically about posthumans and posthuman society? >We haven't the foggiest notion concerning posthumanity. We don't even know much about transhumans & transhuman >society. ben wrote: >>I suspect we have a hard time thinking realistically about posthumans, >>and posthuman society, precisely because they will be posthuman and >>we're not. >>ben :) I was being polite. ben From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 1 21:38:01 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 13:38:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041101153222.61227.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101213801.84263.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > Part of the problem is a factor which has been much > talked about, but > never fixed: that government regulations force > corporate managment to > focus on short term gains rather than long term > growth. Which regulations are those? I thought the problem was responsibility to shareholders are free to purchase shares without believing in, or even knowing, the company's plans for long term growth, and thus focus only on the short term data (which must also be provided, to try to prevent scams) and demand immediate return on investment. This would not ultimately place responsibility on the government regulations. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 1 21:53:19 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 13:53:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041101131558.86745.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101215319.87908.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > Yes it is in the interests of the productive classes > that civilization > not be torn down by the unproductive, just as it is > in the interests of > families to pay up the demanded ransom when their > kids are kidnapped. And in both cases, it is in the long-term interests of the former that the latter class (the unproductive, or those who would kidnap) be eliminated such that the threat does not reoccur. But unlike a single family, the productive classes as a whole know that the bribe will be needed of them in particular, instead of merely some other productive classes, again and again, making the long term interest more directly relevant. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 22:44:57 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 14:44:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041101213801.84263.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101224457.37644.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > Part of the problem is a factor which has been much > > talked about, but > > never fixed: that government regulations force > > corporate managment to > > focus on short term gains rather than long term > > growth. > > Which regulations are those? I thought the problem > was responsibility to shareholders are free to > purchase shares without believing in, or even > knowing, the company's plans for long term growth, > and thus focus only on the short term data (which > must also be provided, to try to prevent scams) and > demand immediate return on investment. This would not > ultimately place responsibility on the government > regulations. Government regs requiring quarterly reports create this situation. If, instead, all corporations reported only annually, you'd automatically lengthen the view of the shareholder by four times. If you allowed them to report only once every two years if they wanted to, you'd lengthen the view of the investor even more. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 1 23:06:27 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 15:06:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041101224457.37644.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041101230627.9248.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Which regulations are those? I thought the > problem > > was responsibility to shareholders are free to > > purchase shares without believing in, or even > > knowing, the company's plans for long term growth, > > and thus focus only on the short term data (which > > must also be provided, to try to prevent scams) > and > > demand immediate return on investment. This would > not > > ultimately place responsibility on the government > > regulations. > > Government regs requiring quarterly reports create > this situation. If, > instead, all corporations reported only annually, > you'd automatically > lengthen the view of the shareholder by four times. > If you allowed them > to report only once every two years if they wanted > to, you'd lengthen > the view of the investor even more. Okay...so how do you prevent managers from cashing out the company between reports and leaving shareholders with an empty bag? Granted, that does sometimes happen now, but it's a lot easier to do over the course of a year than over the course of three months...and one can report on quarterly progress towards a long-term goal, noting milestones met (or missed) on the long-term project plan. (And any project, even a long-term one, needs a plan to have a good chance of success. Ones that last for months are often broken down into days, so theoretically ones that last for years should be able to be broken into three-month segments, no?) From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 23:48:53 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 15:48:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Youthful Characteristics In-Reply-To: <41869AB6.8040607@lineone.net> Message-ID: <20041101234853.97944.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Everytime I think about posthumanity, my mind boggles; no wonder Luddites are so frightened at the prospect of their descendents being non-human. However, in the back of my mind I think not only of how fear of death, severe injury, and intense pain scare people into violence & warfare, but also how the biosphere is temporary-- it could easily be wiped out by an asteroid or comet or whatever else some of you scientists could think of. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From samantha at objectent.com Tue Nov 2 00:09:45 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:09:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <001c01c4bd52$e1d706b0$5eeafb44@kevin> References: <20041028220024.50818.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> <001c01c4bd52$e1d706b0$5eeafb44@kevin> Message-ID: <8074ED0C-2C63-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Considering that: a) Israel has ignored at least 500% more UN resolutions; b) WMD was the key reason that the war was justified to Congress & the people; c) the inspectors had not given up and did not believe there were significant weapons to find; d) the inspectors were not done. He acted as if he distrusted the UN and inspectors. He had good reason to given past experience. So why or how is your argument remotely a justification for this invasion and occupation? -s On Oct 28, 2004, at 6:01 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: > It is quite evident that people on this list aren't immune to > believing for > the sake of belief. Those who son;t like Bush choose to believe that > WMDs > were never there. Those who like Bush choose to believe that they were > there > and taken out of the country. We may never know if they were there or > not. > The fact remains that Saddam ignored 12 UN resolutions and constantly > worked > against UN inspectors knowing full well that we wouldn;t put up with it > forever. The invasion of Iraq would have been totally avoided if he > would > have simply opened up the the UN as he was requested countless times. > Whether or not the WMDs were there or not is irrelevant. He acted as > though > they were. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Lorrey" > To: > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 5:00 PM > Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria > > >> As I've steadily maintained since last year, it is now becoming >> evident >> that Iraq received significant aid from Russia in its weapons >> programs, >> and especially in its program to extract its most useful weapons to be >> safeguarded by Saddam's Baathist bretheren in Syria (note I posted a >> story of how France and Germany negotiated an EU treaty with Syria >> which will allow it to keep any WMD in its territory, i.e. the WMD are >> there, being swept under the rug by the international left). >> >> http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041028-122637-6257r.htm >> >> Russia tied to Iraq's missing arms >> By Bill Gertz >> THE WASHINGTON TIMES >> >> Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's >> weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks >> before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times >> has >> learned. >> John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for >> international technology security, said in an interview that he >> believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost >> certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from >> the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad. >> "The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole >> series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred >> all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the >> Iraqis. The others were transportation units." >> Mr. Shaw, who was in charge of cataloging the tons of conventional >> arms provided to Iraq by foreign suppliers, said he recently obtained >> reliable information on the arms-dispersal program from two European >> intelligence services that have detailed knowledge of the >> Russian-Iraqi >> weapons collaboration. >> Most of Saddam's most powerful arms were systematically separated >> from other arms like mortars, bombs and rockets, and sent to Syria and >> Lebanon, and possibly to Iran, he said. >> The Russian involvement in helping disperse Saddam's weapons, >> including some 380 tons of RDX and HMX, is still being investigated, >> Mr. Shaw said. >> The RDX and HMX, which are used to manufacture high-explosive and >> nuclear weapons, are probably of Russian origin, he said. >> Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita could not be reached for comment. >> The disappearance of the material was reported in a letter Oct. 10 >> from the Iraqi government to the International Atomic Energy Agency. >> Disclosure of the missing explosives Monday in a New York Times >> story was used by the Democratic presidential campaign of Sen. John >> Kerry, who accused the Bush administration of failing to secure the >> material. >> Al-Qaqaa, a known Iraqi weapons site, was monitored closely, Mr. >> Shaw said. >> "That was such a pivotal location, Number 1, that the mere fact of >> [special explosives] disappearing was impossible," Mr. Shaw said. "And >> Number 2, if the stuff disappeared, it had to have gone before we got >> there." >> The Pentagon disclosed yesterday that the Al-Qaqaa facility was >> defended by Fedayeen Saddam, Special Republican Guard and other Iraqi >> military units during the conflict. U.S. forces defeated the defenders >> around April 3 and found the gates to the facility open, the Pentagon >> said in a statement yesterday. >> A military unit in charge of searching for weapons, the Army's >> 75th >> Exploitation Task Force, then inspected Al-Qaqaa on May 8, May 11 and >> May 27, 2003, and found no high explosives that had been monitored in >> the past by the IAEA. >> The Pentagon said there was no evidence of large-scale movement of >> explosives from the facility after April 6. >> "The movement of 377 tons of heavy ordnance would have required >> dozens of heavy trucks and equipment moving along the same roadways as >> U.S. combat divisions occupied continually for weeks prior to and >> subsequent to the 3rd Infantry Division's arrival at the facility," >> the >> statement said. >> The statement also said that the material may have been removed >> from the site by Saddam's regime. >> According to the Pentagon, U.N. arms inspectors sealed the >> explosives at Al-Qaqaa in January 2003 and revisited the site in March >> and noted that the seals were not broken. >> It is not known whether the inspectors saw the explosives in >> March. >> The U.N. team left the country before the U.S.-led invasion began >> March >> 20, 2003. >> A second defense official said documents on the Russian support to >> Iraq reveal that Saddam's government paid the Kremlin for the special >> forces to provide security for Iraq's Russian arms and to conduct >> counterintelligence activities designed to prevent U.S. and Western >> intelligence services from learning about the arms pipeline through >> Syria. >> The Russian arms-removal program was initiated after Yevgeny >> Primakov, the former Russian intelligence chief, could not persuade >> Saddam to give in to U.S. and Western demands, this official said. >> A small portion of Iraq's 650,000 tons to 1 million tons of >> conventional arms that were found after the war were looted after the >> U.S.-led invasion, Mr. Shaw said. Russia was Iraq's largest foreign >> supplier of weaponry, he said. >> However, the most important and useful arms and explosives appear >> to have been separated and moved out as part of carefully designed >> program. "The organized effort was done in advance of the conflict," >> Mr. Shaw said. >> The Russian forces were tasked with moving special arms out of the >> country. >> Mr. Shaw said foreign intelligence officials believe the Russians >> worked with Saddam's Mukhabarat intelligence service to separate out >> special weapons, including high explosives and other arms and related >> technology, from standard conventional arms spread out in some 200 >> arms >> depots. >> The Russian weapons were then sent out of the country to Syria, >> and >> possibly Lebanon in Russian trucks, Mr. Shaw said. >> Mr. Shaw said he believes that the withdrawal of Russian-made >> weapons and explosives from Iraq was part of plan by Saddam to set up >> a >> "redoubt" in Syria that could be used as a base for launching >> pro-Saddam insurgency operations in Iraq. >> The Russian units were dispatched beginning in January 2003 and by >> March had destroyed hundreds of pages of documents on Russian arms >> supplies to Iraq while dispersing arms to Syria, the second official >> said. >> Besides their own weapons, the Russians were supplying Saddam with >> arms made in Ukraine, Belarus, Bulgaria and other Eastern European >> nations, he said. >> "Whatever was not buried was put on lorries and sent to the Syrian >> border," the defense official said. >> Documents reviewed by the official included itineraries of >> military >> units involved in the truck shipments to Syria. The materials outlined >> in the documents included missile components, MiG jet parts, tank >> parts >> and chemicals used to make chemical weapons, the official said. >> The director of the Iraqi government front company known as the Al >> Bashair Trading Co. fled to Syria, where he is in charge of monitoring >> arms holdings and funding Iraqi insurgent activities, the official >> said. >> Also, an Arabic-language report obtained by U.S. intelligence >> disclosed the extent of Russian armaments. The 26-page report was >> written by Abdul Tawab Mullah al Huwaysh, Saddam's minister of >> military >> industrialization, who was captured by U.S. forces May 2, 2003. >> The Russian "spetsnaz" or special-operations forces were under the >> GRU military intelligence service and organized large commercial truck >> convoys for the weapons removal, the official said. >> Regarding the explosives, the new Iraqi government reported that >> 194.7 metric tons of HMX, or high-melting-point explosive, and 141.2 >> metric tons of RDX, or rapid-detonation explosive, and 5.8 metric tons >> of PETN, or pentaerythritol tetranitrate, were missing. >> The material is used in nuclear weapons and also in making >> military >> "plastic" high explosive. >> Defense officials said the Russians can provide information on >> what >> happened to the Iraqi weapons and explosives that were transported out >> of the country. Officials believe the Russians also can explain what >> happened to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. >> >> ===== >> Mike Lorrey >> Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH >> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. >> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." >> -William Pitt (1759-1806) >> Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism >> >> >> >> __________________________________ >> Do you Yahoo!? >> Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. >> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Nov 2 00:35:42 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:35:42 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED96@tpeex05> Or as some people think, this is a conscious universe and even the non-living things have some consciousness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments if possible). Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 4:26 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS > LIMBOIDS > What, if anything, separates life from nonlife? [miscellanea] At Caltech, Chris Adami is studying exactly that, imo. http://dllab.caltech.edu/avida/ http://dllab.caltech.edu/research/ "According to our approach living organisms and computer programs are beautiful structures and are pretty much the same thing." (?!) http://physis.sourceforge.net/ John Baez wrote: 'Is life improbable?', in Found. Phys. 19 (1989), 91-95, and sometimes this paper appears here too http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/improbable.pdf According to J.B. his paper explains the flaw in a famous proof by Wigner. What his [Wigner's] argument actually proves is something much weaker than what he wanted to prove. Roughly, he proves that if you first pick a specific design of a machine and then randomly choose the laws of physics, it's unlikely this machine will be able to reproduce itself in a specific amount of time. This should not be surprising: to design a machine that does a specified task, one usually needs to know a little about the laws of physics ahead of time. When I restated the problem - says J.B. - and redid Wigner's calculation, I got drastically different results. See also: quant-ph/0303124 'Quantum Mechanical Universal Constructor' by Arun K. Pati, and Samuel L. Braunstein " Arbitrary quantum states cannot be copied. In fact, to make a copy we must provide complete information about the system. However, can a quantum system self-replicate? This is not answered by the no-cloning theorem. In the classical context, Von Neumann showed that a 'universal constructor' can exist which can self-replicate an arbitrary system, provided that it had access to instructions for making copy of the system. We question the existence of a universal constructor that may allow for the self-replication of an arbitrary quantum system. We prove that there is no deterministic universal quantum constructor which can operate with finite resources. Further, we delineate conditions under which such a universal constructor can be designed to operate deterministically and probabilistically. " For now, beautiful manmade boids are here http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/ (no need of a universal quantum constructor!) _______________________________________________ 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: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 2 00:57:45 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 18:57:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED96@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED96@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101185212.01ad5300@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:35 AM 11/2/2004 +0800, Walter_Chen wrote: >Or as some people think, this is a conscious universe and even the >non-living things have some >consciousness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments >if possible). The trouble with this proposition, which appears to make the mistake of projecting a local (and locally highly-esteeemed) state of matter upon the rest of the universe, is that it's no more plausible than, say: this is a broccoli-like universe and even the non-living things have some broccoli qualities in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments if possible). or this is a musical universe and even the non-living things have some tunefulness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments if possible). or this is a sheep-like universe and even the non-living things have some sheepishness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments if possible). Damien Broderick [feeling a bit sheepish--but that's *goood* in a sheepish universe] From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Tue Nov 2 02:11:11 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:11:11 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101185212.01ad5300@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien Broderick >Or as some people think, this is a conscious universe and even the >non-living things have some >consciousness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments >if possible). The trouble with this proposition, which appears to make the mistake of projecting a local (and locally highly-esteeemed) state of matter upon the rest of the universe, is that it's no more plausible than, say: this is a broccoli-like universe or this is a musical universe or this is a sheep-like universe ------------------------------------- Lemme guess....roast lamb with broccoli, accompanied by Bach? No fava beans? Sean From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 2 02:35:49 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 18:35:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED96@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED96@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041101183503.02964b10@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> How can we test for consciousness without a definition and measurement criteria? At 04:35 PM 11/1/2004, you wrote: >Or as some people think, this is a conscious universe and even the >non-living things have some >consciousness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments >if possible). > >Thanks. > >Walter. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 02:40:59 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 18:40:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 1908 asteroid In-Reply-To: <20041102023541.75038.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041102024059.76674.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> this link theorizes the 1908 asteroid explosion over Siberia was approximately 500 kilotons, i.e. equivalent to large hydrogen bomb. The article reassuringly states that such an asteroid 'impact', about six kilometers up in the atmosphere, might occur over a populated area every 3600 years. http://www.psi.edu/projects/siberia/siberia.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 2 03:28:49 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:28:49 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101185212.01ad5300@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101212631.01c35ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:11 AM 11/2/2004 +0800, Sean wrote: > >No fava beans? As T. S. Eliot put it in *The Waste Land*: `Mon Hannibal! Mon lecteur!' Damien Broderick From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Nov 2 03:59:14 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:59:14 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EDA0@tpeex05> This must be a very old topic: If human beings came from a big bang of the universe, it's really very possible that there was already some consciousness at the big bang or when there were just non-living things. (It's not necessary to say there must be some Creator or God.) It's like the preservation of consciousness. PK or teleportation may provide some direction to this. Of course, we need to prove them scientifically. As David Bohm thought, there could be much more very subtle active information at the subatomic level. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Hara Ra Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 10:36 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS How can we test for consciousness without a definition and measurement criteria? At 04:35 PM 11/1/2004, you wrote: Or as some people think, this is a conscious universe and even the non-living things have some consciousness in some way (waiting to be proved by scientific experiments if possible). Thanks. Walter. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Tue Nov 2 04:11:00 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:11:00 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101212631.01c35ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101185212.01ad5300@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <6.1.1.1.0.20041101212631.01c35ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <418708D4.4040806@jefallbright.net> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:11 AM 11/2/2004 +0800, Sean wrote: > >> >> No fava beans? > > > As T. S. Eliot put it in *The Waste Land*: > > `Mon Hannibal! Mon lecteur!' > Mon elan vital! I find great comfort in eating only organic, live foods. ;-) - Jef From extropians at perception.co.nz Tue Nov 2 04:14:47 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:14:47 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <418708D4.4040806@jefallbright.net> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101185212.01ad5300@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <6.1.1.1.0.20041101212631.01c35ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <418708D4.4040806@jefallbright.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102171410.059ea728@127.0.0.1> At 17:11 2/11/2004, you wrote: >Damien Broderick wrote: > >>At 10:11 AM 11/2/2004 +0800, Sean wrote: >> >>> >>>No fava beans? >> >> >>As T. S. Eliot put it in *The Waste Land*: >> >>`Mon Hannibal! Mon lecteur!' >Mon elan vital! > >I find great comfort in eating only organic, live foods. ;-) you mean, like cows, straight from the paddock? :)) From jef at jefallbright.net Tue Nov 2 04:20:19 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:20:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102171410.059ea728@127.0.0.1> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041101185212.01ad5300@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <6.1.1.1.0.20041101212631.01c35ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <418708D4.4040806@jefallbright.net> <6.1.2.0.2.20041102171410.059ea728@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <41870B03.2000001@jefallbright.net> Simon Dawson wrote: >At 17:11 2/11/2004, you wrote: > > >>Damien Broderick wrote: >> >> >> >>>At 10:11 AM 11/2/2004 +0800, Sean wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>No fava beans? >>>> >>>> >>>As T. S. Eliot put it in *The Waste Land*: >>> >>>`Mon Hannibal! Mon lecteur!' >>> >>> >>Mon elan vital! >> >>I find great comfort in eating only organic, live foods. ;-) >> >> > >you mean, like cows, straight from the paddock? :)) > > > Well, cows are like totally spiritual, but I would rather grok higher life forms in the manner of Michael Valentine Smith. As we all know, you are what you eat. ;-) - Jef From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Nov 2 05:46:24 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 21:46:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bin Laden Wants to Bankrupt U.S. Message-ID: <006101c4c09f$4b327eb0$6600a8c0@brainiac> "So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy bled, and Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his future," bin Laden said.: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/index.html Olga From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Nov 2 06:34:21 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 07:34:21 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dyson on human enhancement Message-ID: <470a3c5204110122347ebcd813@mail.gmail.com> The American Enterprise sat down with three of the most fascinating figures in space science to converse about the heavens, the Earth, and how the twain might meet. Interview with David Levy, Robert Zubrin and Freeman Dyson. Dyson: "The one thing I don't want is to have a cure for death. I'm 80 years old so I can speak freely about death. I think death is a good idea. We have to have some means of clearing away the old to make room for the young, and death seems to be a good way of doing that. The only alternative would be if there was some way of really rejuvenating people so that you lost all your old cantankerous thoughts and are really born anew; that would be almost as good as death and new birth. Apart from that, I think most of what genetic engineering can do for us is good. I want to see a diversification of life, and we need that, of course, if we are to go away from this planet. I would like life to spread in the universe, and to have all these dead, boring places in the universe come to life with new ecologies and new communities. If we could engineer that, it would be great. It might mean that the human species could also cease to exist as a species, and would diversify into all kinds of different creatures that would be adapted to living in different places." http://www.taemag.com/issues/articleid.18294/article_detail.asp From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 2 06:39:35 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 22:39:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <8074ED0C-2C63-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <003d01c4c0a6$b86de350$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > On Oct 28, 2004, at 6:01 PM, Kevin Freels wrote: ... > > Whether or not the WMDs were there or not is irrelevant. He > > acted as though they were. I have a theory on why he did that. Saddam believed he did have WMDs. Reasoning: he handed out millions of bucks to his top generals to develop advanced weapon systems. He probably had each of them estimate how much it would cost to develop such and such a weapon. He chose the one that gave him the lowest estimate, then gave that general about half to 2/3 the estimate. The general soon learned the two rules that we yanks already know: 1) every weapon system costs waaaaay more than anyone expects. 2) even if rule 1 is taken into account, it still costs waaay more than anyone expects. That general steals some of the money and burns thru most of the rest of it in fruitless research and still has no weapons program, so he takes a calculated risk: he buys something analogous to that system from Russia, paints over the hammer and curvy knife thingy, demonstrates the system to Saddam, who becomes convinced that Iraq now has such and such weapons. The general is a top military guy, he isn't stupid. Generals don't get to be generals by making mistakes. He knows that should war break out, his gambit would be found out, at which time Saddam would round up the general's parents, wife, children, friends etc and torture them to all death in front of his eyes, then kill him. Sooooo... When the coalition shows up, there is little real resistance. The Iraqi army is nowhere to be seen. The only actual fighting is from Muslim zealots, few of which are Iraqi. The coalition is as much the savior of the Iraqi generals as anyone else. The generals thus escape Saddam's retribution; they have all done the same thing under the same circumstances. So Saddam, Baghdad Bob and the rest of the world are surprised to learn belatedly that Iraq really doesn't have much, they do not have the capability to produce advanced weaponry, but they do have a lot of stuff they weren't supposed to have, sold to them primarily by the Russians. Putin is understandably squirmy. He didn't authorize the sale of arms to Iraq for fear of pissing off Bush and Blair, but suspects that Russian weapons were sold to Iraq illegally, possibly by Syria or other countries with which he did business. Evidence: the Iraqis have advanced Russian GPS jammers. So Putin stalls as long as he can, but when he knows the invasion is going to happen in a week or two, he moves quickly to cover his tracks. He makes arrangements to move the high explosives and anything else that might be found to be Russian, in a convoy of trucks to somewhere, anywhere, Syria will do. This also gives the Iraqi generals an out: they can claim their advanced programs were squirrelled away in Syria. Doesn't that theory fit all the observations so far? Now here's the curious part. Some of the anti-W crowd was saying there were never any WMDs, but if you listen closely to the tall guy, he doesn't actually make that claim. He made many claims that were close to that, but Skerry avoided the position that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq because there were no WMDs. In a sense, Skerry is as much a hawk as Bush, thereby giving away (in my mind) any advantage he had over W. He didn't say he wouldn't have gone to war with Iraq, but rather that he would have fought it better, or more sensitively or smarter or whatever. I doubt that he would have done any better, but it doesn't matter at this point. In the last week before the election, Skerry comes out with this big hootnanny about 400 tonnnnns of missing high explosives, which were not allowed under the 1991 treaty, which had to come from somewhere since Iraq generally doesn't manufacture that stuff, which is admitting that Saddam was illegally buying munitions and illegally stockpiling dangerous stuff and chipping away at the UN sanctions, and had to be stopped, which is all W and Blair were claiming to start with. This tactic by Skerry divides the anti-W crowd; it cuts off those who maintained that there was not sufficient justification for invading Iraq. Now we yanks are faced with a choice tomorrow of two hawks. We can go out and vote for the libertarian Badnarik if we want, but we know that either way our troops are stuck in Iraq for at least another four years. And even Badnarik has no really convincing plan for how to get out of Iraq. If we just pack up and leave, the Sunnis and Shia, who hate each other and hate christians nearly as much, will surely go into civil war. You can bet the first casualties are the christians. Both W and Skerry know that if he were to allow the Iraqis to slay 3E6 Iraqi christians, then that candidate would be trounced in 08 by someone who is still more hawkish than either W or Skerry. Suggestions anyone? Samantha have you the answers to this? I am all ears. spike From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 2 07:07:07 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:07:07 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory Message-ID: <041901c4c0aa$90a1c270$b8232dcb@homepc> Looks like a Kerry victory may be about to happen after all. I've been watching this site for a few weeks. http://www.electoral-vote.com/ in the last couple of days there seems to have been a heck of a lot of polls and the trend of electoral-votes has been tending ever so slightly towards a Kerry win. Brett -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 2 07:41:32 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:41:32 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] DUMBOIDS References: <20041102021108.CFACCCA8B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <103b01c4c0af$5fe3f040$5eb41b97@administxl09yj> [D.B.] > this is a broccoli-like universe > or > this is a musical universe > or > this is a sheep-like universe [Sean] > Lemme guess....roast lamb with broccoli, > accompanied by Bach? No fava beans? Also. But, essentially, it is a "tutti frutti" universe :-) According to Carroll and Chen (hep-th/0410270) observers in the very far past of our universe will also detect an arrow of time, but one that will be reversed from ours with respect to some (completely unobservable) global time coordinate throughout the entire spacetime. Both sets of observers will think of the others as living in their "past". As in other models of eternal inflation, the future history of spacetime takes on a fractal structure of ever-increasing volume. A similar structure is found in a time-reversed sense in the far past. (Not to mention Multiverses and Many-Minds!). [Walter] > If human beings came from a big bang of the universe, > it's really very possible that there was already > some consciousness at the big bang or when there were > just non-living things. A big bang? "A society which accepts the idea that the origin of the cosmos could be explained in terms of an explosion, reveals more about the society itself, than about the universe." - Carl Friedrich Freiherr von Weizsaecker A conscious big bang? "It is absurd to suppose that purpose is not present because we do not observe the agent deliberating. Art does not deliberate. If the ship-building art were in the wood, it would produce the same results by nature. If, therefore, purpose is present in art, it is present also in nature. The best illustration is a doctor doctoring himself: nature is like that." - Aristotle Tutti Frutti (1955) A-bop-bop, a-loo-mop, a-lop-bop-bop Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie A-bop-bop, a-loo-mop, a-lop-bop-bop I got a gal, her name's Sue She knows just what to do I got a gal, her name's Sue She knows just what to do I've been to the east I've been to the west But she's the gal That I love the best Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Whooo, Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie A-bop-bop, a-loo-mop, a-lop-bop-bop I got a gal, her name's Daisy She almost drives me crazy I got a gal, her name's Daisy She almost drives me crazy She's a real gone cookie Yes, sir-ree But pretty little Susie Is The gal for me Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Whooo, Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie A-bop-bop, a-loo-mop, a-lop-bop-bop [Instrumental Interlude] Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Whooo, Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie A-bop-bop, a-loo-mop, a-lop-bop-bop I got a gal, her name's Daisy She almost drives me crazy I got a gal, her name's Daisy She almost drives me crazy She's a real gone cookie Yes, sir-ree But pretty little Susie Is The gal for me Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Whooo, Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie Tutti Frutti, all rootie A-bop-bop, a-loo-mop, a-lop-bam-boom From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 2 07:37:13 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 01:37:13 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Stem cells cures 'feasible, sensible' Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102013613.01caeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,11256424,00.html Leigh Dayton, Science writer 02nov04 WITHIN 15 to 25 years, doctors will be using stem cell therapy to treat a host of serious diseases, from Alzheimer's to Huntington's, a pioneer of embryonic stem cell research claims. "In virtually every test environment it's been shown to work. It's feasible and sensible," claims geneticist Martin Evans, head of biosciences at Cardiff University in Wales. Sir Martin is in Australia to visit biotech firms such as Ozgene in Perth, and to speak at the Ausbiotech 2004 conference in Brisbane this week. In 1981, while at England's Cambridge University, he and research partner Matt Kaufman first "isolated" ? separated from other cell types ? embryonic stem (ES) cells in mice. [etc] From zero.powers at gmail.com Tue Nov 2 07:56:46 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 23:56:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <041901c4c0aa$90a1c270$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <041901c4c0aa$90a1c270$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <7a32170504110123566d047eba@mail.gmail.com> Hooray for the good guys!!! Oh, uh, I mean, that's interesting statistical data, and may the best man win. On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:07:07 +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > Looks like a Kerry victory may be about to happen after all. > > I've been watching this site for a few weeks. http://www.electoral-vote.com/ > in the last couple of > days there seems to have been a heck of a lot of polls > and the trend of electoral-votes has been tending ever > so slightly towards a Kerry win. > > Brett > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 09:32:57 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 01:32:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <7a32170504110123566d047eba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041102093257.74127.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Too good to be true? If it is then i will be seriously interested in transhumanism/extropianism. However if Bush wins it wont be worth it; four more years of this? It's been like one door after another slamming on transhumanism. --- Zero Powers wrote: > Hooray for the good guys!!! > > Oh, uh, I mean, that's interesting statistical data, > and may the best man win. > > > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:07:07 +1100, Brett Paatsch > wrote: > > > > Looks like a Kerry victory may be about to happen > after all. > > > > I've been watching this site for a few weeks. > http://www.electoral-vote.com/ > > in the last couple of > > days there seems to have been a heck of a lot of > polls > > and the trend of electoral-votes has been tending > ever > > so slightly towards a Kerry win. > > > > Brett > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From maxm at mail.tele.dk Tue Nov 2 09:38:38 2004 From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 10:38:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <008601c4c051$0c1da590$f4b41b97@administxl09yj> References: <418589B6.31E41C99@mindspring.com> <008601c4c051$0c1da590$f4b41b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <4187559E.2020605@mail.tele.dk> >>LIMBOIDS >>What, if anything, separates life from nonlife? >> >> Religion... If you believe in God, you believe that God created life. If you don't believe in religion, there is no reason at all to see life/non-life as binary oppositions. Life and non life is on a scale. In one end there is clearly no life in the other end there is clearly life, as we define it. What confuses is that there seem to have been some kind of "life singularity", where the chemical reactions changed state quickly from non-life to life. And by now the difference between chemical reactions and life is pretty big. I guess that what we call life is a combination of many different factors. Yet they all seem to have exceptions. I think that the most basic thing that different life forms has in common is that they can postpone entropy. -- hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark http://www.mxm.dk/ IT's Mad Science From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 2 09:42:41 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 20:42:41 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharingasdownregulators References: <20041101172218.0F6B457E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <046501c4c0c0$4c0bc4b0$b8232dcb@homepc> Hal Finney wrote: > Brett Paatsch writes: >> Human societies didn't invent poverty or starvation or disease >> (though ways of living do influence the types of disease) and to >> some extent human societies have been in part attempts to > > mitigate against poverty and starvation... >> >> If everyone in the world was suddenly infected by a meme that >> caused them to want to to distribute all their wealth downwards ... >> >> You'd need some sort of complex system to implement species > > wide altruism.... > > Apologies for the truncation, but I chose these excerpts because > they suggest that this line of analysis is collective and global, not > personal. The line of analysis came from a flesh and blood person. I promise. Moreover, it came out in response to what you wrote. > You're talking about human societies and collective action. What > would happen if everyone in the world behaved altrustically, how > could we get species wide altruism. Yes I was. But not before you'd mused that "some might argue that we should give away all of our wealth until we are at the same level of the poor we have donated to. ... The (quote) net happiness in the world (unquote) would almost certainly be increased if each of us adopted this policy. " And then you went on to ask "how (sic) can we turn away from this logic (sic)?" So then, I took up what I perceived to be an offer to converse by answering a question that you asked as if it wasn't entirely rhetorical. > That's the opposite of my point. I am talking about personal, > individual actions. When we make most choices, we don't > consider the implications for the grand scope of human society. > If I'm hungry, I get a sandwich. If I want to get the latest news, > I go online or turn on the TV. These are the kinds of personal > actions I am talking about. There is no way I'm going to believe that Hal Finney makes moral decisions in essentially the same way that as a rabbit or a coach potato makes dietary and program viewing decisions. Not everyone reasons about things to the same extent, some guy called Kohlberg produced a scheme involving various levels of moral reasoning. > To choose to save someone from starvation by my personal > sacrifice does not require considerations like those you have > raised above. If you have to choose in the face of an actual person with and obvious and desperate need than I reckon you're right and pretty typical. I think most westerners would respond in those circumstances - we don't see a lot of starvation up close and personal. > I can give money to a charitable organization and have considerable > confidence that it will ease human suffering. Real people feeling > real pain will be helped by my sacrifice. Sure. > Again, I am not trying to decide what other people should do. I accept that. But you didn't write what you were thinking in a diary (or not only a diary anyway) you wrote it on the Exi chat list. > I face a quandary in considering what I, personally, should do. Right now? Right this second, or just as part of a sort of ongoing personal existential angst. (Not to downplay that but there are degrees of urgency as well as degrees of importance). If its the first then just say so and I'll stop clowning about. If its the second, then, me too. > I ask myself, under what circumstances would I sacrifice to save > the life of a stranger? Or perhaps just to improve a life which is > full of suffering and hardship? What should I consider my > obligations in this area to be? I ask those sorts of questions of myself too. I also ask what should I do next. Its often very hard to decide exactly what to do next. Time, like money, and perhaps even more than money, is a limited personal resource. > I still say that these are hard problems, and that in some ways > they are harder than those global issues of species altruism and > such. I agree they are hard problems. But they are hard problems because they are the sort of problems a person ultimately has to nut out answers to for themselves. The responsibility for choosing a personal course of action or for failing to take action rests on each of us personally. And there is a good chance that as we go through life we will not always make the same decisions in the same way because we will differ in how well we are able to reason about moral issues as well as in the sort of resources we have at our disposal. > In fact those abstract considerations can in some cases be a > defense mechanism, a way for the mind to turn away from facing > the brute reality of a world full of suffering, by recasting it in > academic > abstractions which make it easier to evade consideration of the > effects of our decisions. They could be. In some cases. I don't think I was being defensive though. If we kid ourselves on a list rather than in our heads then there is at least a chance that any rationalisation will be pointed out. Regards, Brett From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 09:50:03 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 01:50:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <20041102093257.74127.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041102095004.91400.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Not to be alarmist, but since 2000 it's been one f-up after another; dotcom bust, recession, Bush election, 9-11, Enron-type reverses (yes, i know, 'creative destruction'), misfired Iraq invasion. It's enough to turn one to the remote possibility of the 'Endtimes' Christians subscribe to. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Nov 2 10:16:45 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:16:45 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <20041102093257.74127.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <7a32170504110123566d047eba@mail.gmail.com> <20041102093257.74127.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204110202167c15b807@mail.gmail.com> Fingers crossed. G. On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 01:32:57 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > Too good to be true? If it is then i will be seriously > interested in transhumanism/extropianism. However if > Bush wins it wont be worth it; four more years of > this? It's been like one door after another slamming > on transhumanism. > > > > > --- Zero Powers wrote: > > > Hooray for the good guys!!! > > > > Oh, uh, I mean, that's interesting statistical data, > > and may the best man win. > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:07:07 +1100, Brett Paatsch > > wrote: > > > > > > Looks like a Kerry victory may be about to happen > > after all. > > > > > > I've been watching this site for a few weeks. > > http://www.electoral-vote.com/ > > > in the last couple of > > > days there seems to have been a heck of a lot of > > polls > > > and the trend of electoral-votes has been tending > > ever > > > so slightly towards a Kerry win. > > > > > > Brett > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 10:26:26 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 02:26:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] optimism study Message-ID: <20041102102626.34368.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> A Dutch research involving 900 men & women aged 65-85 has concluded there is a 55% reduction in death by all causes by the subject being optimistic; a 23% reduction in death related to cardio-vascular conditions by being optimistic. One obvious problem is that if one is too optimistic one will be severely ridiculed-- even in a nation such as Holland few can bear excessive ridicule. It is almost as if most have a sort of sonar built into them giving them the ability to sense when someone is too optimistic or has the guarding of one's psychic flank down caused by temporary depression or merely inattention. It's a peculiar phenomenon that is in itself enough to shake one's optimism. --------------------------------------- BTW, this list's discussion of the cosmos' conceivably being alive is thought-provoking. It leads one to think of parallel universes, time travel from the future, collective unconscious self-fulfilling prophecies, and other science fiction topics. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 2 10:39:29 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 21:39:29 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] optimism study References: <20041102102626.34368.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <04ab01c4c0c8$3b68c290$b8232dcb@homepc> Al Brooks wrote: >A Dutch research involving 900 men & women aged 65-85 > has concluded there is a 55% reduction in death by all > causes by the subject being optimistic; a 23% > reduction in death related to cardio-vascular > conditions by being optimistic. The healthy side of the power of positive thinking has been recognized for quite a while. Presumably that is part of the reason that placebos work to some extent. I read somewhere recently that depressed or pessimistic people make for more reliable eye witnesses at crime senses. (Sorry I don't have the source.) I think it was that optimists don't tend to see what actually happened but rather what they thought would probably have happened. I wonder how optimism/pessimism would correlate to IQ? Brett Paatsch From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 2 12:48:22 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 06:48:22 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory References: <20041102095004.91400.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001401c4c0da$3d0b70e0$e9ebfb44@kevin> Since when did things NOT go this way? This is the story of human civilization. 1999 Y2K bug Serbia Columbine school shootings Yugoslavia 1998 Worldwide financial crisis Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons testing 1996 Mad Cow Disease 1995 Gas attack in Tokyo Subway Oklahoma City Bombing 1994 Rwandan Genocide Begins (Lorena Bobbit?) US troops to Haiti 1993 First WTC bombing WACO 1992 Los Angelos Riots 1991 Gulf War 1990 1989 Exxon Valdez Tiananmen Square 1988 Flight ? over Lockerbie Scotland My mind gets a bit foggy as I go backwards and forgive me if I miss the start date of some things by a year or two, but you get the point. Need I continue? What makes anyone think the last 4 years is anything but SSDD? Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:50 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory > Not to be alarmist, but since 2000 it's been one f-up > after another; dotcom bust, recession, Bush election, > 9-11, Enron-type reverses (yes, i know, 'creative > destruction'), misfired Iraq invasion. > It's enough to turn one to the remote possibility of > the 'Endtimes' Christians subscribe to. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From maxm at mail.tele.dk Tue Nov 2 13:23:33 2004 From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:23:33 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <20041102095004.91400.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041102095004.91400.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41878A55.1090208@mail.tele.dk> Al Brooks wrote: >Not to be alarmist, but since 2000 it's been one f-up >after another; dotcom bust, recession, Bush election, >9-11, Enron-type reverses (yes, i know, 'creative >destruction'), misfired Iraq invasion. >It's enough to turn one to the remote possibility of >the 'Endtimes' Christians subscribe to. > Those are small fries seen over time. What has mattered the most for our current way of life, WWII or the phone? Positive technology is just a lot less dramatic. -- hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark http://www.mxm.dk/ IT's Mad Science From hkhenson at rogers.com Tue Nov 2 13:53:56 2004 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 08:53:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Toronto Lecture by Keith Henson November 14, 2004 In-Reply-To: <200411020933.iA29XM026128@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20041102083852.032a8b60@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> I signed on this list a while back, but have been a bit too busy to participate much. In case you wonder what I have been up to in the last few years (besides trying to stay in Canada and away from scientology bounty hunters) I have been working on extensions to the paper you can find by putting _sex drugs cults_ in Google. The Sunday after next I am giving a talk in Toronto. It will be on evolutionary psychology and the origin of war. The talk will be November 14, 2004 at 1pm at the Unitarian Church at 175 St Clair Ave W Toronto, ON That's the same place that had a cryonics panel a year or so ago. If someone knows other places to put this announcement, please do. The last one (on cults) had a small attendance, though we did have someone who came all the way from Amsterdam and there was lots of interaction. I know there is not much chance of many living close enough to be able to come, but this also serves to let you know what I have been working on in my copious free time. Keith Henson **************** Abstract of talk Human population are observed to slowly oscillate between being dominated by rational memes and xenophobic/warlike, often disfunctional memes (religious and political such as communism). Why? I make the case that which class of memes dominates is dependent on the situation. A stressed population facing a bleak future will have a high gain setting for infecting those not caught up with xenophobic or "going to war" memes. Rationalist memes will prevail in situations of lower stress/worry. This meme switch mechanism has its origin in the millions of years the human line lived as hunter gatherers. It has the function of synchronizing a tribe's warriors to the ultimate effort to do or die in an attack on a neighboring tribe. (Irrespective of which side won, the hunter gatherer population pushing the ecological limits was thinned out.) "Thinned out populations" results in improving prospects and reduces the "gain setting" on the spread of xenophobic memes. This was seen in Northern Ireland, though not resulting from large scale deaths. In that case, a switch to a much lower birth rate a generation ago let economic growth exceed population growth. Rational memes slowly prevailed and support for the IRA faded out. My claim here is that the psychological switch into and out of war mode evolved in the stone age to be dependent on the difficulty of getting game and berries. Today the mode trigger maps (roughly) into income per capita, more particularly into changes in income per capita. This model has serious real world applications. Because of the high birth rate in the Palestinian population (and Islamic populations in general), and low economic growth, there is no resolution of the problems in the mid east in sight. The most likely (and grim) outcome is a population reducing spasm within the next decade similar to what happened in Rwanda unless some wild card such as nanotechnology becomes a major economic factor. From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Tue Nov 2 14:02:54 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 15:02:54 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <7a32170504110123566d047eba@mail.gmail.com> References: <041901c4c0aa$90a1c270$b8232dcb@homepc> <7a32170504110123566d047eba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I don't want to be negative, but if you examine the site it is clearly too close to call (and the site says as much). Kerry has a slight advantage in polling, but statistically this doesn't mean anything (i.e., its predictive value is so small to be discountable). Bush had an even larger margin in his favor in 2000 just before the election and look what happened there. If you look at the animated map its amazing how over the past few months either candidate could have won the election. Even in the last two weeks things have been flip-flopping around with first Bush and then Kerry leading over the course of a few days. A comparison of the predicted electoral college votes shows that in the last few weeks neither candidate has gained any sort of margin. Looks to me that either candidate is going to win by the slimmest of margins. best, patrick From bret at bonfireproductions.com Tue Nov 2 14:36:25 2004 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 09:36:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <041901c4c0aa$90a1c270$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <041901c4c0aa$90a1c270$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <93146F95-2CDC-11D9-893F-000A9591E432@bonfireproductions.com> Not taking sides here, except the side of proper statistical viewing. If the majority of people on the internet in the US say they are going to vote for Kerry, that number is still a percentage of a minority of the US populace. I do not believe the majority of the US population surfs the web, especially not every day. True? There is probability that we will know by tomorrow morning. I don't know how to calculate it though. =) Bret Kulakovich On Nov 2, 2004, at 2:07 AM, Brett Paatsch wrote: > Looks like a Kerry victory may be about to happen after all. > ? > I've been watching this site for a few weeks. > http://www.electoral-vote.com/?in the last couple of > days there seems to have been a heck of a lot of polls > and the trend of electoral-votes has been tending ever > so slightly towards a Kerry win. > ? > Brett > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1580 bytes Desc: not available URL: From es at popido.com Tue Nov 2 14:59:08 2004 From: es at popido.com (Erik Starck) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 15:59:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory Message-ID: <200411021459.iA2Ex8Y4020897@mail-core.space2u.com> This year more than half of the population of the world goes to the voting booth. Even though some countries aren't as democratic as their government would like them to appear, this is still a significant percentage of the globe and more than ever before. Famine is decreasing, average life span is increasing and the world as a whole is getting richer and richer. Even though bad things are happening, the general trend is that tomorrow will be a better day than today, which is a better day than yesterday. Erik On 2004-11-02 Kevin Freels wrote: Since when did things NOT go this way? This is the story of human >civilization. >1999 > Y2K bug > Serbia > Columbine school shootings > Yugoslavia >1998 > Worldwide financial crisis > Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons testing >1996 > Mad Cow Disease >1995 > Gas attack in Tokyo Subway > Oklahoma City Bombing >1994 > Rwandan Genocide Begins > (Lorena Bobbit?) > US troops to Haiti >1993 First WTC bombing > WACO >1992 > Los Angelos Riots >1991 > Gulf War >1990 > >1989 > Exxon Valdez > Tiananmen Square >1988 > Flight ? over Lockerbie Scotland > >My mind gets a bit foggy as I go backwards and forgive me if I miss the >start date of some things by a year or two, but you get the point. Need I >continue? What makes anyone think the last 4 years is anything but SSDD? > >Kevin Freels > > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Al Brooks" >To: "ExI chat list" >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:50 AM >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory > > >> Not to be alarmist, but since 2000 it's been one f-up >> after another; dotcom bust, recession, Bush election, >> 9-11, Enron-type reverses (yes, i know, 'creative >> destruction'), misfired Iraq invasion. >> It's enough to turn one to the remote possibility of >> the 'Endtimes' Christians subscribe to. >> >> >> >> __________________________________ >> Do you Yahoo!? >> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. >> www.yahoo.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From natashavita at earthlink.net Tue Nov 2 15:36:42 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:36:42 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Toronto Lecture by Keith Henson November 14, 2004 Message-ID: <323090-220041122153642632@M2W047.mail2web.com> Wishing you much success with your talk - Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Keith Henson hkhenson at rogers.com Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 08:53:56 -0500 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] Toronto Lecture by Keith Henson November 14, 2004 I signed on this list a while back, but have been a bit too busy to participate much. In case you wonder what I have been up to in the last few years (besides trying to stay in Canada and away from scientology bounty hunters) I have been working on extensions to the paper you can find by putting _sex drugs cults_ in Google. The Sunday after next I am giving a talk in Toronto. It will be on evolutionary psychology and the origin of war. The talk will be November 14, 2004 at 1pm at the Unitarian Church at 175 St Clair Ave W Toronto, ON That's the same place that had a cryonics panel a year or so ago. If someone knows other places to put this announcement, please do. The last one (on cults) had a small attendance, though we did have someone who came all the way from Amsterdam and there was lots of interaction. I know there is not much chance of many living close enough to be able to come, but this also serves to let you know what I have been working on in my copious free time. Keith Henson **************** Abstract of talk Human population are observed to slowly oscillate between being dominated by rational memes and xenophobic/warlike, often disfunctional memes (religious and political such as communism). Why? I make the case that which class of memes dominates is dependent on the situation. A stressed population facing a bleak future will have a high gain setting for infecting those not caught up with xenophobic or "going to war" memes. Rationalist memes will prevail in situations of lower stress/worry. This meme switch mechanism has its origin in the millions of years the human line lived as hunter gatherers. It has the function of synchronizing a tribe's warriors to the ultimate effort to do or die in an attack on a neighboring tribe. (Irrespective of which side won, the hunter gatherer population pushing the ecological limits was thinned out.) "Thinned out populations" results in improving prospects and reduces the "gain setting" on the spread of xenophobic memes. This was seen in Northern Ireland, though not resulting from large scale deaths. In that case, a switch to a much lower birth rate a generation ago let economic growth exceed population growth. Rational memes slowly prevailed and support for the IRA faded out. My claim here is that the psychological switch into and out of war mode evolved in the stone age to be dependent on the difficulty of getting game and berries. Today the mode trigger maps (roughly) into income per capita, more particularly into changes in income per capita. This model has serious real world applications. Because of the high birth rate in the Palestinian population (and Islamic populations in general), and low economic growth, there is no resolution of the problems in the mid east in sight. The most likely (and grim) outcome is a population reducing spasm within the next decade similar to what happened in Rwanda unless some wild card such as nanotechnology becomes a major economic factor. _______________________________________________ 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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:24:12 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:24:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] thanks, but i know all this In-Reply-To: <200411021459.iA2Ex8Y4020897@mail-core.space2u.com> Message-ID: <20041102162412.96451.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> All you responders, thank you for the reassurance. Yet, the war in West Asia (what we call the 'Middle East') is bad, very bad. Our worst since 1942. > This year more than half of the population of the > world goes to the voting booth. Even though some > countries aren't as democratic as their government > would like them to appear, this is still a > significant percentage of the globe and more than > ever before. Famine is decreasing, average life span > is increasing and the world as a whole is getting > richer and richer. > > Even though bad things are happening, the general > trend is that tomorrow will be a better day than > today, which is a better day than yesterday. > > > Erik > > > On 2004-11-02 Kevin Freels wrote: > > Since when did things NOT go this way? This is the > story of human > >civilization. > >1999 > > Y2K bug > > Serbia > > Columbine school shootings > > Yugoslavia > >1998 > > Worldwide financial crisis > > Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons testing > >1996 > > Mad Cow Disease > >1995 > > Gas attack in Tokyo Subway > > Oklahoma City Bombing > >1994 > > Rwandan Genocide Begins > > (Lorena Bobbit?) > > US troops to Haiti > >1993 First WTC bombing > > WACO > >1992 > > Los Angelos Riots > >1991 > > Gulf War > >1990 > > > >1989 > > Exxon Valdez > > Tiananmen Square > >1988 > > Flight ? over Lockerbie Scotland > > > >My mind gets a bit foggy as I go backwards and > forgive me if I miss the > >start date of some things by a year or two, but you > get the point. Need I > >continue? What makes anyone think the last 4 years > is anything but SSDD? > > > >Kevin Freels > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Al Brooks" > >To: "ExI chat list" > > >Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:50 AM > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry > victory > > > > > >> Not to be alarmist, but since 2000 it's been one > f-up > >> after another; dotcom bust, recession, Bush > election, > >> 9-11, Enron-type reverses (yes, i know, 'creative > >> destruction'), misfired Iraq invasion. > >> It's enough to turn one to the remote possibility > of > >> the 'Endtimes' Christians subscribe to. > >> > >> > >> > >> __________________________________ > >> Do you Yahoo!? > >> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > >> www.yahoo.com > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> extropy-chat mailing list > >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 2 16:34:32 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:34:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory Message-ID: <20041102163432.DD1E557E2A@finney.org> Brett Paatsch writes: > Looks like a Kerry victory may be about to happen after all. > > I've been watching this site for a few weeks. > http://www.electoral-vote.com/ in the last couple of > days there seems to have been a heck of a lot of polls > and the trend of electoral-votes has been tending ever > so slightly towards a Kerry win. The betting markets are still pretty split. IEM has 51%/50% for the two, http://128.255.244.60/quotes/78.html (based on adding the two DEM04 and REP04 average prices). Tradesports has it 54%/48% for Bush v Kerry, http://www.tradesports.com/ . Keep in mind these are estimated chances of victory, not margins. The markets are still saying that it is essentially a coin flip which one will win. BTW adding the _G52 prices for the IEM gives the odds that one candidate will win with greater than 52% of the popular vote, which would be a relatively decisive victory. IEM estimates 32% for this, so it certainly can't be ruled out. In other words, the markets are NOT predicting razor-thin margins, but rather that there is too much uncertainty to know who will win. In 2000, changing fewer than 1000 votes in one state (Florida) would have changed the outcome. I predict that will not happen this time; that in the final results, no single state will be such that changing < 1000 votes will change the overall victor. This is just based on probabilities; with many millions of voters in large states, it's unlikely that the result will be that close, and when you combine it with the need for the overall electoral balance to be so close that one state could tip it, the odds seem low. Hal From jpnitya at verizon.net Tue Nov 2 17:00:00 2004 From: jpnitya at verizon.net (Joao Magalhaes) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 12:00:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cancer-resistant mice age normally Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.2.20041102115245.01f11d48@receptor.med.harvard.edu> Hi, It looks like cancer-resistant mice have a normal lifespan and age normally. http://www.genesdev.org/cgi/reprint/gad.310304v1 (subscription required) Here's a link to the story on BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3971103.stm This is a very nice work by Manuel Serrano's group in Madrid as it shows that increasing cellular defences against damage, while influencing cancer, does not impact on aging. What it tells me is that aging is not merely a result from damage accumulation. It also raises questions on the link between cancer and aging--one which I've argued for in the past. All the best, Joao --- Joao Pedro de Magalhaes, PhD Harvard Medical School, Dept. of Genetics Avenue Louis Pasteur, 77, Room 238 Boston, MA 02115 Telephone: 1-617-432-6550 http://www.senescence.info From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 2 17:08:42 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 09:08:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] optimism study Message-ID: <20041102170842.C5BE157E2A@finney.org> Al Brooks writes: > A Dutch research involving 900 men & women aged 65-85 > has concluded there is a 55% reduction in death by all > causes by the subject being optimistic; a 23% > reduction in death related to cardio-vascular > conditions by being optimistic. You always have to worry about correlation vs causation in such studies. I'm sure they controlled for health, but even so there could be problems. Maybe the people who felt an intangible and unmeasurable sense of health were inherently and justifiably more optimistic, while those who had a sense of bodily weakness and vulnerability would be more pessimistic. Then the study might be measuring how well people could sense their own prospects for longevity. If so, just forcing yourself to be optimistic would not do anything to extend your life. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 2 17:11:31 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:11:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] LIMBOIDS In-Reply-To: <4187559E.2020605@mail.tele.dk> References: <418589B6.31E41C99@mindspring.com> <008601c4c051$0c1da590$f4b41b97@administxl09yj> <4187559E.2020605@mail.tele.dk> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102110905.01bdfb08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:38 AM 11/2/2004 +0100, Max M wrote: >I think that the most basic thing that different life forms has in common >is that they can postpone entropy. The usual formulation is that living structures--actively and systematically--*export* entropy. (But then don't stars do that too?) Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:27:50 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:27:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041101230627.9248.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041102182750.17640.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > Okay...so how do you prevent managers from cashing > out the company between reports and leaving > shareholders with an empty bag? If the managers obtain their stock via employee purchase or options programs, they would be required to only buy or sell stock in the month or two AFTER the annual or bi-annual report is released. Anyone who purchases stock on the open market could buy and sell whenever they want. > Granted, that does > sometimes happen now, but it's a lot easier to do over > the course of a year than over the course of three > months...and one can report on quarterly progress > towards a long-term goal, noting milestones met (or > missed) on the long-term project plan. (And any > project, even a long-term one, needs a plan to have a > good chance of success. Ones that last for months are > often broken down into days, so theoretically ones > that last for years should be able to be broken into > three-month segments, no?) I'd generally discourage this. The reporting system is so frequently used by corporations to collude at a distance with their competitors to exploit the consumer that I'd say that either all companies in a given industry report on the same day, or else the four largest competitors in a market must report 3 months apart from each other. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:34:49 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:34:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 1908 asteroid In-Reply-To: <20041102024059.76674.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041102183449.24742.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > this link theorizes the 1908 asteroid explosion over > Siberia was > approximately 500 kilotons, i.e. equivalent to large > hydrogen bomb. The article reassuringly states that > such an asteroid 'impact', about six kilometers up in > the atmosphere, might occur over a populated area > every 3600 years. > http://www.psi.edu/projects/siberia/siberia.html I'm wondering if they've counted a similar but smaller bolide event in the 19th century in the midwestern US. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:42:55 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:42:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] optimism study In-Reply-To: <20041102170842.C5BE157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041102184255.68023.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> Cripes, did you read about yesterday's assassination of Vincent Van Gogh's great grand nephew in Amsterdam for collaborating with someone on a film exploring the abuse of women in Islamic nations? It's enough to make one want to crawl in a hole and pull the hole in afterwards. > Dutch research involving 900 men & women aged 65-85 > has concluded there is a 55% reduction in death by all > causes by the subject being optimistic; a 23% > reduction in death related to cardio-vascular > conditions by being optimistic. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:43:12 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:43:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bin Laden Wants to Bankrupt U.S. In-Reply-To: <006101c4c09f$4b327eb0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041102184312.26202.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> He also said that states that voted for Bush would be attacked, those that did not would be safe. Is it any wonder that ABC refused to release the tape before the election? --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > "So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy > bled, and > Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his > future," bin > Laden said.: > > http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/index.html > > Olga > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 2 18:58:51 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 12:58:51 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bin Laden Wants to Bankrupt U.S. References: <20041102184312.26202.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <023e01c4c10d$fe966020$e9ebfb44@kevin> AHA! So if Bush wins and certain states are attacked, it becomes ABC's fault!!! lol At least that's the logic they used when critics of Bush decided that the WTC attacks were the fault of Bush and the CIA. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 12:43 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Bin Laden Wants to Bankrupt U.S. > He also said that states that voted for Bush would be attacked, those > that did not would be safe. Is it any wonder that ABC refused to > release the tape before the election? > > > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > > "So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy > > bled, and > > Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his > > future," bin > > Laden said.: > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/index.html > > > > Olga > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:58:48 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:58:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn Message-ID: <20041102185848.31420.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> For those of you nay-sayers, the NH Public Radio exit poll has Libertarian Rich Kahn getting 11% of the vote in the 2nd district congressional race. This is the best showing of any Libertarian in NH history for a federal election, and shows that we can play with the big dogs if we get organized and work together in a positive, rational, and mature manner. We also want to thank all the support of FSP members who helped out in big ways and small throughout the campaign, especially those who helped ensure Rich got on the ballot in the first place, in spite of the best efforts of the statist saboteurs. Spread the word far and wide: The FSP is kicking butt and taking names. Get YOUR butt to New Hampshire. The new American Revolution is starting, and it's starting in New Hampshire. I held a Kahn sign at the Amherst polls from 6 AM to 1 pm today, and about 5% stopped to specifically tell me they'd voted for Rich, including a number of conservatives and liberals who are sick of the two party system and want us to be a viable third party. It appears that Rich's success is coming at the Democrats expense (despite the conventional wisdom). Paul Hodes exit poll results show him getting only 29% of the vote, while Charlie Bass, the perpetual rubber fish of NH politics, continues to repel the competition with a solid majority of the vote. This achievement is in keeping with our goal of turning the Democrats into a third party if they continue to attack us, rather than working with us on common issues. WE CAN ACHIEVE LIBERTY IN OUR LIFETIME, IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. Won't you join us? Come, live what you believe. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Tue Nov 2 18:58:20 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 19:58:20 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bin Laden Wants to Bankrupt U.S. In-Reply-To: <20041102184312.26202.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041102184312.26202.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <29A61E6F-2D01-11D9-99ED-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 2 Nov 2004, at 19:43, Mike Lorrey wrote: > He also said that states that voted for Bush would be attacked, those > that did not would be safe. Is it any wonder that ABC refused to > release the tape before the election? So the moral here is to be very careful about answering exit polls from guys with beards... best, patrick From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 2 19:05:33 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:05:33 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] optimism study In-Reply-To: <04ab01c4c0c8$3b68c290$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <20041102102626.34368.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> <04ab01c4c0c8$3b68c290$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <4187DA7D.8020705@pobox.com> Brett Paatsch wrote: > Al Brooks wrote: > >> A Dutch research involving 900 men & women aged 65-85 has concluded >> there is a 55% reduction in death by all causes by the subject being >> optimistic; a 23% reduction in death related to cardio-vascular >> conditions by being optimistic. > > The healthy side of the power of positive thinking has been recognized > for quite a while. Presumably that is part of the reason that placebos > work to some extent. I read somewhere recently that depressed or > pessimistic people make for more reliable eye witnesses at crime senses. Thou shalt not confuse correlation and causation. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:14:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:14:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] optimism study In-Reply-To: <4187DA7D.8020705@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041102191413.33617.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Brett Paatsch wrote: > > > > The healthy side of the power of positive thinking has been > recognized > > for quite a while. Presumably that is part of the reason that > placebos > > work to some extent. I read somewhere recently that depressed or > > pessimistic people make for more reliable eye witnesses at crime > senses. > > Thou shalt not confuse correlation and causation. Unless, of course, you are correlating a cynical attitude toward optimism with stress-factors.... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From samantha at objectent.com Tue Nov 2 19:19:30 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:19:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bin Laden Wants to Bankrupt U.S. In-Reply-To: <20041102184312.26202.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041102184312.26202.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1F1ECB0F-2D04-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> That's odd. I didn't see that in the offshore transcripts I read. I'll look again. -s On Nov 2, 2004, at 10:43 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > He also said that states that voted for Bush would be attacked, those > that did not would be safe. Is it any wonder that ABC refused to > release the tape before the election? > > > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > >> "So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy >> bled, and >> Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his >> future," bin >> Laden said.: >> >> http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/11/01/binladen.tape/index.html >> >> Olga >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat >> > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 2 20:34:48 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 12:34:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory Message-ID: <20041102203448.6F51C57E2A@finney.org> Some interesting mid-day election news. Drudge (www.drudgereport.com) is reporting, "Exit poll mania spread through media and campaign circles Tuesday afternoon after first wave of morning data showed Kerry competitive in key states.... National Election Pool -- representing six major news organization -- shows Kerry in striking distance -- with small lead -- in Florida and Ohio, sources tell DRUDGE... But early sample was based on a 59- 41 women to men ratio..." Drudge has a history of leaking exit poll data. Mainstream media voluntarily agrees to refrain from publishing these results until the polls have closed. Perhaps based on this new data, the betting markets have closed up. Tradesports, which had Bush at 55, is now at 50.1/50 for Bush/Kerry. IEM has now put Kerry ahead slightly, for the first time in months, at 50.5/51.2. Of course, to play broken record, all this really means is that the markets still see a coin flip. Hal From fortean1 at mindspring.com Tue Nov 2 21:15:38 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:15:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Limboids Message-ID: <4187F8FA.8A130B37@mindspring.com> From: Kyle King To: Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:32:12 -0600 Subject: Re: Limboids >From: Terry W. Colvin >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:56:22 -0700 >Subject: Limboids >Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. >Science Frontiers, No. 156, Nov-Dec, 2004, p. 2 >http://www.science-frontiers.com >Biology >Limboids >What, if anything, separates life from non-life? To be alive, it >is widely promulgated that such entities must metabolize, >reproduce, and evolve in the Darwinian sense. It is also >popularly believed that living matter is intrinsically different >from nonliving matter, although one no longer speaks of "the >breath of life" or of an "elan vital". Even so, knowing all we >now know, there does still 'seem' to be a fundamental gap >between life and non-life. Is this gap illusory or perhaps >filled by entities of which we are not yet aware? >(3) The metabolisms of limboids are too slow and their lifetimes >too long (millions of years) for us to discern them. In other >words, they 'seem' inanimate. (This potential attribute was >suggested by P. Gunkel.) >(4) The lifetimes of limboids may be too short for us to >register them. >(5) The limboids live outside the ranges of our eyes and >instruments. >(6) The limboids may incorporate considerable dark matter and be >hard to detect. Conceivably some manifestations of dark matter >could exist in recognized visible organisms and perform >organizing functions that "breathe life" into inanimate matter! >Scientists have not seriously looked for limboids, but they may >have caught fleeting glimpses of them, and "laid them back in >the closet," as Omar mused poetically. Hi Terry, Excellent post and kudos to Mr. Corliss for his generosity. This idea of what constitutes life has intrigued me for some time. I remember in geometry class, dimensions were illustrated this way... A point or line is one-dimensional A square or polygon is two-dimensional A cube or polyhedron is 3-dimensional What comes next cannot be drawn or modeled in 3 dimensions, so we can only create crude approximations or envision them in our minds. We know mathematically that the 4th-dimensional cube or tesseract exists, yet we have no ready means by which to show it. The usual description goes like, "a cube with a cube at each of its faces". This sounds good, and a "shadow" of it can be drawn or modeled with sticks and Styrofoam, but the implications of how such an object would behave in our perceivable 3- dimensional world are completely hidden, since that aspect cannot be modeled in anything less than 4 dimensions. In the context of this thread, it is interesting that as we say that we are alive, we explain this by describing the components... mostly water, some minerals, proteins, and some barely understood electro-chemical processes which seem to result in a persistent sense of "being". Also, an entire ecosystem of bacteria, virii, etc that either depend on the host, or on which the host depends, or both. In this context, I find the earth itself aptly described as a life -form. Mostly water, minerals, proteins, electro-chemical processes, beneficial and non-beneficial parasitic ecosystems, etc. Likewise, I find the idea that life could be related to the dark matter very compelling, and the strong sense that as we cannot accurately model in 3 dimensions what exists in 4, we very likely could have life all around us that we simply are not equipped to see, or detect. Is it possible that the dark matter is connective tissue for a life-form which is as vast as the universe itself? I don't mean to sound new-age, and I'm obviously not the first to propose the living earth idea, but is it possible that the universe is alive, and that multi-timelines are an evolved process of survival, and that the planets are merely organelles or sensors, populated by smaller and smaller ecosystems? Is it possible that dimensions are not finite, but a product of natural selection on a cosmic scale? Is it possible that this evolution includes the rise and fall of life forms in all dimensions and on all timelines? If the dark matter is truly the connective tissue of the cosmic "dude", is it possible that clairvoyance, UFOs, abductions, etc could all have at their root the natural mutations of this cosmic dude, or by the inadvertent overlapping of dimensions, and the crossing of timelines either through design or misadventure? If we could find the means to communicate in a direct and universally comprehendible way, we might tap into knowledge of which we cannot even imagine. We might also find an answer to Prophecy, ESP, UFOs, abduction, etc. We may evolve right along with the cosmic dude. Could the "fleeting glimpses" of dark matter mentioned in the article be analogous to the similar fleeting glimpses of UFOs, aliens, and other anomalous things in our collective experience? Limboids could be the very fabric of reality. I guess we'd be some form of mutation. The discomforting question is whether we represent an evolutionarily beneficial mutation, or a cancer. Great thought-provoking post. Thank you. Kyle -- "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 Nov 2 21:18:06 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:18:06 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Limboids Message-ID: <4187F98E.B125C154@mindspring.com> From: Rich Reynolds To: ufoupdates at virtuallystrange.net Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 22:38:12 -0500 Subject: Re: Limboids >From: Kyle King >To: >Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:32:12 -0600 >Subject: Re: Limboids >>From: Terry W. Colvin >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >>Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:56:22 -0700 >>Subject: Limboids >>Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. >>Science Frontiers, No. 156, Nov-Dec, 2004, p. 2 >>http://www.science-frontiers.com >>Biology >>Limboids >Great thought-provoking post. Thank you. And without invoking quantum mechanics/theory, what about Teilhard de Chardin or Lecomte du Nouy (even Spengler) where the biology of the universe is intermingled with the mystical (dare I say spiritual), and a kind of theology explains life in ways that can account for things seen in the sky or paranormally? The movie "The Incredible Shrinking Man" provided a view of Kyle King's fabric of reality, but it was the Pre-Socratic Greek philosophers and the great Schopenhauer that formulated the concept of life infusing all things, even rocks. I would go far afield to mention more here, but this web-site might enlighten further Kyle and those who find that there are more things in heaven and earth than dreamt..... < http://www.icpd.org/science/future.html > Rich Reynolds -- "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 Nov 2 21:20:41 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:20:41 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Limboids Message-ID: <4187FA29.78512E7E@mindspring.com> From: Bruce Maccabee To: Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 23:46:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Limboids >From: Terry W. Colvin >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto >Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:56:22 -0700 >Subject: Limboids >Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. >Science Frontiers, No. 156, Nov-Dec, 2004, p. 2 >http://www.science-frontiers.com >Biology >Limboids >What, if anything, separates life from non-life? To be alive, it i>s widely promulgated that such entities must metabolize, >reproduce, and evolve in the Darwinian sense. It is also >popularly believed that living matter is intrinsically different >from nonliving matter, although one no longer speaks of "the >breath of life" or of an "elan vital". Even so, knowing all we >now know, there does still 'seem' to be a fundamental gap >between life and non-life. Is this gap illusory or perhaps >filled by entities of which we are not yet aware? >Comments. But humans and their instruments do not observe >everything. There may be an unappreciated limbo separating life >from non-life. This limbo could be occupied by entities that >we'll call "limboids." Science may not yet recognize this >hypothesized realm of the natural world because: >(1) The limboids are too small - smaller than the controversial >nonolife and still inaccessible to today's science. >(2) The limboids are too large for us to grasp intellectually or >instrument-wise. >F. Hoyle's fictional "black cloud" would be an example. >(3) The metabolisms of limboids are too slow and their lifetimes >too long (millions of years) for us to discern them. In other >words, they 'seem' inanimate. (This potential attribute was >suggested by P. Gunkel.) >(4) The lifetimes of limboids may be too short for us to >register them. >(5) The limboids live outside the ranges of our eyes and >instruments. >(6) The limboids may incorporate considerable dark matter and be >hard to detect. Conceivably some manifestations of dark matter >could exist in recognized visible organisms and perform >organizing functions that "breathe life" into inanimate matter! These speculations as to why "limboids" have not been discovered parallel the comments I have made regarding the "search for the intellecton", where the intellecton is defined as the minimum- sized (whatever that "size" means) element of inteligence or intellect. For example, I ask the question, what if an electron is intelligent? Would we ever know? Only by its actions I suppose. But what if it did something intelligent in a femtosecond. It's action would be over before we could measure it. What is an electron only did an intelligent act over a period of millions of seconds. Would it be so slow as to be undetectable? These comments wouldn't apply just to an electron, but to any subunit (including complex combinations of atoms) that might exhibit elementary intelligence. Is a protein that changes shape "intelligent"? For further amusing details see: < http://brumac.8k.com/AbductionInLife/INTELLECTON.html > -- "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 rhanson at gmu.edu Tue Nov 2 21:37:08 2004 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:37:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <20041102203448.6F51C57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041102203448.6F51C57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102162632.01de4520@mail.gmu.edu> At 03:34 PM 11/2/2004, you wrote: >Perhaps based on this new data, the betting markets have closed up. >Tradesports, which had Bush at 55, is now at 50.1/50 for Bush/Kerry. >IEM has now put Kerry ahead slightly, for the first time in months, >at 50.5/51.2. Of course, to play broken record, all this really means >is that the markets still see a coin flip. Markets are now almost 2:1 in favor of Kerry. IEM is about 67%, while Tradesports is at 63%. You heard it here first. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 2 21:48:32 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 13:48:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Limboids Message-ID: <20041102214832.D3F8957E2A@finney.org> Another idea along these lines is the suggestion that earlier eras of our universe could have had life of a form which could not exist today. In the post-Big-Bang time frame the universe went through a number of transitions even before stars began to form. Of course, by our standards that time was incredibly hot, and chaotic, and violent, and it's hard to see how any stable structures could form. But "stable" is a relative term and even a very short-lived structure might be considered stable by the standards of the era. Similarly in the far future, when matter has decayed and all that is left are black holes, photons and the occasional electron and positron, maybe it is conceivable that life could exist, incredibly huge and incredibly slow, based on extremely large scale patterns and interactions built of these elements. The idea of super-fast microscopic life has been explored in a couple of science fiction stories I have read. One is Dragon's Egg by Robert Forward, where condensed-matter beings evolve on the surface of a neutron star. They develop a civilization and even visit Earth but are not detected there. They eventually have a kind of Singularity that takes them out of the picture. Another is Greg Bear's Blood Music, where genetic engineering creates intelligent cells. They begin to explore the world and take over Earth in a matter of days, before going through a Singularity and vanishing. When you think of how human life has transformed the world in the blink of an eye by geological time standards, it's kind of scary to think of another form of life springing up that is comparably faster than we are. No doubt it's quite unlikely to happen just at this moment, though. Hal From rhanson at gmu.edu Tue Nov 2 22:33:30 2004 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:33:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 2 22:49:31 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:49:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: <41880EFB.7080405@pobox.com> Robin Hanson wrote: > Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win. [Eliezer] Whoa! Robin Hanson says that the markets are breaking 2:1 in favor of Kerry. IEM at 67%, Tradesports at 63%. Maybe they're not worth rotten petunias for predicting the outcome a month in advance, but they might be good indicators of who's winning on Election Day - we'll have to see. "Quick, dump your Bush shares! The markets must know something!" Bandwagon in the markets is probably one of the most pronounced of all, hehe. [Eliezer] True. yeah, those markets are reactionary like the early exit polling that showed Kerry leading with totally non-representative internals sent the markets plummeting including NYSE/NASDAQ [Eliezer] hold on, non-representative intervals don't change the Bayesian interpretation of the data - if it swings wider than expected given the bias, that's evidence *internals* [Eliezer] ok, what's non-representative internals mean? meaning that the sample population was not representative in this case 60/40 women/men among other things I've seen some analysis that normalized the internals on those exit polls which gave Bush +1-3, depending on the method Exit polls are pretty bad anyway not a good track record in many cases (your favorite is Kerry?) My favorite is Cthulhu Or maybe Kodos [Eliezer] heh, I was just about to say Kodos -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Nov 3 00:16:15 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:16:15 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Limboids Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EDB0@tpeex05> It's quite reasonable for me if both the biggest macroscopic level (universe itself) and the smallest microscopic level (subatomic) exhibit some similar basic features (such as consciousness or life). I think this is a kind of correspondence principle. Thanks. Walter. --------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fortean1 at mindspring.com Wed Nov 3 00:22:22 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:22:22 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] 1908 asteroid References: <20041102183449.24742.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <418824BE.B00741EB@mindspring.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Al Brooks wrote: > > > this link theorizes the 1908 asteroid explosion over > > Siberia was > > approximately 500 kilotons, i.e. equivalent to large > > hydrogen bomb. The article reassuringly states that > > such an asteroid 'impact', about six kilometers up in > > the atmosphere, might occur over a populated area > > every 3600 years. > > http://www.psi.edu/projects/siberia/siberia.html > > I'm wondering if they've counted a similar but smaller bolide event in > the 19th century in the midwestern US. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey Mike, Details please of this bolide. Below is another bolide event. Terry Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss. Science Frontiers, No. 156, Nov-Dec, 2004, p. 3 < http://www.science-frontiers.com > GEOLOGY The Vitim bolide event On the night of September 24-25, 2002, an energetic bolide streaked across the Irkutsk region of Russia near the Vitim River. The event was reminiscent of the more powerful 1908 Tunguska event. Consequently, Russian scientists quickly began gathering testimony and dispatching ground expeditions. Although we are interested mainly in the havoc wrought at the impact site, it is also interesting to review some of the curious phenomena accompanying the bolide's passage. * Luminous displays lasting several days in the direction of the presumed impact site. These were called "glow rays" by the inhabitants. * All-sky brightening even in clouded areas. * Filament lamps glowed during the bolide's passage. * St. Elmos fire emanated from the tops of fence poles. * Background radiation increased 60 kilometers from the impact site. * Afterwards, the temporary worsening of the health of inhabitants of the area. * The snow and water became bitter (!). * Tritium concentration in the region's water increased. Photos taken at the presumed impact site remind one not only of ground zero of the Tunguska event but also of recently blasted sites in remote Brazil (1930) and elsewhere. (See *Science Frontiers II* for collected descriptions.) (Ol'khovatov, Andrei; "Vitim Bolide Event," *Meteorite*, 10:30, February 2004. Comments. It is curious that: (1) That there are so many apparent recent impact events. (2) That said events always seem to occur in remote, hard-to-access areas. (3) That well-defined craters are rarely found. Instead there is devastated vegetation with little ground disturbance. (4) That meteoritic material is also rarely found. [Science Frontiers is a bimonthly collection of digests of scientific anomalies in the current literature. Published by the Sourcebook Project, P.O. Box 107, Glen Arm, MD 21057. Annual subscription: $8.00.] -- "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 gmail.com Wed Nov 3 00:51:41 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 16:51:41 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102162632.01de4520@mail.gmu.edu> References: <20041102203448.6F51C57E2A@finney.org> <6.1.2.0.2.20041102162632.01de4520@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: <7a32170504110216514272d21e@mail.gmail.com> Here's another site for those waiting with baited breath: http://news.yahoo.com/electionresults By the way, does anybody happen to know any election voodoo curses that might help sway things? I'm getting desperate. Thanks Zero From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 02:37:31 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 18:37:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] good riddance to bad trash Message-ID: <20041103023731.6596.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> At least that religious lunatic Alan Keyes is defeated by Obama in Illinois. Good riddance to Keyes, may he never run for office again. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Wed Nov 3 03:02:22 2004 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 22:02:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Now Bush to win 1.5:1 Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102215544.01ded930@mail.gmu.edu> At 5:33 EST I wrote: >Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win. Tradesports now gives Bush a 62% of winning. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 3 03:24:04 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 21:24:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Democracy in action! Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102211840.01aa8640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Yahoo's data as of now: Candidate Electoral States Won Vote % Votes Bush 195 22 52% 21,533,444 Kerry 112 11 47% 19,684,284 So it take Kerry 175,753 votes to get an electoral vote, and Bush 110,428. Democracy in action! From sjvans at ameritech.net Wed Nov 3 03:40:55 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 19:40:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Democracy in action! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102211840.01aa8640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041103034055.15221.qmail@web81204.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > So it take Kerry 175,753 votes to get an electoral > vote, and Bush 110,428. > > Democracy in action! Yep, if everyone stopped counting now. But those are actual popular vote counts so far, but projected electoral votes. It will be very different when it's all over. From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 3 03:42:19 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 21:42:19 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Democracy in action! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102211840.01aa8640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102211840.01aa8640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102213847.01a34ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:24 PM 11/2/2004 -0600, I wrote: >So it take[s] Kerry 175,753 votes to get an electoral vote, and Bush 110,428. Before anyone gets hysterical and explains the principle of majority rule to me: I do understand that in principle one candidate could attract very nearly half the vote yet if the electorate were sufficiently homogenous might still gain *zero* electoral votes. But I reckon a proportional representation might work with less resentment from the excluded near-majority. Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 03:59:22 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 19:59:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] religious liberty In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102213847.01a34ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041103035922.92988.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Religious organizations ought to keep their tax exempt status; they should have complete liberty to refuse medical treatment for religious reasons; they should have thorough freedom to worship-- if they want to dress up as ballerinas to church on Sunday morning and spray each other with whipped cream, that is fine. However I draw the line at them running for public office. Naturally they have the right to run for office, but anyone opposing them can do whatever they wish to maneuver against them, keep them out of office & vote them out if they are incumbents. To hell with them. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zero.powers at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 06:35:35 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:35:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] religious liberty In-Reply-To: <20041103035922.92988.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102213847.01a34ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041103035922.92988.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7a32170504110222353420105d@mail.gmail.com> Uh, I'm no apologist for religious people. But, what are you saying? "Religious organizations" don't run for office. Religious people do. Personally I would be disinclined to vote for a Fairy Tale Believer, all other things being equal. But the things you advocate for people running against FTB's are applicable to any political candidate. Democrats do whatever they can to maneuver against Republicans, keep them out of office and vote them out if they are incumbents, and vice versa. And that's as it should be. On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 19:59:22 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > > > > > Religious organizations ought to keep their tax exempt status; they should > have complete liberty to refuse medical treatment for religious reasons; > they should have thorough freedom to worship-- if they want to dress up as > ballerinas to church on Sunday morning and spray each other with whipped > cream, that is fine. However I draw the line at them running for public > office. Naturally they have the right to run for office, but anyone opposing > them can do whatever they wish to maneuver against them, keep them out of > office & vote them out if they are incumbents. To hell with them. > > ________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From zero.powers at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 06:42:10 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:42:10 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: <7a32170504110222422cbcbc91@mail.gmail.com> At least according to Matt Drudge. Looks like Ohio is going red. Anybody know where I can get a prescription for 4 years worth of Prozac? Zero From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 06:53:56 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 07:53:56 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <7a32170504110222422cbcbc91@mail.gmail.com> References: <7a32170504110222422cbcbc91@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204110222533d04d5a4@mail.gmail.com> Not in the US unfortunately. They are going to outlaw it since it is against natural law and interferes with God's plan for man. You can, of course, come to Europe to buy it. But in Europe we allow gay marriage, we allow stem cell research, we have a secular society, we have removed the word "God" from our Constitution, and we have recently kicked out a proposed Commissioner because he is a fundamentalist religious nut. Are you sure they will let you travel here? G. On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:42:10 -0800, Zero Powers wrote: > At least according to Matt Drudge. Looks like Ohio is going red. > Anybody know where I can get a prescription for 4 years worth of > Prozac? > > Zero From samantha at objectent.com Wed Nov 3 08:50:15 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 00:50:15 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <9D05F9DB-27F2-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <9D05F9DB-27F2-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <6154F0D4-2D75-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Hi Arthur, For now I am more interested in learning what I can about how it is to be there and your opinion of whether there is a fit for me at Google. Shibani, Emmett and I are all on a T-90 at Vignette. They will keep us working 90 days beyond SF office termination for transition of knowledge and work. I just heard today that the majority of the work will be finishing full clustering. Clustering is near and dear to me despite being done for what is now all too obviously a sucky company. I am also working to get the ORM open sourced as it is one large important bit that they do not believe they can support themselves. There are a lot of other projects that I can and have thought up based on the ORM. Open sourcing it would insure Vignette it would continue to maintained, viable and evolving indefinitely. They lose a bit of IP but the IP isn't that huge as far as translating to real directly salable value. I have a fuller argument than I will go into here. Those I have talked to about it are all supportive although the more highly placed ones doubt Vignette will actually go for it. Here's hoping. So I am still here until Feb. 12. At that time I collect an additional 11 weeks of pay as severance plus sweetener for sticking around. During that time I will discipline myself to give Vignette proper only 40 hrs/wk of my time. For me this is very hard. The rest of the time will be spent on attempting to form a business possibly involving consulting but preferably (and certainly eventually) fielding a product based on one or more of my ideas. I am drawn toward producing a hosted product. If my evaluation of progress and prospects around mid-January doesn't look promising I will consider applying then. One thing at Google I am particular curious about is how the 1 day a week to work on your own project works out. Can it be anything you wish within some limits? What sort of limits? What kind of vetting is needed? How easy is it to use Google tools and resources to put a project up on Googles web or on some part of their servers like Orkut? Some of the things I would like to see built might be built fielded much more widely if I had space/tools/resources within Google to help spread it broadly. Otherwise I will just have to create something cool the hard way and have Google gobble it up after it has proven itself. :-) - samantha On Oct 27, 2004, at 1:31 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > On Oct 23, 2004, at 7:41 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > >> Firstly, they are not MY ultra-socialists. >> >> Secondly, I find your attitudes here rather wanting. If extropians are >> such big supporters of futures markets being the best predictors of >> facts and future events, and futures markets behave according to price >> signals created by mass consensus, and mass consensus is that Iraq was >> involved in al Qaeda, isn't that more true than the flawed >> intelligence >> agencies conclusions that totally missed the events leading up to 911? >> > > Whoa. You believe that mass consensus created by the administration, > in large from whole cloth, means that that mass consensus determines > what is actually true? Surely you are joking. > > The administration itself severely restricted some of those agencies > from doing their jobs regarding terrorism before 9/11. Do you think > those agencies and everything they say should be discredited because > they were not allowed to do their jobs? > > I am not capable of believing that you believe what you are writing. > Or maybe I lack a compatible sense of humor. > > - samantha > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 3 09:49:36 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:49:36 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: On 2 Nov 2004, at 23:33, Robin Hanson wrote: > Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win. This seems to suggest that markets don't necessarily make good short term predictions. best, patrick From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 3 10:17:43 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:17:43 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the future. I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly separated the American people from their government, and expected the Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in the world. On a more personal note, as a holder of a US and Latvian passport, the shift in these last years is that I only use my US passport when I travel to the US, because the "baggage" of the US government is not something I like to carry in my dealings with people in my everyday life. I never had a good answer when someone wants to know where I am "from" (Hawaii, Wisconsin, California, Colorado, Latvia, Germany, Greece all fit to some degree, but California the most). Unfortunately my Italian paperwork lists US as my citizenship, so I'm illegal for the last year, with an expired permit-of-stay, grouped with Australians, New Zealanders, Canadians, Japanese, Africans, South Americans.... (the nonEU world) who are in a quagmire in the collapsed Italian Bossi-Fini immigration law. Therefore, given the US political situation now, I will begin to shift my Italian bureaucratic papers to my Latvian citizenship (even with Italy's new restrictions on the new EU member countries), since I think that holding a US passport will mostly hurt me now. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From scerir at libero.it Wed Nov 3 10:35:26 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:35:26 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... References: Message-ID: <000401c4c190$d5bc5f00$aebf1b97@administxl09yj> [Amara] > I am so disappointed. > How could Bush win the popular vote? Kerry leads overseas. http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/15/world_poll/index_np.html Is this one of the reasons? s. From sentience at pobox.com Wed Nov 3 10:30:43 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 05:30:43 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: <4188B353.5090906@pobox.com> Robin Hanson wrote: > Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win. Today's experiment... failed. It disturbs me that with millions of dollars to spend and all the sophisticated apparatus of statistics, we can't predict the outcome of an election. It makes one wonder about the latest study showing that broccoli does (not) prevent cancer. At least with elections, you find out when you're wrong. I wonder how much marginal science is similarly bogus. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Wed Nov 3 10:40:06 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:40:06 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: good trick In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041103104001.CBCEECE5F@vscan02.westnet.com.au> www.dslextreme.com/users/exstatica/psychic.swf Good trick....based on a simple idea, but nicely put together... I think it's been around for a while, so apologies if it's redundant. I'm looking for things to distract me from the US election results.. Sean From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 10:45:11 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:45:11 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:17:43 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the future. > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > the world. > Bush won the popular vote in the face of unremitting opposition from virtually all the liberal, intellectual writers and artists. All the opinion columns, media sources, leader writers, etc. in US and around the world have been almost unanimous in opposition to Bush. Why? I suspect that a lot of the Bush support comes from people who never read the writers output. I think they are writing for each other, mutual support and back-scratching. One theory is that the liberal intellectuals (especially European, but world-wide) have been lost for years since the failure of socialism and they have now united in anti-Americanism. Kerry has been trying to say that it is not really anti-Americanism, that it is anti-Bushism. (Vote for me and the world will love the US again!) But this is hardly believable. If you accept the 'War on Terror' then regardless of who is President, the anti-Americanism will continue. And Bush is better at the 'War on Terror' than Kerry would have been. BillK From rhanson at gmu.edu Wed Nov 3 11:53:47 2004 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 06:53:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Now Bush to win 1.5:1 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102215544.01ded930@mail.gmu.edu> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102215544.01ded930@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041103064342.01f4b9c8@mail.gmu.edu> Well the betting markets made a big reversal last night, from up to almost 75% in favor of Kerry, now down to a 5% chance for Kerry (even that looks too high, so I finally made my first election bet). Of course we should expect this sort of reversal at least 1/4 of the time, so one can't be too stunned. But this does at least raise a small suspicion that theses markets were too volatile due to over-confidence. However, one case won't really show this - we have to look at statistics over many events to see if there's a trend. In the end the important question is comparative - are there any other institutions that on average do better? So far direction comparisons between markets and other institutions in the field have favored markets. And real and play money have come out about the same. But the jury is still out. Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 12:38:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 04:38:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Looks like a Kerry victory In-Reply-To: <7a32170504110216514272d21e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041103123856.23665.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Zero Powers wrote: > Here's another site for those waiting with baited breath: > > http://news.yahoo.com/electionresults > > By the way, does anybody happen to know any election voodoo curses > that might help sway things? I'm getting desperate. Looks like a Bush victory. Oops..... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Wed Nov 3 12:45:45 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 23:45:45 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Now Bush to win 1.5:1 References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102215544.01ded930@mail.gmu.edu> <6.1.2.0.2.20041103064342.01f4b9c8@mail.gmu.edu> Message-ID: <062001c4c1a3$095e1fd0$b8232dcb@homepc> Robin Hanson wrote: > Well the betting markets made a big reversal last night, from up > to almost 75% in favor of Kerry, now down to a 5% chance for > Kerry (even that looks too high, so I finally made my first election > bet). > > Of course we should expect this sort of reversal at least 1/4 of > the time, so one can't be too stunned. But this does at least raise > a small suspicion that theses markets were too volatile due to > over-confidence. I don't follow. I don't get how you are thinking of "over-confidence". If you are speaking with your economists hat on could you please elaborate a bit. I'd have thought that efficient markets would be indifferent to "over-confidence". How could "over-confidence" have produced too much volatility? > However, one case won't really show this - we have to look at > statistics over many events to see if there's a trend. > > In the end the important question is comparative - are there any > other institutions that on average do better? So far direction > comparisons between markets and other institutions in the field > have favored markets. And real and play money have come > out about the same. But the jury is still out. I honestly 'reckoned' at the time that I posted that Kerry was more likely to win. (I don't think so now). I didn't bet real money myself. I wrote at the time another email that I kept but didn't post that my reckoning at the time when I thought Kerry would win because I wanted to see if there was meritorious method in it afterwards regardless of whether or not Kerry won. There's no value for me in being right by just luck. Anyway, I have long thought that real money would make me and others a lot more serious about our predictions. I'd be very interested in a finding to the contrary as its SO counter-intuitive. Do you really think real and play money have come out the same? That would be extraordinary I think. Brett Paatsch From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:05:27 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 05:05:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Democracy in action! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102211840.01aa8640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041103130527.89207.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > Yahoo's data as of now: > > Candidate Electoral States Won Vote % Votes > > Bush 195 22 52% 21,533,444 > Kerry 112 11 47% 19,684,284 > > So it take Kerry 175,753 votes to get an electoral vote, and Bush > 110,428. That is a really interesting way of putting it Damien. I believe you've hit upon a good metric of measuring race winners: how much they have to pay for a vote, how many votes buy an electoral vote, and how much money the candidates raise and spend.... it then becomes purely a microeconomic equation that any college freshman could figure out. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:08:19 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 05:08:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] religious liberty In-Reply-To: <20041103035922.92988.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103130819.28104.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > > Religious organizations ought to keep their tax exempt status; they > should have complete liberty to refuse medical treatment for > religious reasons; they should have thorough freedom to worship-- if > they want to dress up as ballerinas to church on Sunday morning and > spray each other with whipped cream, that is fine. However I draw the > line at them running for public office. Naturally they have the right > to run for office, but anyone opposing them can do whatever they wish > to maneuver against them, keep them out of office & vote them out if > they are incumbents. To hell with them. At 'them' who? Priests? Or just people with religious beliefs? Don't you realize that your atheism therefore disqualifies you, because it is as much a superstition as those that worship guys who hang from trees? An opponent is of course free to campaign however he or she wants. What the public thinks of their tactics, though, will determine the election. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:26:36 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 05:26:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Now Bush to win 1.5:1 In-Reply-To: <062001c4c1a3$095e1fd0$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041103132636.84831.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > > I don't follow. I don't get how you are thinking of > "over-confidence". > If you are speaking with your economists hat on could you please > elaborate a bit. > > I'd have thought that efficient markets would be indifferent to > "over-confidence". > > How could "over-confidence" have produced too much volatility? a) Some players in the markets cared more about creating public perception that could create PR synergies rather than whether or not the lost money. If you still have $20 million in your campaign chest on election morning, are you going to buy more ads, or try to tweak the markets to convince people that you are the winner? b) Coin tosses are the most volatile markets around, you are either winning or losing. c) Polls being produced by so many sources, of such varying quality and accuracy, and in many cases, commissioned to try to invent PR synergies, left the bayesian market clouded by FUD, produced by disinformation and imprecise measurement. When you are trying to guage a winner by trying to decide who is lying less, you have a very volatile market. > > I honestly 'reckoned' at the time that I posted that Kerry was more > likely to win. (I don't think so now). > > I didn't bet real money myself. I wrote at the time another email > that I kept but didn't post that my reckoning at the time when I > thought > Kerry would win because I wanted to see if there was meritorious > method in it afterwards regardless of whether or not Kerry won. > There's no value for me in being right by just luck. > > Anyway, I have long thought that real money would make me and > others a lot more serious about our predictions. I'd be very > interested > in a finding to the contrary as its SO counter-intuitive. > > Do you really think real and play money have come out the same? > That would be extraordinary I think. Depends on how much you bet. A gentlemans bet of $10 isn't going to mean anything. If you bet $1000 I think you'd put a lot more rational analysis into making a good decision. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From rhanson at gmu.edu Wed Nov 3 13:42:54 2004 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 08:42:54 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Now Bush to win 1.5:1 In-Reply-To: <062001c4c1a3$095e1fd0$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102215544.01ded930@mail.gmu.edu> <6.1.2.0.2.20041103064342.01f4b9c8@mail.gmu.edu> <062001c4c1a3$095e1fd0$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041103083445.02e35af8@mail.gmu.edu> At 07:45 AM 11/3/2004, you wrote: >>Well the betting markets made a big reversal last night, ... this does at >>least raise >>a small suspicion that theses markets were too volatile due to >>over-confidence. > >I don't follow. I don't get how you are thinking of "over-confidence". >I'd have thought that efficient markets would be indifferent to >"over-confidence". >How could "over-confidence" have produced too much volatility? If when the true probability is 20% you think 10%, when the true chance is 40% you think 20%, when the true chance is 60% you think 80%, and when the true chance is 80% you think 90%, you are overconfident. If the true chances followed a rational random walk, then your overconfidence chances would be too volatile. If the prices reflected overconfident beliefs they would make a buy low sell high strategy profitable. >Anyway, I have long thought that real money would make me and >others a lot more serious about our predictions. I'd be very interested >in a finding to the contrary as its SO counter-intuitive. >Do you really think real and play money have come out the same? >That would be extraordinary I think. The few studies that have been done so far have found that. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prediction Markets: Does Money Matter? Electronic Markets September 2004, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 243-251(9) Emile Servan-Schreiber[1]; Justin Wolfers[2]; David M. Pennock[3]; Brian Galebach[4] The accuracy of prediction markets has been documented both for markets based on real money and those based on play money. To test how much extra accuracy can be obtained by using real money versus play money, we set up a real-world online experiment pitting the predictions of TradeSports.com (real money) against those of NewsFutures.com (play money) regarding American Football outcomes during the 2003-2004 NFL season. As expected, both types of markets exhibited significant predictive powers, and remarkable performance compared to individual humans. But, perhaps surprisingly, the play-money markets performed as well as the real-money markets. We speculate that this result reflects two opposing forces: real-money markets may better motivate information discovery while play-money markets may yield more efficient information aggregation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:54:18 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 05:54:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041103135418.89804.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. > Also, > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the > future. I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will > be much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many > in the world. I suspect most of your friends would fall into that class of people that are referred to as "the chattering class". There are a lot of New Yorkers, for example, who don't know a single Republican personally. They create these insular lives where they only associate with individuals in the media, the arts, or academia, who reflect their own views, so no fact checking occurs. Enclave consensus can significantly differ from reality if no rational intelligence gathering occurs. > since I think that holding a US passport will mostly hurt me now. Europe thought the same of Reagan, and were rewarded with the collapse of the iron curtain. They should be so fortunate again. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 14:18:19 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:18:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103135418.89804.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103135418.89804.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204110306182914b25e@mail.gmail.com> Mike, Europe never thought the same of Reagan. Most Europeans, myself included, think that all things considered he was a good president. What we don't like of Bush is the fact that he wants to take the US and the world back to the middle ages concerning the respective roles of reason and religion in public affairs. I follw with interest your Free State project, and wish you all the best. But it will not be in a fundamentalist theocratic US that you will achieve it. More likely, the Iranian-style theocracy that the US is becoming will declare Holy War against the Free State: you see, there is the risk that the Free State will pass laws too favorable to same sex marriage and stem cell research. You call yourself a Libertarian. I don't, but I always appreciated many elements of Libertarian thinking. In particular, "Live and Let Live". You can do whatever you like in your house, and I will not complain as long as you don't objectively harm me. With the caveat that "objective harm" does NOT include sleeping with a same sex partner under your own roof. That is, if I understand libertarianism, just your business and not mine. Now tell me: do you see much libertarianism in the policies advocated by the Bush administration? Have to agree on the rest of your note, some reality check is always useful. G. On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 05:54:18 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > --- Amara Graps wrote: > > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. > > Also, > > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the > > future. I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will > > be much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of > many > > in the world. > > I suspect most of your friends would fall into that class of people > that are referred to as "the chattering class". There are a lot of New > Yorkers, for example, who don't know a single Republican personally. > They create these insular lives where they only associate with > individuals in the media, the arts, or academia, who reflect their own > views, so no fact checking occurs. Enclave consensus can significantly > differ from reality if no rational intelligence gathering occurs. > > > > since I think that holding a US passport will mostly hurt me now. > > Europe thought the same of Reagan, and were rewarded with the collapse > of the iron curtain. They should be so fortunate again. From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 3 14:21:00 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:21:00 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: to Mike Lorrey's peculiar response.. >I suspect most of your friends would fall into that class of people >that are referred to as "the chattering class". Very well educated ? (worldwide, including Americans) Perhaps it is true that they don't know many 'Republicans' (whatever that is). It's universally true that my friends and colleagues (worldwide) don't like the actions of Bush administration. 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/ ******************************************************************** "Stupidity got us into this mess, so why can't it get us out?" -- Will Rogers From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 14:22:54 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:22:54 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] California backs stem cell move In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <470a3c5204110306222b931261@mail.gmail.com> California looks set to become the first US state to provide funding for stem cell research, medical experiments that involve human embryos. Early returns from a ballot in the state show voters have approved $3bn-worth of funding to last 10 years. President Bush and religious groups had strongly opposed stem cell research on moral grounds. Supporters of the research said it could help find cures for deadly diseases and spinal cord injuries. Early counts of voting in the ballot, held in conjunction with the presidential vote and known as proposition 71, showed it set to be approved by 60% of California voters. Supporters said the ballot's approval was needed to get around funding restrictions imposed by the Bush administration. The campaign won the backing of California's Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, despite the opposition of the president and the Republican party. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3977347.stm From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 14:32:01 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:32:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: It would be nice if Europe would allow some sort of reverse immigration from the US. I'd love to move to europe for a few years, but getting a work permit is next to impossible. What EU countries allow gay marriage? That's news I hadn't heard yet. BAL >From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 >To: Zero Powers , ExI chat list > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 07:53:56 +0100 > >Not in the US unfortunately. They are going to outlaw it since it is >against natural law and interferes with God's plan for man. >You can, of course, come to Europe to buy it. But in Europe we allow >gay marriage, we allow stem cell research, we have a secular society, >we have removed the word "God" from our Constitution, and we have >recently kicked out a proposed Commissioner because he is a >fundamentalist religious nut. >Are you sure they will let you travel here? >G. > >On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:42:10 -0800, Zero Powers >wrote: > > At least according to Matt Drudge. Looks like Ohio is going red. > > Anybody know where I can get a prescription for 4 years worth of > > Prozac? > > > > Zero >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 14:35:35 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:35:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: It seemed like a lot of anti-Bush sentiment prior to the election was by dems, for dems. Take F9/11 for example: anti-Bushers loved it, pro-Bushers hated it. I don't know anyone who changed their opinion because of it. I now suspect that stuff like Fareinheight 9/11 galvanized republicans to vote to counteract perceived increase in democrats voting. What puzzles me is how so many first time voters went for Bush. I expected all of the increase in new voter registrations to be anti-Bush. Wierd. BAL >From: BillK >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:45:11 +0000 > >On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:17:43 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the >future. > > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > > the world. > > > >Bush won the popular vote in the face of unremitting opposition from >virtually all the liberal, intellectual writers and artists. All the >opinion columns, media sources, leader writers, etc. in US and around >the world have been almost unanimous in opposition to Bush. > >Why? I suspect that a lot of the Bush support comes from people who >never read the writers output. I think they are writing for each >other, mutual support and back-scratching. > >One theory is that the liberal intellectuals (especially European, but >world-wide) have been lost for years since the failure of socialism >and they have now united in anti-Americanism. Kerry has been trying to >say that it is not really anti-Americanism, that it is anti-Bushism. >(Vote for me and the world will love the US again!) But this is hardly >believable. > >If you accept the 'War on Terror' then regardless of who is President, >the anti-Americanism will continue. And Bush is better at the 'War on >Terror' than Kerry would have been. > >BillK >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 3 14:42:08 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:42:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: Brian Lee brian_a_lee at hotmail.com : >I'd love to move to europe for a few years, but getting a work >permit is next to impossible. Did you try? Amara From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 14:43:49 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:43:49 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <470a3c520411030643347dcc61@mail.gmail.com> A few Nordic countries allow gay marriage since years and many others, including Spain (Viva Zapatero!) will pass appropriate laws soon. Yes you can come back and we will welcome you with open arms (there are workarounds for the work permit thing you know). On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:32:01 -0500, Brian Lee wrote: > It would be nice if Europe would allow some sort of reverse immigration from > the US. I'd love to move to europe for a few years, but getting a work > permit is next to impossible. > > What EU countries allow gay marriage? That's news I hadn't heard yet. > > BAL > > >From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 > >To: Zero Powers , ExI chat list > > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 07:53:56 +0100 > > > >Not in the US unfortunately. They are going to outlaw it since it is > >against natural law and interferes with God's plan for man. > >You can, of course, come to Europe to buy it. But in Europe we allow > >gay marriage, we allow stem cell research, we have a secular society, > >we have removed the word "God" from our Constitution, and we have > >recently kicked out a proposed Commissioner because he is a > >fundamentalist religious nut. > >Are you sure they will let you travel here? > >G. > > > >On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:42:10 -0800, Zero Powers > >wrote: > > > At least according to Matt Drudge. Looks like Ohio is going red. > > > Anybody know where I can get a prescription for 4 years worth of > > > Prozac? > > > > > > Zero > > > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From etcs.ret at verizon.net Wed Nov 3 15:29:09 2004 From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:29:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Futures markets volatility In-Reply-To: <200411031248.iA3Cm0008070@tick.javien.com> References: <200411031248.iA3Cm0008070@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <1vsho09tf1g7emgr05gqu4dck6bsjntlv9@4ax.com> In extropy-chat Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4 >------------------------------ Robin Hanson and Brett Paatsch: >> But this does at least raise >> a small suspicion that theses markets were too volatile due to >> over-confidence. > >I don't follow. I don't get how you are thinking of "over-confidence". >If you are speaking with your economists hat on could you please >elaborate a bit. > >I'd have thought that efficient markets would be indifferent to >"over-confidence". > >How could "over-confidence" have produced too much volatility? > > >> However, one case won't really show this - we have to look at >> statistics over many events to see if there's a trend. >> >> Minuscule as it may be, the population that participates in futures markets is far from homogeneous. Stategy Pages's market http://www.strategypage.com/prediction_market/default.asp (before they yanked the Bush/Kerry lines last night) showed a consistent expectation that Kerry would lose and that Bush would win. My late neighbor lady, two doors down the hill, eponymous first victim of the Kael Syndrome, surely was not the last. (To her credit, some feel she may have speaking ironically of her own, revealed, provincialism.) While we could wish that markets operate in a fluid medium of information, there is still a great deal of viscosity and turbulence. Hopefully, this season's major harvest will be the spreading realization that the prophet is not the deity and that CBS in fact means "Can't Believe." stencil sends From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 3 15:30:59 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 16:30:59 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103135418.89804.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103135418.89804.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5C96258E-2DAD-11D9-99ED-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 3 Nov 2004, at 14:54, Mike Lorrey wrote: > I suspect most of your friends would fall into that class of people > that are referred to as "the chattering class". Mike: I am not sure that calling someone (or at least their friends) a member of the "chattering class" is particularly nicer than saying that their friends are a bunch of dumb rednecks who don't know any better. I don't think its appropriate on list to say such things. > Europe thought the same of Reagan, and were rewarded with the collapse > of the iron curtain. They should be so fortunate again. I thought you thought Bush was the lesser of two evils. Do you think that he is going to achieve great and positive things in the next four years? He seems so anti-libertarian on so many levels that I find it weird that you would actually have anything positive to say about him. What do you think the lasting positive legacy of Bush's presidency is going to be? best, patrick From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 15:51:39 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:51:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Immigrate to Europe Message-ID: Thanks for the response. Do you have any specific info or web sites that give information on work arounds. I investigated a little bit back when there was opportunity for tech work visas, but I didn't go to the length of contacting an EU lawyer. For someone with a background in tech/programming, what are the options available? This isn't as a response to the recent election, but something I've been thinking about for years. BAL >From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 >To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:43:49 +0100 > >A few Nordic countries allow gay marriage since years and many others, >including Spain (Viva Zapatero!) will pass appropriate laws soon. >Yes you can come back and we will welcome you with open arms (there >are workarounds for the work permit thing you know). > >On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:32:01 -0500, Brian Lee >wrote: > > It would be nice if Europe would allow some sort of reverse immigration >from > > the US. I'd love to move to europe for a few years, but getting a work > > permit is next to impossible. > > > > What EU countries allow gay marriage? That's news I hadn't heard yet. > > > > BAL > > > > >From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 > > >To: Zero Powers , ExI chat list > > > > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 07:53:56 +0100 > > > > > >Not in the US unfortunately. They are going to outlaw it since it is > > >against natural law and interferes with God's plan for man. > > >You can, of course, come to Europe to buy it. But in Europe we allow > > >gay marriage, we allow stem cell research, we have a secular society, > > >we have removed the word "God" from our Constitution, and we have > > >recently kicked out a proposed Commissioner because he is a > > >fundamentalist religious nut. > > >Are you sure they will let you travel here? > > >G. > > > > > >On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:42:10 -0800, Zero Powers > > >wrote: > > > > At least according to Matt Drudge. Looks like Ohio is going red. > > > > Anybody know where I can get a prescription for 4 years worth of > > > > Prozac? > > > > > > > > Zero > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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 spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 3 16:16:14 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:16:14 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001601c4c1c0$746a1f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Amara Graps > Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote?... Ja, Badnarik did rather poorly everywhere outside New Hampshire. spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:22:38 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:22:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204110306182914b25e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041103162238.20078.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Mike, Europe never thought the same of Reagan. Most Europeans, myself > included, think that all things considered he was a good president. You couldn't tell it by what showed up on television. European protests against Reagan's stubbornness toward the USSR were a nightly staple of the network news here in the 80's. You can say now that he was a good president, now that his legacy is paying its profits, but the europeans I saw on the TV back then certainly did not like him at all. > What we don't like of Bush is the fact that he wants to take the US > and the world back to the middle ages concerning the respective roles > of reason and religion in public affairs. > I follw with interest your Free State project, and wish you all the > best. But it will not be in a fundamentalist theocratic US that you > will achieve it. More likely, the Iranian-style theocracy that the US > is becoming will declare Holy War against the Free State: you see, > there is the risk that the Free State will pass laws too favorable to > same sex marriage and stem cell research. I can tell you categorically that Libertarians here will never support the expenditure of public funds for non-defense scientific research that a significant number of taxpayers believe is tantamount to murder. Whether they are right nor not is immaterial, and I hope you folks finally are as rational as you claim you are to understand this point: forcing someone to pay for something they regard as extremely morally abhorrent, which is not crucial to their self defense, is wrong. > You call yourself a Libertarian. I don't, but I always appreciated > many elements of Libertarian thinking. In particular, "Live and Let > Live". You can do whatever you like in your house, and I will not > complain as long as you don't objectively harm me. With the caveat > that "objective harm" does NOT include sleeping with a same sex > partner under your own roof. That is, if I understand libertarianism, > just your business and not mine. > Now tell me: do you see much libertarianism in the policies advocated > by the Bush administration? I see Bush's tax cuts, being as they were engineered by ATR Chairman Grover Norquist, who was a libertarian activist in college, as one tactic in forcing government to grow smaller, to downsize. Grover once said, "I'm not against government, I just want to shrink it down small enough that I can drag it into the bathroom and strangle it in the tub." That is a pretty libertarian statement. Before 9/11, Bush said that nation building isn't our job. That is also a pretty libertarian statement, which you europeans vilified him for (and now you are vilifying him for going the other way). Bush says that stem cell research is not national defense related, so the government has no business funding it. He is not opposed to private stem cell research and has not supported any measures which would ban private research. That is also a libertarian point of view. Bush is by no means a real libertarian, but he is still, despite everything, far better than that royalist, Kerry. I didn't vote for Bush, but I still can state that he is still the lesser of two evils, by a huge margin. If you think that Kerry will be better for stem cell research, just wait until his wife's trusts fund the luddites that will start bombing cloning and other stem cell research labs when they finally start producing some significant results. They are going to use bioterrorism to force this research into hiding in government labs, where the state will control research to focus on using it for totalitarian purposes. I happen to work with a fellow who worked with Kerry in the VVAW anti-war movement after he (my friend) got back from Vietnam where he served in the special forces. He verifies everything the Swift Boat guys are saying, and he also verifies a lot of stuff about Kerry's treasonous activities. > Have to agree on the rest of your note, some reality check is always > useful. THanks. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:25:11 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:25:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > to Mike Lorrey's peculiar response.. > > >I suspect most of your friends would fall into that class of people > >that are referred to as "the chattering class". > > Very well educated ? (worldwide, including Americans) > > Perhaps it is true that they don't know many 'Republicans' (whatever > that is). It's universally true that my friends and colleagues > (worldwide) don't like the actions of Bush administration. So you live in a self-reinforcing memeset that never fact checks with a cultural group outside your own, because you have a built in immune system that presumes that your greater education makes you smarter than anybody else and that therefore your opinions are therefore more correct. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 3 16:26:51 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 17:26:51 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Immigrate to Europe In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2A8A7C45-2DB5-11D9-99ED-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> I should also say that Australia is always looking for smart tech savvy immigrants. And although we are willing to follow America into war (like a little French poodle wagging its tail as it follows behind its master) we are generally more liberal on the sorts of issues that those who see the evil in current Whitehouse abhor. best, patrick On 3 Nov 2004, at 16:51, Brian Lee wrote: > Thanks for the response. Do you have any specific info or web sites > that give information on work arounds. > > I investigated a little bit back when there was opportunity for tech > work visas, but I didn't go to the length of contacting an EU lawyer. > > For someone with a background in tech/programming, what are the > options available? > > This isn't as a response to the recent election, but something I've > been thinking about for years. > > BAL > >> From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 >> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:43:49 +0100 >> >> A few Nordic countries allow gay marriage since years and many others, >> including Spain (Viva Zapatero!) will pass appropriate laws soon. >> Yes you can come back and we will welcome you with open arms (there >> are workarounds for the work permit thing you know). >> >> On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:32:01 -0500, Brian Lee >> wrote: >> > It would be nice if Europe would allow some sort of reverse >> immigration from >> > the US. I'd love to move to europe for a few years, but getting a >> work >> > permit is next to impossible. >> > >> > What EU countries allow gay marriage? That's news I hadn't heard >> yet. >> > >> > BAL >> > >> > >From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 >> > >To: Zero Powers , ExI chat list >> > > >> > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >> > >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 07:53:56 +0100 >> > > >> > >Not in the US unfortunately. They are going to outlaw it since it >> is >> > >against natural law and interferes with God's plan for man. >> > >You can, of course, come to Europe to buy it. But in Europe we >> allow >> > >gay marriage, we allow stem cell research, we have a secular >> society, >> > >we have removed the word "God" from our Constitution, and we have >> > >recently kicked out a proposed Commissioner because he is a >> > >fundamentalist religious nut. >> > >Are you sure they will let you travel here? >> > >G. >> > > >> > >On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 22:42:10 -0800, Zero Powers >> >> > >wrote: >> > > > At least according to Matt Drudge. Looks like Ohio is going >> red. >> > > > Anybody know where I can get a prescription for 4 years worth of >> > > > Prozac? >> > > > >> > > > Zero >> > >> > >> > >_______________________________________________ >> > >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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:31:06 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:31:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <5C96258E-2DAD-11D9-99ED-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041103163106.63480.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > What do you think the lasting positive legacy of Bush's presidency is > going to be? When the LP VP candidate, Richard Campagna, asked me what I thought would ensure the success of the FSP, I said, "Patriot Acts II, III, IV, and V, or conversely, Brady Act II, III, and IV". Seeing as Bush's tax cuts were engineered by Grover Norquist, who has a libertarian history, I have begun to suspect that there is a group of individuals in the Bush camp which would be entirely happy with the entire collapse of the US federal system, if it does not willingly subject itself to a major downsizing, perhaps individuals who want to bring about the sort of monetary collapse that Neal Stephenson predicted as the prelude to the setting of his novel Snow Crash. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 3 16:29:34 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 17:29:34 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8BE1A93B-2DB5-11D9-99ED-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 3 Nov 2004, at 17:25, Mike Lorrey wrote: > So you live in a self-reinforcing memeset that never fact checks with a > cultural group outside your own, because you have a built in immune > system that presumes that your greater education makes you smarter than > anybody else and that therefore your opinions are therefore more > correct. Am I the only one who sees any irony here? :) p. From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Wed Nov 3 16:35:10 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:35:10 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: <1099499710.73242580namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Mike Lorrey wrote: >If you think that Kerry will be better for stem cell research, just >wait until his wife's trusts fund the luddites that will start bombing >cloning and other stem cell research labs when they finally start >producing some significant results. They are going to use bioterrorism >to force this research into hiding in government labs, where the state >will control research to focus on using it for totalitarian purposes. Mike, that has to be the most paranoid, idiotic thing you've ever said on this list. (Funny, many people have called me paranoid, but every time I read one of Mike's posts I realize just how rational and mainstream my thinking really is...) The likelyhood of this fantasy occuring is about nil. -Nicq MacDonald From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:43:52 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:43:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] religious liberty In-Reply-To: <20041103130819.28104.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103164352.8240.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Yes it does; all i want, relating to the topic of religion, is for those such as Alan Keyes to be so kind as to not to run for office and stick to reading the bible. He is the right wing equivalent of leftwing ideologues running in the Democratic Party. >Don't you realize that your atheism therefore disqualifies you, because it is >as much a superstition as those that worship guys who hang from trees? --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:47:56 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:47:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <001601c4c1c0$746a1f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041103164756.41092.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Why? because America is basically old-fashioned. We got into high tech because the Soviets were interested in it after Sputnik. > Amara Graps > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:54:32 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:54:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] religious liberty In-Reply-To: <7a32170504110222353420105d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041103165432.43835.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Yes. You're right Anyway I don't like leftist ideologues anymore than wingnuts like Alan Keyes. The lesson is to run a moderate who has a war record. Zero Powers wrote:Uh, I'm no apologist for religious people. But, what are you saying? "Religious organizations" don't run for office. Religious people do. Personally I would be disinclined to vote for a Fairy Tale Believer, all other things being equal. But the things you advocate for people running against FTB's are applicable to any political candidate. Democrats do whatever they can to maneuver against Republicans, keep them out of office and vote them out if they are incumbents, and vice versa. And that's as it should be. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:58:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:58:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <1099499710.73242580namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Message-ID: <20041103165810.23987.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nicholas Anthony MacDonald wrote: > > Mike, that has to be the most paranoid, idiotic thing you've ever > said on this list. (Funny, many people have called me paranoid, but > every time I read one of Mike's posts I realize just how rational and > mainstream my thinking really is...) The likelyhood of this fantasy > occuring is about nil. It has already happened, Niq, which contradicts your presumption of rationality. She funded the Ruckus Society's boot camp for luddite terrorists. Documented fact, verified by the Tides Center's own public online statements. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 3 17:08:01 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:08:01 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103163106.63480.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103163106.63480.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 3 Nov 2004, at 17:31, Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Patrick Wilken wrote: >> What do you think the lasting positive legacy of Bush's presidency is >> going to be? > > Seeing as Bush's tax cuts were engineered by Grover Norquist, who has a > libertarian history, I have begun to suspect that there is a group of > individuals in the Bush camp which would be entirely happy with the > entire collapse of the US federal system, if it does not willingly > subject itself to a major downsizing, perhaps individuals who want to > bring about the sort of monetary collapse that Neal Stephenson > predicted as the prelude to the setting of his novel Snow Crash. So you think that Bush's lasting legacy is going to be that he is essentially going to bankrupt America and by so doing lead to a Libertarian revolution? best, patrick From mbb386 at main.nc.us Wed Nov 3 17:13:56 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:13:56 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <001601c4c1c0$746a1f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <001601c4c1c0$746a1f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: Yes, sadly, he did. I think too many folks who might have voted for him were running scared and picked the "lesser of two evils" of the Big Two. :( This time I managed not to do that and felt much better with myself when I left the voting booth. Regards, MB On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Spike wrote: > > Ja, Badnarik did rather poorly everywhere outside > New Hampshire. From mbb386 at main.nc.us Wed Nov 3 17:21:03 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:21:03 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] California backs stem cell move In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204110306222b931261@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c5204110306222b931261@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: They'd better look out. Just see what goes on (and on and on) with the "Death with Dignity" movement in Oregon. :/ Mr. Ashcroft just won't let up. Regards, MB On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > California looks set to become the first US state to provide funding > for stem cell research, medical experiments that involve human embryos. > Early returns from a ballot in the state show voters have approved > $3bn-worth of funding to last 10 years. > President Bush and religious groups had strongly opposed stem cell > research on moral grounds. From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 17:28:42 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 17:28:42 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041102185848.31420.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041102185848.31420.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:58:48 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > For those of you nay-sayers, the NH Public Radio exit poll has > Libertarian Rich Kahn getting 11% of the vote in the 2nd district > congressional race. This is the best showing of any Libertarian in NH > history for a federal election, and shows that we can play with the big > dogs if we get organized and work together in a positive, rational, and > mature manner. > > It appears that Rich's success is coming at the Democrats expense > (despite the conventional wisdom). Paul Hodes exit poll results show > him getting only 29% of the vote, while Charlie Bass, the perpetual > rubber fish of NH politics, continues to repel the competition with a > solid majority of the vote. This achievement is in keeping with our > goal of turning the Democrats into a third party if they continue to > attack us, rather than working with us on common issues. > I see the final results are: Charles F. Bass * (R) 191,031 59% Paul Hodes (D) 123,393 38% Richard Kahn (Lib.) 11,258 3% So you managed to get 11,258 to vote Lib. This is probably still a record for the Lib party, but rather far from turning the Dems into a third party. Looks like your objective of 20,000 Libs moving to NH will be too small on its own to change the state politics. I think you have quite a few more years of persuasion ahead of you yet. BillK From zero.powers at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 17:31:37 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 09:31:37 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: References: <001601c4c1c0$746a1f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <7a321705041103093132977a46@mail.gmail.com> I briefly considered voting for Badnarik only because here in Cali, Kerry was a sure thing. But then I thought better of it. I want to be on record as having voted for Kerry when the nation looks back 4 years from now wondering how in the world we let things get to what they'll surely get to. I plan to proudly display one of those bumper stickers that says: "Don't blame me, I voted for Kerry." On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:13:56 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time), MB wrote: > > Yes, sadly, he did. I think too many folks who might have voted for > him were running scared and picked the "lesser of two evils" of the > Big Two. :( > > This time I managed not to do that and felt much better with myself > when I left the voting booth. > > Regards, > MB > > > > > On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Spike wrote: > > > > > Ja, Badnarik did rather poorly everywhere outside > > New Hampshire. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 3 17:46:19 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:46:19 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... References: Message-ID: <005101c4c1cd$07154f30$af1e4842@kevin> This is so simple that I don;t know why people here don;t get it. If Kerry actually believed what he says, and his future actions could be easily predicted, he wouldn't have had a problem. It seems like everyone here but MIke Lorrey compares Bush's policies with what Kerry says his policies would be. This comparison is made while ignoring the fact that John Kerry doesn;t have a clue where he stands on any of the issues. He says what he thinks people want to hear to elect him and you fall for it every time. He flips and flops. The bottom line is that he is unpredictable. If he had said "I am going to pull out of Iraq and put that money into MNT", you would be excited, but do you honestly think he would follow through? If you actually think that he would do as he says, you are basing that on faith (or something like it) instead of logic. The fact is, no matter how much I dislike many of Bush's policies, I can predict what he is going to do. I know where he stands. There are many places where I am at odds with him, particularly stem cell research, cloning, foreign policy, and gay marriage. But for all I know, Kerry is most likely lying about his stance on these things. He has taken both sides on these issues and you have only heard him say what you wanted to hear hiim say. He is also just as guilty of invoking "God" at every turn....unless he is addressing a secular crowd. When faced with an unpredictable character and a predictable one, most people will choose the predictable one. This is why I preferred the known evil of Bush over the unknown evil of Kerry. Although I don;t have any polling data that says so, my gut tells me that the swing voters went Bush'd way for that same reason. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amara Graps" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 4:17 AM Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the future. > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > the world. > > On a more personal note, as a holder of a US and Latvian passport, the > shift in these last years is that I only use my US passport when I > travel to the US, because the "baggage" of the US government is not > something I like to carry in my dealings with people in my everyday > life. I never had a good answer when someone wants to know where I am > "from" (Hawaii, Wisconsin, California, Colorado, Latvia, Germany, Greece > all fit to some degree, but California the most). Unfortunately my > Italian paperwork lists US as my citizenship, so I'm illegal for the > last year, with an expired permit-of-stay, grouped with Australians, > New Zealanders, Canadians, Japanese, Africans, South Americans.... (the > nonEU world) who are in a quagmire in the collapsed Italian Bossi-Fini > immigration law. Therefore, given the US political situation now, I will > begin to shift my Italian bureaucratic papers to my Latvian citizenship > (even with Italy's new restrictions on the new EU member countries), > since I think that holding a US passport will mostly hurt me now. > > Amara > > -- > > Amara Graps, PhD > Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) > Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), > Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, > Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it > _______________________________________________ > 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 Nov 3 18:07:52 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:07:52 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Democracy in action! In-Reply-To: <20041103130527.89207.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041102211840.01aa8640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041103130527.89207.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041103120446.01c41ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:05 AM 11/3/2004 -0800, Mike L., not a member of the chattering classes, wrote: > > > So it take Kerry 175,753 votes to get an electoral vote, and Bush > > 110,428. > >That is a really interesting way of putting it Damien. And as it turned out a highly misleading one. At 99% counted, I see the popular vote is 58,659,922 for Bush to 55,124,616 for Kerry, which is rather convincing. Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:12:36 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:12:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <005101c4c1cd$07154f30$af1e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041103181236.48190.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> The main point of electoral politics is to check power-seekers. Everything else comes after, so i don't care much how double-dealing Kerry was. There's no virtue in politics, it's business, it's about cutting the power-hungry down to size. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > This is so simple that I don;t know why people here > don;t get it. > If Kerry actually believed what he says, and his > future actions could be > easily predicted, he wouldn't have had a problem. It > seems like everyone > here but MIke Lorrey compares Bush's policies with > what Kerry says his > policies would be. This comparison is made while > ignoring the fact that John > Kerry doesn;t have a clue where he stands on any of > the issues. He says what > he thinks people want to hear to elect him and you > fall for it every time. > He flips and flops. The bottom line is that he is > unpredictable. If he had > said "I am going to pull out of Iraq and put that > money into MNT", you would > be excited, but do you honestly think he would > follow through? If you > actually think that he would do as he says, you are > basing that on faith (or > something like it) instead of logic. > > The fact is, no matter how much I dislike many of > Bush's policies, I can > predict what he is going to do. I know where he > stands. There are many > places where I am at odds with him, particularly > stem cell research, > cloning, foreign policy, and gay marriage. But for > all I know, Kerry is most > likely lying about his stance on these things. He > has taken both sides on > these issues and you have only heard him say what > you wanted to hear hiim > say. He is also just as guilty of invoking "God" at > every turn....unless he > is addressing a secular crowd. > > When faced with an unpredictable character and a > predictable one, most > people will choose the predictable one. This is why > I preferred the known > evil of Bush over the unknown evil of Kerry. > Although I don;t have any > polling data that says so, my gut tells me that the > swing voters went Bush'd > way for that same reason. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Amara Graps" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 4:17 AM > Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the > popular vote? I don't > > understand this; no one I spoke with here > understands it either. Also, > > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with > nonAmericans in the future. > > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans > simply made a > > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, > and so they cleanly > > separated the American people from their > government, and expected the > > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. > Now Americans will be > > much more closely aligned with their government in > the eyes of many in > > the world. > > > > On a more personal note, as a holder of a US and > Latvian passport, the > > shift in these last years is that I only use my US > passport when I > > travel to the US, because the "baggage" of the US > government is not > > something I like to carry in my dealings with > people in my everyday > > life. I never had a good answer when someone > wants to know where I am > > "from" (Hawaii, Wisconsin, California, Colorado, > Latvia, Germany, Greece > > all fit to some degree, but California the most). > Unfortunately my > > Italian paperwork lists US as my citizenship, so > I'm illegal for the > > last year, with an expired permit-of-stay, grouped > with Australians, > > New Zealanders, Canadians, Japanese, Africans, > South Americans.... (the > > nonEU world) who are in a quagmire in the > collapsed Italian Bossi-Fini > > immigration law. Therefore, given the US political > situation now, I will > > begin to shift my Italian bureaucratic papers to > my Latvian citizenship > > (even with Italy's new restrictions on the new EU > member countries), > > since I think that holding a US passport will > mostly hurt me now. > > > > Amara > > > > -- > > > > Amara Graps, PhD > > Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario > (IFSI) > > Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), > > Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, > > Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:18:07 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:18:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041103181808.79542.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> To be perfectly candid & cynical, Bush's one of legacies will be reducing the population in central and west Asia by the millions. Has anyone read Paul Kennedy's book about imperial overstretch? Imperial overstretch may be the principle legacy, trillions will be poured into the war. > What do you think the lasting positive legacy of > Bush's presidency is going to be? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:49:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:49:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041103184916.88582.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 10:58:48 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > For those of you nay-sayers, the NH Public Radio exit poll has > > Libertarian Rich Kahn getting 11% of the vote in the 2nd district > > congressional race. This is the best showing of any Libertarian in > NH > > history for a federal election, and shows that we can play with the > big > > dogs if we get organized and work together in a positive, rational, > and > > mature manner. > > > > It appears that Rich's success is coming at the Democrats expense > > (despite the conventional wisdom). Paul Hodes exit poll results > show > > him getting only 29% of the vote, while Charlie Bass, the perpetual > > rubber fish of NH politics, continues to repel the competition with > a > > solid majority of the vote. This achievement is in keeping with our > > goal of turning the Democrats into a third party if they continue > to > > attack us, rather than working with us on common issues. > > > > > I see the final results are: > Charles F. Bass * (R) 191,031 59% > Paul Hodes (D) 123,393 38% > Richard Kahn (Lib.) 11,258 3% > > So you managed to get 11,258 to vote Lib. This is probably still a > record for the Lib party, but rather far from turning the Dems into a > third party. > > Looks like your objective of 20,000 Libs moving to NH will be too > small on its own to change the state politics. I think you have quite > a few more years of persuasion ahead of you yet. I'm actually heartened by that showing. Its still the best in that congressional district so far, despite a neck and neck presidential race, with record total turnout, which is when we typically do our worst. Richard's 3.4% showing is significantly better than the 2002 elections where Rosalie Babiarz got 2.3% with 5051 votes, and the 2000 election, when Brian Chisteson got 2.3% with 6188 votes. This is a 50% improvement percentage wise, and about a 100% improvement in raw numbers. If we were to extrapolate that the 50-60 FSP members who have already moved here can be correlated to an increase in votes for Libertarians by 5000-6000, due to increased activism, public perception of legitimacy and influence, etc., this means that 20,000 FSP members should result in 200,000 votes in this one congressional district for libertarian candidates when the migration is completed. Double that for state-wide races and we control the state. Of course, this is a pretty bold extrapolation to make off of only a few data points. A diminishing utility curve would likely temper that significantly. I believe a truer curve will start to take shape over the next few years. If we could get even 100,000 state-wide votes for us in any given race we will be competing head to head with the GOP and Democrats on their own terms, and will command a significant minority of the legislature. I believe once we penetrate the statutory thresholds required for major party status (4% of the vote in state wide elections) regularly, we will start to build a popular synergy of legitimacy that won't level off until we reach at least 20% popularity. We might have done that this year if our Senate candidate had made it onto the ballot, since the 1st district is actually much more supportive of us, but our 1st district congressional candidate's poor ballot access petitioning screwed that up (in addition to many Democrat dirty tricks). Past performance in the 1st district has typically been 3.1-3.3%. If they had shown similar improvement of 50%, they'd have gotten 4.6%-4.9% this election, statewide we'd have averaged over 4%, and gotten major party status for the first time since 1996 (when the statutory threshold was raised from 3% to 4%). This is rather bittersweet to contemplate, since I just assumed the vice-chairmanship. So, the FSP is having a significant positive impact. Not as big as indicated by my irrational exhuberance of yesterday after spending the day at the polls (I was high on the democratic process, sorry, I'm still recuperating), but quite significant none the less. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From max at maxmore.com Wed Nov 3 18:54:38 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:54:38 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 In-Reply-To: <4188B353.5090906@pobox.com> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> <4188B353.5090906@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041103125218.038afa20@mail.earthlink.net> Cheer up, Eli. If you look in the right place, you *can* find a sophisticated and *correct* prediction: http://morris.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast/Political/ This collection of indicators has forecast a Bush victory consistently for many months. One of the few non-aligned major components was the first Delphi poll, but the second and third Delphi's pointed to Bush. Max At 04:30 AM 11/3/2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: >Robin Hanson wrote: >>Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win. > >Today's experiment... failed. > >It disturbs me that with millions of dollars to spend and all the >sophisticated apparatus of statistics, we can't predict the outcome of an >election. It makes one wonder about the latest study showing that >broccoli does (not) prevent cancer. At least with elections, you find out >when you're wrong. I wonder how much marginal science is similarly bogus. > >-- >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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:57:59 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:57:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041103184916.88582.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103185759.27432.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Scraping together- and i do mean scraping- 100,000 votes in a state as stodgy as NH will (or would) take decades. Right now you are of the scale of Naderites. > Of course, this is a pretty bold extrapolation to > make off of only a > few data points. A diminishing utility curve would > likely temper that > significantly. I believe a truer curve will start to > take shape over > the next few years. If we could get even 100,000 > state-wide votes for > us in any given race we will be competing head to > head with the GOP and > Democrats on their own terms, and will command a > significant minority > of the legislature. > > I believe once we penetrate the statutory thresholds > required for major > party status (4% of the vote in state wide > elections) regularly, we > will start to build a popular synergy of legitimacy > that won't level > off until we reach at least 20% popularity. We might > have done that > this year if our Senate candidate had made it onto > the ballot, since > the 1st district is actually much more supportive of > us, but our 1st > district congressional candidate's poor ballot > access petitioning > screwed that up (in addition to many Democrat dirty > tricks). > > Past performance in the 1st district has typically > been 3.1-3.3%. If > they had shown similar improvement of 50%, they'd > have gotten 4.6%-4.9% > this election, statewide we'd have averaged over 4%, > and gotten major > party status for the first time since 1996 (when the > statutory > threshold was raised from 3% to 4%). This is rather > bittersweet to > contemplate, since I just assumed the > vice-chairmanship. > > So, the FSP is having a significant positive impact. > Not as big as > indicated by my irrational exhuberance of yesterday > after spending the > day at the polls (I was high on the democratic > process, sorry, I'm > still recuperating), but quite significant none the > less. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:05:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:05:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103181236.48190.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103190547.10813.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > The main point of electoral politics is to check > power-seekers. Everything else comes after, so i don't > care much how double-dealing Kerry was. > There's no virtue in politics, it's business, it's > about cutting the power-hungry down to size. Cause Kerry "is your son of a bitch", paraphrase a previous JFK....? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think you wrongly assumed that Bush was the only power-hungry or the most power-hungry individual in the equation here. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:25:07 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:25:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103190547.10813.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103192507.16550.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> No, Bush is not the only or most power-oriented; but he certainly is motivated by power more than the love of Jesus-- so 'technically' he is a fraud, that is to say Bush is as power-oriented or more so than the average presidential aspirant yet only a truly foolish person would take him at his word when he says he genuinely represents the higher purpose he presents to the world. Bush's overarching goal is to get as many of his relatives as practical into office, thereby he has a realistic legacy because anyone who gets their relatives in power or has relatives who are extremely wealthy is realistic is thinking their descendants have a better chance of living longer or at least continuing the genetic posterity. Only religious nuts or utter chumps would con themselves into thinking Bush would dedicate his life to politics for the sake of Jesus. > I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think you > wrongly assumed that Bush > was the only power-hungry or the most power-hungry > individual in the > equation here. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:28:37 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:28:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041103185759.27432.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103192837.50462.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > Scraping together- and i do mean scraping- 100,000 > votes in a state as stodgy as NH will (or would) take > decades. Right now you are of the scale of Naderites. Trend, Nader has never had major party status. His performance got the Greens that status in a few states, but certainly not nationwide and definitely not here. Nader is a main stream media creation. Nationwide, he got the same number of votes that Badnarik got this year (of course the press isn't going to mention this fact), despite raising $2.4 million by September (according to FEC filings), to Badnarik's fraction of a million. Nader is a media fiction that the hipsters in the chattering class can show their cool by supporting. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 19:30:32 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:30:32 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103190547.10813.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103181236.48190.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <20041103190547.10813.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:05:47 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think you wrongly assumed that Bush > was the only power-hungry or the most power-hungry individual in the > equation here. > The BBC website has a good analysis of why Bush won: Selection of quotes from the article:- Religion - rather than class, ethnic origin or education - has become the key determinant of voting in the 2004 presidential race. And moral issues were more important for voters than Iraq, the war on terrorism, or the economy. Not surprisingly, four out of five voters who cited moral values as their key issue voted for President Bush - as did the same proportion of those who cited terrorism. In contrast, those most concerned about the economy voted four to one for Senator Kerry. What has divided voters in this election, however, are views on the Iraq war, and on new moral issues like stem cell research and same-sex marriage. Those against gay marriage, for example, voted strongly for Mr Bush, as did those opposed to abortion. And the electorate divided sharply over Iraq, with the 47% disapproving of the decision to go to war strongly backing Senator Kerry. Two-thirds of voters who attend religious services regularly (once a week or more) backed President Bush rather than Senator Kerry - and they make up 40% of the electorate. Those who never attend services, in contrast, backed the Democrats by the same margin - but they make up only 15% of the electorate. The ability of the Republican party to mobilise its religious base could prove to be the decisive factor. End quotes. BillK From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 3 19:39:01 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:39:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn Message-ID: <20041103193901.CF6B457E2A@finney.org> Badnarik wasn't on the ballot in New Hampshire, right? http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/NH/P/00/index.html What happened there? Are you hoping to get a Libertarian on the ballot for the next presidential election? Hal From sjatkins at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 19:42:30 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:42:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948b11e04110311426e35c6e3@mail.gmail.com> Well, maybe we can blame the huge predominance of untested voting machines. Neither I nor anyone else has any way of knowing how much rigging was done there. They certainly are not proven to be fair and accurate. On the other hand if I was rigging machines I would have rigged in a much better margin that what eventually occurred. But perhaps the hypothetical riggers simply misjudged how much was needed. Perhaps. I just hope the Shrub doesn't start mouthing off about a "mandate from the people". I don't think I can take it. - s On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:17:43 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the future. > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > the world. > > On a more personal note, as a holder of a US and Latvian passport, the > shift in these last years is that I only use my US passport when I > travel to the US, because the "baggage" of the US government is not > something I like to carry in my dealings with people in my everyday > life. I never had a good answer when someone wants to know where I am > "from" (Hawaii, Wisconsin, California, Colorado, Latvia, Germany, Greece > all fit to some degree, but California the most). Unfortunately my > Italian paperwork lists US as my citizenship, so I'm illegal for the > last year, with an expired permit-of-stay, grouped with Australians, > New Zealanders, Canadians, Japanese, Africans, South Americans.... (the > nonEU world) who are in a quagmire in the collapsed Italian Bossi-Fini > immigration law. Therefore, given the US political situation now, I will > begin to shift my Italian bureaucratic papers to my Latvian citizenship > (even with Italy's new restrictions on the new EU member countries), > since I think that holding a US passport will mostly hurt me now. > > Amara > > -- > > Amara Graps, PhD > Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) > Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), > Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, > Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:46:23 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:46:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041103192837.50462.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041103194623.88170.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Hmm, you might be correct. All the same, you've got decades to go before a substantive fraction of the public in NH accepts libertarianism. i lived in VT, a few blocks from the NH border, they're not at all the sort of radicals who would be attracted en masse to libertarianism. You could get maybe 10-20,000 to join the NHLP in perhaps 20-30 years because libertarianism is fun (for instance, the allure of drugs & wild sex), but 100,000 members in one decade? nosiree. 50 years? yes. The crucial factor is the constancy of psychological processes in a state such as NH. You might have better luck in Vermont. > Trend, > Nader has never had major party status. His > performance got the Greens > that status in a few states, but certainly not > nationwide and > definitely not here. Nader is a main stream media > creation. Nationwide, > he got the same number of votes that Badnarik got > this year (of course > the press isn't going to mention this fact), despite > raising $2.4 > million by September (according to FEC filings), to > Badnarik's fraction > of a million. Nader is a media fiction that the > hipsters in the > chattering class can show their cool by supporting. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From sjatkins at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 19:52:30 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:52:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: References: <20041103181236.48190.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <20041103190547.10813.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e041103115239c64517@mail.gmail.com> "Moral issues"? Well yes, denying the same rights others enjoy to a minority in matters of relationship and recognition of relationship is a "moral issue". It is clearly evil. Stem cell research though? On what basis? Only the considerably misinformed believe it has anything to do with abortion which is claimed as a "moral issue". When looking at the poll results it helps, along with some fitting intoxicant or other, to remember that the vast majority of the people are not far from an IQ of 100. On top of that they have been successfully taught not to think. Also, Kerry never stood for a big difference in most of the matters of primary non-"moral" concern. The real message to the Shrub should be that the people largely think he is doing a terrible job if even an opponent who did not present a very clear difference did this well against him. But that is not the message he will trumpet to the country. Back to my bitters. -s On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:30:32 +0000, BillK wrote: > On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:05:47 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think you wrongly assumed that Bush > > was the only power-hungry or the most power-hungry individual in the > > equation here. > > > > The BBC website has a good analysis of why Bush won: > > > Selection of quotes from the article:- > > Religion - rather than class, ethnic origin or education - has become > the key determinant of voting in the 2004 presidential race. > And moral issues were more important for voters than Iraq, the war on > terrorism, or the economy. > Not surprisingly, four out of five voters who cited moral values as > their key issue voted for President Bush - as did the same proportion > of those who cited terrorism. > In contrast, those most concerned about the economy voted four to one > for Senator Kerry. > > What has divided voters in this election, however, are views on the > Iraq war, and on new moral issues like stem cell research and same-sex > marriage. > Those against gay marriage, for example, voted strongly for Mr Bush, > as did those opposed to abortion. > And the electorate divided sharply over Iraq, with the 47% > disapproving of the decision to go to war strongly backing Senator > Kerry. > > Two-thirds of voters who attend religious services regularly (once a > week or more) backed President Bush rather than Senator Kerry - and > they make up 40% of the electorate. > Those who never attend services, in contrast, backed the Democrats by > the same margin - but they make up only 15% of the electorate. > The ability of the Republican party to mobilise its religious base > could prove to be the decisive factor. > > End quotes. > > BillK > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 19:54:06 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:54:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <005101c4c1cd$07154f30$af1e4842@kevin> References: <005101c4c1cd$07154f30$af1e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <948b11e041103115469f0868d@mail.gmail.com> You know, at the moment I don't have a bit of patience for the same lies that I have heard for months. Just stop. On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:46:19 -0600, Kevin Freels wrote: > This is so simple that I don;t know why people here don;t get it. > If Kerry actually believed what he says, and his future actions could be > easily predicted, he wouldn't have had a problem. It seems like everyone > here but MIke Lorrey compares Bush's policies with what Kerry says his > policies would be. This comparison is made while ignoring the fact that John > Kerry doesn;t have a clue where he stands on any of the issues. He says what > he thinks people want to hear to elect him and you fall for it every time. > He flips and flops. The bottom line is that he is unpredictable. If he had > said "I am going to pull out of Iraq and put that money into MNT", you would > be excited, but do you honestly think he would follow through? If you > actually think that he would do as he says, you are basing that on faith (or > something like it) instead of logic. > > The fact is, no matter how much I dislike many of Bush's policies, I can > predict what he is going to do. I know where he stands. There are many > places where I am at odds with him, particularly stem cell research, > cloning, foreign policy, and gay marriage. But for all I know, Kerry is most > likely lying about his stance on these things. He has taken both sides on > these issues and you have only heard him say what you wanted to hear hiim > say. He is also just as guilty of invoking "God" at every turn....unless he > is addressing a secular crowd. > > When faced with an unpredictable character and a predictable one, most > people will choose the predictable one. This is why I preferred the known > evil of Bush over the unknown evil of Kerry. Although I don;t have any > polling data that says so, my gut tells me that the swing voters went Bush'd > way for that same reason. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Amara Graps" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 4:17 AM > Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the future. > > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > > the world. > > > > On a more personal note, as a holder of a US and Latvian passport, the > > shift in these last years is that I only use my US passport when I > > travel to the US, because the "baggage" of the US government is not > > something I like to carry in my dealings with people in my everyday > > life. I never had a good answer when someone wants to know where I am > > "from" (Hawaii, Wisconsin, California, Colorado, Latvia, Germany, Greece > > all fit to some degree, but California the most). Unfortunately my > > Italian paperwork lists US as my citizenship, so I'm illegal for the > > last year, with an expired permit-of-stay, grouped with Australians, > > New Zealanders, Canadians, Japanese, Africans, South Americans.... (the > > nonEU world) who are in a quagmire in the collapsed Italian Bossi-Fini > > immigration law. Therefore, given the US political situation now, I will > > begin to shift my Italian bureaucratic papers to my Latvian citizenship > > (even with Italy's new restrictions on the new EU member countries), > > since I think that holding a US passport will mostly hurt me now. > > > > Amara > > > > -- > > > > Amara Graps, PhD > > Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) > > Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), > > Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, > > Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 19:56:54 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:56:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041103194623.88170.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103192837.50462.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> <20041103194623.88170.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e041103115660107441@mail.gmail.com> Do you really think that drugs and wild sex are what the party is about? Or are you just being "funny"? -s On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:46:23 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > Hmm, you might be correct. All the same, you've got > decades to go before a substantive fraction of the > public in NH accepts libertarianism. i lived in VT, a > few blocks from the NH border, they're not at all the > sort of radicals who would be attracted en masse to > libertarianism. You could get maybe 10-20,000 to join > the NHLP in perhaps 20-30 years because libertarianism > is fun (for instance, the allure of drugs & wild sex), > but 100,000 members in one decade? nosiree. 50 years? > yes. > The crucial factor is the constancy of psychological > processes in a state such as NH. You might have > better luck in Vermont. > > > > > Trend, > > Nader has never had major party status. His > > performance got the Greens > > that status in a few states, but certainly not > > nationwide and > > definitely not here. Nader is a main stream media > > creation. Nationwide, > > he got the same number of votes that Badnarik got > > this year (of course > > the press isn't going to mention this fact), despite > > raising $2.4 > > million by September (according to FEC filings), to > > Badnarik's fraction > > of a million. Nader is a media fiction that the > > hipsters in the > > chattering class can show their cool by supporting. > > > > ===== > > Mike Lorrey > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > > "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!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Nov 3 19:57:23 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 14:57:23 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: <91160-220041133195723875@M2W034.mail2web.com> Greetings - This is short and sweet: I am disappointed Bush won. I didn't want Kerry either, frankly. But Kerry would have been more contemporary in his understanding of the world, stem cells, and varied religious beliefs. Personally, I think it is inappropriate to come down on America just because Bush won. I spoke with some friends from Belgium, France, and Canada last week. I asked what they thought. Each one believes that it would not make any different if Bush or Kerry won, that the damage has already been done, and we must deal with it. What can our organizations, such as Extropy Institute, do to promote good relations between ourselves and others throughout the world? That is a first step. Best, Natasha Vita-More -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From sjatkins at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 20:05:01 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:05:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e041103120551e1633@mail.gmail.com> Quite a mouthful to read into a simple statement, Mike. I personally only presume that those with good reasons for their opinions are superior to those without as good reasons. I also that justifying great gobs of misery and waste of life and fortune with lies is clearly and cleanly wrong. That has nothing to do with education level. What are you of all people doing trotting out the old rotten business of class distinctions anyway? - s On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 08:25:11 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > --- Amara Graps wrote: > > > to Mike Lorrey's peculiar response.. > > > > >I suspect most of your friends would fall into that class of people > > >that are referred to as "the chattering class". > > > > Very well educated ? (worldwide, including Americans) > > > > Perhaps it is true that they don't know many 'Republicans' (whatever > > that is). It's universally true that my friends and colleagues > > (worldwide) don't like the actions of Bush administration. > > So you live in a self-reinforcing memeset that never fact checks with a > cultural group outside your own, because you have a built in immune > system that presumes that your greater education makes you smarter than > anybody else and that therefore your opinions are therefore more correct. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 20:05:54 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:05:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <91160-220041133195723875@M2W034.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041103200554.19025.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> This is indeed the quadrillion dollar question, how do we promote better relations? I haven't the foggiest notion; besides I like cats, not humans. > What can our organizations, such as Extropy > Institute, do to promote good > relations between ourselves and others throughout > the world? That is a > first step. > > Best, > > Natasha Vita-More > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 20:09:07 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:09:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <948b11e041103115660107441@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041103200907.27036.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> No, I am NOT being funny. I meant libertarian in the philosophical not political sense. Madam, I was a libertarian when you were in diapers, and drugs & sex are most absolutely an attraction to younger libertarians. --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Do you really think that drugs and wild sex are what > the party is > about? Or are you just being "funny"? > > -s > > > On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:46:23 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks > wrote: > > Hmm, you might be correct. All the same, you've > got > > decades to go before a substantive fraction of the > > public in NH accepts libertarianism. i lived in > VT, a > > few blocks from the NH border, they're not at all > the > > sort of radicals who would be attracted en masse > to > > libertarianism. You could get maybe 10-20,000 to > join > > the NHLP in perhaps 20-30 years because > libertarianism > > is fun (for instance, the allure of drugs & wild > sex), > > but 100,000 members in one decade? nosiree. 50 > years? > > yes. > > The crucial factor is the constancy of > psychological > > processes in a state such as NH. You might have > > better luck in Vermont. > > > > > > > > > Trend, > > > Nader has never had major party status. His > > > performance got the Greens > > > that status in a few states, but certainly not > > > nationwide and > > > definitely not here. Nader is a main stream > media > > > creation. Nationwide, > > > he got the same number of votes that Badnarik > got > > > this year (of course > > > the press isn't going to mention this fact), > despite > > > raising $2.4 > > > million by September (according to FEC filings), > to > > > Badnarik's fraction > > > of a million. Nader is a media fiction that the > > > hipsters in the > > > chattering class can show their cool by > supporting. > > > > > > ===== > > > Mike Lorrey > > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of > NH > > > "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!? > > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 3 20:28:46 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 12:28:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: <20041103202846.4D01B57E2A@finney.org> Natasha writes: > What can our organizations, such as Extropy Institute, do to promote good > relations between ourselves and others throughout the world? That is a > first step. I think that's a great question. Of course, ExI is not a major player on the world stage and can't by itself rehabilitate America's international image. But just by asking it, we are reminded that we are not our country. By asking what we can do, as individuals united with common beliefs, we emphasize that our individual actions must be distinguished from the collective actions taken in our name by nations and other political bodies. Political bodies are not voluntary societies. The Extropy Institute is. We choose to join ExI and to affiliate with it and work to advance our common goals. If ExI does something we don't like, we can easily leave the organization and join another one or start our own. The United States is not like that. The country is deeply split along religious and cultural lines. No matter who won the election, half the electorate would be deeply disappointed. But we're stuck with each other. It's not feasible to split the nation along the lines of the red and blue states. And even if it were possible, there would still be many people who are stuck in a country which is taking actions that they strongly disagree with. The direction I would pursue in response to Natasha's question is simply to emphasize this reality. We in the United States are not our country. Neither are Europeans their countries, or their continent. Likewise with people in all parts of the world. We are individuals, with individual beliefs. Those beliefs are what should govern our interactions, not the views which happen to have a numerical majority in the region where we live. This is what I would like to see ExI emphasize, that even though American Extropians are located in a country which is perhaps moving in the direction of religious conservatism, that doesn't stop us from still supporting our causes and working to advance our goals. On the WTA list this morning, Americans are talking about moving to Canada or Europe in response to this election. I think this is at least premature and at worst makes the mistake of identifying too much with the country where you live. You aren't your country. You aren't responsible for its actions. Most people have only an infinitisimal influence on its policies. ExI should continue to work with international transhuman groups and others with whom we have common cause. So the country took a further step to the right. That doesn't change our views or our goals. We can continue to work for them, unapologetically and wholeheartedly. Hal From sentience at pobox.com Wed Nov 3 20:34:55 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:34:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041103125218.038afa20@mail.earthlink.net> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> <4188B353.5090906@pobox.com> <6.1.2.0.2.20041103125218.038afa20@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <418940EF.9050706@pobox.com> Max More wrote: > Cheer up, Eli. If you look in the right place, you *can* find a > sophisticated and *correct* prediction: > > http://morris.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast/Political/ > > This collection of indicators has forecast a Bush victory consistently > for many months. One of the few non-aligned major components was the > first Delphi poll, but the second and third Delphi's pointed to Bush. What would you have given me for the "sophisticated and correct" prediction if Kerry had won? -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 3 21:12:50 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:12:50 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Kerry to win, 2.5 to 1 In-Reply-To: <418940EF.9050706@pobox.com> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041102172736.01f1d580@mail.gmu.edu> <4188B353.5090906@pobox.com> <6.1.2.0.2.20041103125218.038afa20@mail.earthlink.net> <418940EF.9050706@pobox.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:34:55 -0500, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > > What would you have given me for the "sophisticated and correct" prediction > if Kerry had won? > This is like astrologers or psychics. If enough people make enough forecasts, somebody will claim that they can forecast the future correctly. We just have to ignore the wrong forecasts (which are uninteresting anyway) and we can start believing in mediums seeing future events. BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 21:18:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 13:18:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041103193901.CF6B457E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041103211852.16025.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > Badnarik wasn't on the ballot in New Hampshire, right? > http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/NH/P/00/index.html > > What happened there? Are you hoping to get a Libertarian on the > ballot for the next presidential election? I've been asked this so many times I should have a memo prepared in my drafts folder... A whole host of things, some our fault, some government screw ups, some national LP screwups, and some actively criminal interference by the Democrats all contributed. Here we go: Our ballot law requires 1500 certified ballot access petitions in each congressional district to qualify for a statewide race like senator, governor, or president. In past elections our experience has been that our petitions are certified at a 90% rate. We collected 3900 petitions statewide, which we thought was as secure a fudge factor as we needed. Of those, city clerks and supervisors of checklists certified and returned 2200 petitions by the statutory Sept 1 deadline. Of the remainder, we lost them for the following reasons: a) E911: petitioners would put their new E911 addresses on their petition, but the voter checklists have not been updated, so the petition was DQ'd. b) NADER: National LP sent in pro petitioners to help us reach our goals, but either didn't know, or didn't tell us, that they were contracted with Nader to petition for him. Problem is the state law here which says you can only sign for one party, and whoever gets your name to town hall first gets your name, everybody else is SOL. c) National Convention: Our congressional and senate candidates were nominated last November at our state convention, and two of the three started petitioning immediately thereafter. One waited until after the National Convention so he could put Badnarik on all of his petitions. So he had two months to get 1500 signatures. Not enough time. d) THEFT: There were at least two incidents of impostors stealing our petitions from town halls. e) LATE RETURNS: over half a dozen towns sent petitions back to us after the statutory deadline, and even after the deadline for us to turn them over to the Secty of State. The city of Keene never notified us they were ready and never sent them back at all. f) Bad clerking: a number of clearly legible petitions were dq'd for illegibility. On the plus side, the christian fundies, who hated Benson, are facetiously crediting Benson's vote count as "the highest ever for the LPNH" since they've branded him the "first virtual libertarian governor" in NH..... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From sahynepu at concentric.net Wed Nov 3 21:08:35 2004 From: sahynepu at concentric.net (Sahyinepu) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:08:35 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103192507.16550.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <86294830-2DDC-11D9-8659-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> For one...we are turning into the most hypocritical nation of all. We invade other countries supposedly to liberate them from religious oppression...oppression of women, as well as presumably gays, and of course, oppression of the sciences. Meanwhile, we pass oppressive measures like the Patriot Acts I and II, make gay marriage and even civil unions illegal, attempt to limit contraceptives and abortion for women, and limit and stop scientific endeavors, be they in the medical fields or the environmental ones. We are slowly looking more and more like the countries we claim to liberate...we are looking a lot like a theocracy, and less like a democracy. Which begs the question, why even bother to liberate them, when we cannot protect and ensure the same freedoms here? America needs to sit down and shut up. On Wednesday, November 3, 2004, at 01:25 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > No, Bush is not the only or most power-oriented; but > he certainly is motivated by power more than the love > of Jesus-- so 'technically' he is a fraud, that is to > say Bush is as power-oriented or more so than the > average presidential aspirant yet only a truly foolish > person would take him at his word when he says he > genuinely represents the higher purpose he presents to > the world. Bush's overarching goal is to get as many > of his relatives as practical into office, thereby he > has a realistic legacy because anyone who gets their > relatives in power or has relatives who are extremely > wealthy is realistic is thinking their descendants > have a better chance of living longer or at least > continuing the genetic posterity. Only religious nuts > or utter chumps would con themselves into thinking > Bush would dedicate his life to politics for the sake > of Jesus. >> I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think you >> wrongly assumed that Bush >> was the only power-hungry or the most power-hungry >> individual in the >> equation here. >> >> ===== >> Mike Lorrey > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 21:31:18 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 13:31:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <948b11e041103120551e1633@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041103213118.37544.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Quite a mouthful to read into a simple statement, Mike. I > personally > only presume that those with good reasons for their opinions are > superior to those without as good reasons. I also that justifying > great gobs of misery and waste of life and fortune with lies is > clearly and cleanly wrong. That has nothing to do with education > level. What are you of all people doing trotting out the old > rotten business of class distinctions anyway? I didn't, Amara did talking about how all of her academia friends are so anti-Bush. You try to trot out that your opinion and those of your friends is better because you are so well educated, you are declaring your own superiority and elitism. You distinguish yourself with your own statements. My giving your class a name you don't like isn't making class distinctions. You can't have your cake and eat it.... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 22:05:08 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:05:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: This is ridiculous hyperbole. When George Bush wears a funny hat and mandates that all Usians wear a cross, then we approach a theocracy. We're still in a country where the supereme court routinely blocks the ten commandments and such from being displayed in gov't courthouses. There is a strong seperation of church and state and it will remain so for the far future. Bush saying "God bless America" is a far cry from Wahhabism. BAL >From: Sahyinepu >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:08:35 -0600 > >For one...we are turning into the most hypocritical nation of all. We >invade other countries supposedly to liberate them from religious >oppression...oppression of women, as well as presumably gays, and of >course, oppression of the sciences. > >Meanwhile, we pass oppressive measures like the Patriot Acts I and II, make >gay marriage and even civil unions illegal, attempt to limit contraceptives >and abortion for women, and limit and stop scientific endeavors, be they in >the medical fields or the environmental ones. > >We are slowly looking more and more like the countries we claim to >liberate...we are looking a lot like a theocracy, and less like a >democracy. Which begs the question, why even bother to liberate them, when >we cannot protect and ensure the same freedoms here? > >America needs to sit down and shut up. > > >On Wednesday, November 3, 2004, at 01:25 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > >>No, Bush is not the only or most power-oriented; but >>he certainly is motivated by power more than the love >>of Jesus-- so 'technically' he is a fraud, that is to >>say Bush is as power-oriented or more so than the >>average presidential aspirant yet only a truly foolish >>person would take him at his word when he says he >>genuinely represents the higher purpose he presents to >>the world. Bush's overarching goal is to get as many >>of his relatives as practical into office, thereby he >>has a realistic legacy because anyone who gets their >>relatives in power or has relatives who are extremely >>wealthy is realistic is thinking their descendants >>have a better chance of living longer or at least >>continuing the genetic posterity. Only religious nuts >>or utter chumps would con themselves into thinking >>Bush would dedicate his life to politics for the sake >>of Jesus. >>>I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think you >>>wrongly assumed that Bush >>>was the only power-hungry or the most power-hungry >>>individual in the >>>equation here. >>> >>>===== >>>Mike Lorrey >> >> >> >>__________________________________ >>Do you Yahoo!? >>Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. >>www.yahoo.com >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>extropy-chat mailing list >>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat >> > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 3 22:07:05 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:07:05 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <948b11e04110311426e35c6e3@mail.gmail.com> References: <948b11e04110311426e35c6e3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041103160537.01c09e80@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:42 AM 11/3/2004 -0800, Samantha wrote: >I just hope the Shrub doesn't start mouthing off about a "mandate from >the people". I don't think I can take it. Hey, the man got 51.6% of the vote. If Kerry had got that many, wouldn't you regard it as a mandate? Damien Broderick From doc454 at prodigy.net Wed Nov 3 23:03:14 2004 From: doc454 at prodigy.net (doc454) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:03:14 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... References: Message-ID: <005f01c4c1f9$4d2a45d0$d49afea9@scottkupfds4gg> I saw a message on another list from someone distraught abut the results of the election.They concluded with the statement " I didn't realize the country was that (insert choice words here) " Yes it appears that the country is that (______)!!!!! I think the word that applies is Vengeful. Since 9/11 the majority of Americans have wanted a president that will go out and kick some Arab butt. It doesn't seem to matter that they were not directly or even indirectly involved in the attacks. When I try to explain that Sadam was hated by Bin Ladin and would have never co-operated on anything they they just reply 'they're all Arabs so they must have been in it together'. Security was one of the issues that turned the election. "What good is a job if you get blown up on the way to the grocery?" These same people were drawn to the poles in Ohio and 10 other states by the issue of Gay Marriage. I've heard these people say they don't care if someone is gay as long as they don't rub my face in it. Equating gayness with something you wouldn't want your face rubbed in. They wanted vengeance against those that would put the issue on the ballot. This is why pure democracy would never work. Lynch mobs would rule. This has made me ashamed to have been a conservative republican most of my life. The vitriol and hate on the left was just as bad they just didn't have the numbers. I still couldn't bring myself to vote for Kerry. When you vote for the lesser of two evils you still get evil. That's why I was one of 640 in Montgomery county that voted for Badnarik. . Thanks for listening. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Lee" To: ; Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:35 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > It seemed like a lot of anti-Bush sentiment prior to the election was by > dems, for dems. Take F9/11 for example: anti-Bushers loved it, pro-Bushers > hated it. I don't know anyone who changed their opinion because of it. I now > suspect that stuff like Fareinheight 9/11 galvanized republicans to vote to > counteract perceived increase in democrats voting. > > What puzzles me is how so many first time voters went for Bush. I expected > all of the increase in new voter registrations to be anti-Bush. Wierd. > > BAL > > >From: BillK > >To: ExI chat list > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:45:11 +0000 > > > >On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:17:43 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > > > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > > > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the > >future. > > > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > > > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > > > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > > > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > > > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > > > the world. > > > > > > >Bush won the popular vote in the face of unremitting opposition from > >virtually all the liberal, intellectual writers and artists. All the > >opinion columns, media sources, leader writers, etc. in US and around > >the world have been almost unanimous in opposition to Bush. > > > >Why? I suspect that a lot of the Bush support comes from people who > >never read the writers output. I think they are writing for each > >other, mutual support and back-scratching. > > > >One theory is that the liberal intellectuals (especially European, but > >world-wide) have been lost for years since the failure of socialism > >and they have now united in anti-Americanism. Kerry has been trying to > >say that it is not really anti-Americanism, that it is anti-Bushism. > >(Vote for me and the world will love the US again!) But this is hardly > >believable. > > > >If you accept the 'War on Terror' then regardless of who is President, > >the anti-Americanism will continue. And Bush is better at the 'War on > >Terror' than Kerry would have been. > > > >BillK > >_______________________________________________ > >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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 23:20:38 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 15:20:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <005f01c4c1f9$4d2a45d0$d49afea9@scottkupfds4gg> Message-ID: <20041103232038.91859.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> It appears the odds now for a general war in the 'Middle East' (+ maybe Central Asia) are 50%, so Bush is correct to ask us to join together. But gay marriage bans in several states plus a possible anti-gay marriage amendment is not so much meanspirited (though it is mean) as it is very petty; that is unless one believes in 'Sodom and Gomorrah being punished'... you know, the whole "endtimes" package. Can't get it out of my mind that there is a potent self-fulfilling death wish involved, however it could merely be paranoia from putting a limited mind into overdrive. doc454 wrote: I saw a message on another list from someone distraught abut the results of the election.They concluded with the statement " I didn't realize the country was that (insert choice words here) " Yes it appears that the country is that (______)!!!!! I think the word that applies is Vengeful. Since 9/11 the majority of Americans have wanted a president that will go out and kick some Arab butt. It doesn't seem to matter that they were not directly or even indirectly involved in the attacks. When I try to explain that Sadam was hated by Bin Ladin and would have never co-operated on anything they they just reply 'they're all Arabs so they must have been in it together'. Security was one of the issues that turned the election. "What good is a job if you get blown up on the way to the grocery?" These same people were drawn to the poles in Ohio and 10 other states by the issue of Gay Marriage. I've heard these people say they don't care if someone is gay as long as they don't rub my face in it. Equating gayness with something you wouldn't want your face rubbed in. They wanted vengeance against those that would put the issue on the ballot. This is why pure democracy would never work. Lynch mobs would rule. This has made me ashamed to have been a conservative republican most of my life. The vitriol and hate on the left was just as bad they just didn't have the numbers. I still couldn't bring myself to vote for Kerry. When you vote for the lesser of two evils you still get evil. That's why I was one of 640 in Montgomery county that voted for Badnarik. . Thanks for listening. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Lee" To: ; Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:35 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > It seemed like a lot of anti-Bush sentiment prior to the election was by > dems, for dems. Take F9/11 for example: anti-Bushers loved it, pro-Bushers > hated it. I don't know anyone who changed their opinion because of it. I now > suspect that stuff like Fareinheight 9/11 galvanized republicans to vote to > counteract perceived increase in democrats voting. > > What puzzles me is how so many first time voters went for Bush. I expected > all of the increase in new voter registrations to be anti-Bush. Wierd. > > BAL > > >From: BillK > >To: ExI chat list > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > >Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:45:11 +0000 > > > >On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:17:43 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > > > > > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > > > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. Also, > > > I suspect it won't be easy for Americans with nonAmericans in the > >future. > > > I heard often in the last years that 'Americans simply made a > > > mistake',with regards to the Bush administration, and so they cleanly > > > separated the American people from their government, and expected the > > > Americans to 'set things right' in this election. Now Americans will be > > > much more closely aligned with their government in the eyes of many in > > > the world. > > > > > > >Bush won the popular vote in the face of unremitting opposition from > >virtually all the liberal, intellectual writers and artists. All the > >opinion columns, media sources, leader writers, etc. in US and around > >the world have been almost unanimous in opposition to Bush. > > > >Why? I suspect that a lot of the Bush support comes from people who > >never read the writers output. I think they are writing for each > >other, mutual support and back-scratching. > > > >One theory is that the liberal intellectuals (especially European, but > >world-wide) have been lost for years since the failure of socialism > >and they have now united in anti-Americanism. Kerry has been trying to > >say that it is not really anti-Americanism, that it is anti-Bushism. > >(Vote for me and the world will love the US again!) But this is hardly > >believable. > > > >If you accept the 'War on Terror' then regardless of who is President, > >the anti-Americanism will continue. And Bush is better at the 'War on > >Terror' than Kerry would have been. > > > >BillK > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fortean1 at mindspring.com Thu Nov 4 01:55:49 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:55:49 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... References: <948b11e04110311426e35c6e3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <41898C25.4CB6AE87@mindspring.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: > > Well, maybe we can blame the huge predominance of untested voting > machines. Neither I nor anyone else has any way of knowing how much > rigging was done there. They certainly are not proven to be fair and > accurate. > > On the other hand if I was rigging machines I would have rigged in a > much better margin that what eventually occurred. But perhaps the > hypothetical riggers simply misjudged how much was needed. > > Perhaps. > > I just hope the Shrub doesn't start mouthing off about a "mandate from > the people". I don't think I can take it. > > - s Emigrate. I am. Terry -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] From sentience at pobox.com Thu Nov 4 02:19:45 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:19:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <20041103200907.27036.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103200907.27036.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <418991C1.4050405@pobox.com> Al Brooks wrote: > No, I am NOT being funny. I meant libertarian in the > philosophical not political sense. > Madam, I was a libertarian when you were in diapers, > and drugs & sex are most absolutely an attraction to > younger libertarians. Sir, when I was your age I was only thirteen years old, and not all younger libertarians think it's about the sex and drugs. Either that, or I want a refund. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From riel at surriel.com Thu Nov 4 02:46:42 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:46:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Immigrate to Europe In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Brian Lee wrote: > This isn't as a response to the recent election, but something I've been > thinking about for years. I can recommend living in other countries. I grew up in the Netherlands, lived in Brazil for three years (and met my wife there), and currently we're living in the USA. Yes, government is messed up everywhere. Blame the politicians. I've found all the places where I lived to be good places to live, though. The people are all friendly (in their own way, different in each culture) and living in different cultures has helped me understand the world a lot better than I could have otherwise. 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 riel at surriel.com Thu Nov 4 02:53:17 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:53:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <7a321705041103093132977a46@mail.gmail.com> References: <001601c4c1c0$746a1f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <7a321705041103093132977a46@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Zero Powers wrote: > I plan to proudly display one of those bumper stickers that says: "Don't > blame me, I voted for Kerry." Reminds me of a certain episode of The Simpsons. "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos" 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 sean at valuationpartners.com.au Thu Nov 4 02:57:10 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:57:10 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Bush's triumph: getting the poor to favour the rich In-Reply-To: <41898C25.4CB6AE87@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041104025713.D7129C1BF@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Bush's triumph: getting the poor to favour the rich By Anatole Kaletsky - The London Times WHATEVER happens in today's American election - and the odds still marginally favour a Kerry victory, for reasons which I explain for the benefit of political junkies at the bottom of this page - one thing is absolutely certain. This has not been an election about economics. In fact, this election should refute once and for all the widespread belief that voting behaviour in advanced western democracies is determined largely by "pocketbook issues". But I would go further and suggest that this election proves something deeper about modern democratic politics. I believe this election has been about economics - but the influence of economics on politics has been very different from the one that pundits normally emphasise. The Bush record suggests that the macroeconomic indicators that are usually believed to motivate ordinary voters - unemployment, inflation and wage growth - are less important than the policies which govern the social distribution of income and economic power. More intriguingly, what Bush has demonstrated is that people can readily be persuaded to vote in accordance with the economic interests of people much richer than themselves. The fact is that, even if Bush loses marginally today, many millions of poor and middle-class Americans will be voting for tax and public spending policies that are directly against their personal economic interests, but hugely beneficial to a small elite. This elite, which could for simplicity be defined as the top 5 per cent of the US income distribution (households with annual earnings over $150,499 in 2001), has not only benefited disproportionately from President Bush's tax policies but - much more importantly - it has lost nothing from the cutbacks in welfare that his budget deficits will surely require. Its after-tax income had already risen by 53 per cent in real terms in the two decades before President Bush came to power - nearly four times the increase in living standards enjoyed by America's middle 20 per cent. These affluent voters might therefore be expected to provide the core of the President's support - and in a sense they do, since the great majority of wealthy Americans continue to vote Republican, notwithstanding their supposed distaste for the illiberal social and religious policies of the party's dominant Right wing. The real numerical base of the Republican Party, however, are the lower-income Americans whose economic interests it clearly does not represent. This is evident in polling data that show the proportion of Republican voters to be almost as high in the middle and lower-middle income groups as it is in the top 20 per cent. Even more striking is the regional pattern of party support. As shown in the second chart, the states solidly backing Bush are much poorer than the ones supporting Kerry. In the British context, it is as if Glasgow and Merthyr Tydfil were reliably voting Tory, while Henley and Kensington were Labour strongholds. The political triumph of the American Right has been to advance relentlessly the economic interests of the country's richest people, while emphasising a swath of moral, social and foreign policy issues that motivate - and certainly distract - middle-class and poor voters. This has been a spectacularly successful strategy which the elites in other countries, including Britain, are likely to follow if they feel that their interests are seriously threatened by a resurgent Left. How can I jump to this broad conclusion, especially after stating that Bush will probably lose the election today? Because the most striking result of this election is already clear. The fact that Bush has any chance at all of re-election is evidence enough of the Republicans' political success. After all, his economic policies have resulted in unprecedented job losses, his tax reforms have produced a massive shift of income from poor to rich, his public spending plans have favoured corporations at the expense of jobless families, his foreign policies have plunged the nation into war on false pretences and failed to bring to justice the perpetrators of 9/11. By almost every economic criterion, the average American voter has had a very hard time during the past four years. Unemployment has risen, per capita income growth and real wages have stagnated and Bush has been the first President since Herbert Hoover to preside over a net loss of jobs. Even inflation, which has remained remarkably low and stable at about 2 per cent on the official figures, is widely perceived to be much higher than the Government admits. According to the Conference Board's monthly survey, public expectations of inflation in the next 12 months are now 5 per cent, almost the highest level in the survey's 13-year record. Moreover, the economic misery has been worst in the manufacturing states on whose voters President Bush now depends for re-election. The US manufacturing sector has suffered a net decline of 20 per cent in employment in the past four years, implying that while most of the US economy has managed to tread water reasonably comfortably since President Bush was elected, the manufacturing states really have suffered their worst economic setback since the 1930s. On any objective reading of this evidence, President Bush should already have been consigned to history. Yet he is now within an ace of re-election. And even if he loses, most of his policies - especially on tax and public spending - will remain intact. In other words, the Republican Right has won the US policy debate on all the important economic issues, whatever happens today at the polls. Having said all this, why do I think that Kerry may win? Simply because all past experience suggests a marginal advantage to the challenger when the final polls show an even split. As Richard Medley, of Medley Global Advisors, one of America's sharpest and successful political analysts, puts it, there are two rules of thumb for analysing the final round of polls. The first is to watch the President's approval ratings. This approval rating - based on a broad and seemingly meaningless question about whether the voter has generally approved of the President's performance - is probably the statistic that has had a generally confident White House seriously worried. No incumbent President has been elected with a job approval below 50, but Bush's has hovered just below the critical 50 per cent mark for most of the period since the election campaign began. Secondly, all attention in Washington has turned to the final round of voting intentions surveys, collected on Saturday and Sunday. Here again Mr Medley and other politicos suggested a simple rule of thumb: if Bush ended up below 50 per cent in the final Gallup poll and in the average of all polls published by RealClearPolitics.com on Monday, then he would probably lose the election. For some reason, historically, incumbents never do better than their final poll numbers and most often do worse. If he's above 50 per cent in those polls then he'll probably win. Well, what is the answer? The final Gallup/CNN vote projection published yesterday had Bush with 49 per cent of the vote, exactly even with Kerry. However, the actual Gallup sample, before the firm's adjustments for expected voter turn-out, was slightly less favourable to Bush, with 46 per cent of registered voters backing Bush against 48 per cent for Kerry. Turning to the average of the latest polls surveyed on RealClearPolitics.com, this put Bush at 48.5, ahead of Kerry's 46.7, but still a tantalising 1.5 points below the magic 50. Given that in 2000, Bush was 2 points ahead of Gore in the final Gallup projection and also in the average of all the polls released just before the election, this is a very uncomfortable position for the incumbent. After all, Gore ended up winning the popular vote in 2000 by a half-point margin. And the gap between national and state poll trends looks slightly less favourable to Bush this time round. From riel at surriel.com Thu Nov 4 02:58:55 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:58:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041103162511.81598.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: > So you live in a self-reinforcing memeset that never fact checks with a > cultural group outside your own, because you have a built in immune > system that presumes that your greater education makes you smarter than > anybody else and that therefore your opinions are therefore more correct. It appears that many people seem to be suffering from this phenomenon. Quite possibly a majority of the voters. Replace "greater education" by "one true religion" or other dogmas as required. ;) 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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 03:06:43 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:06:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] LP NH:The Wrath-tionality of Kahn In-Reply-To: <418991C1.4050405@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041104030643.93637.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Where did it say in my post that ALL younger libertarians think libertarianism is about sex & drugs? Though youth is wasted on the young, your refund is in the mail, with interest. Later on this month's dues for membership in SI will arrive. We all must be patient. >Sir, when I was your age I was only thirteen years old, and not all younger >libertarians think it's about the sex and drugs. Either that, or I want a >refund. >Eliezer S. Yudkowsky --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 03:16:31 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:16:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104031636.97067.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Hillary will run in 2008, let's hope she wins. >"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos" Nixon for '08 - he's tanned, rested and ready. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brentn at freeshell.org Thu Nov 4 03:37:53 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 22:37:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041103213118.37544.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/3/04 13:31) Mike Lorrey wrote: >I didn't, Amara did talking about how all of her academia friends are >so anti-Bush. You try to trot out that your opinion and those of your >friends is better because you are so well educated, you are declaring >your own superiority and elitism. You distinguish yourself with your >own statements. My giving your class a name you don't like isn't making >class distinctions. You can't have your cake and eat it.... Hmm. Let's check the facts on your statement: --- Amara Graps wrote: > I am so disappointed. How could Bush win the popular vote? I don't > understand this; no one I spoke with here understands it either. > Also, (11/3/04 15:21) Amara Graps wrote: >Perhaps it is true that they don't know many 'Republicans' (whatever >that is). It's universally true that my friends and colleagues >(worldwide) don't like the actions of Bush administration. You know, it doesn't look like to me that Amara was referring solely to academics. Certainly, I believe she has friends outside of academia. Further if you check the time stamps on the message where you first referred to "chattering classes," it predates Amara's reference to "colleagues." Basically, you took a cheap shot at Amara via her comrades and in doing so started playing the class warfare game that the Republicans and Democrats have been playing for years. That's rather amusing. Its also amusing that you refer to "insular groups" so disparagingly when you proudly display membership in probably one of the most insular, chattering group in American politics: the Libertarian Party. :) Brent -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 4 03:49:54 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:49:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004f01c4c221$587ccde0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Brian Lee > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > What puzzles me is how so many first time voters went for > Bush. I expected all of the increase in new voter registrations to be anti-Bush. Wierd. > > BAL That was a common mistake, a view held by both parties. The dems were struggling to get young voters to register and turn out, whereas the reps were hesitant to the point of being uncomfortable. But I saw a few interviews where they actually went onto campuses, and learned that as a whole, young people are not particularly liberal. They seem balanced about the same as their parents generation. Perhap we made an incorrect generalization about 20-somethings based on their predecessors. Their presence at the polls did not seem to have a big impact either way. Im trying to get a feel for generation Y issues. I would think that the draft would be one of them, but the two major parties both opposed a draft. There is a great reason for this: we can't trust draftees in any conceivable future conflict. I would think the right to abortion would be a generation Y issue, but birth control is getting better, more foolproof, so perhaps this isn't such a big deal. So what are the young voters thinking? spike From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 4 04:07:07 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:07:07 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005001c4c223$c3360dc0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > On Wed, 3 Nov 2004, Spike wrote: > > > > > Ja, Badnarik did rather poorly everywhere outside > > New Hampshire. > MB ... > Yes, sadly, he did. I think too many folks who might have voted for > him were running scared and picked the "lesser of two evils" of the > Big Two. :( > > This time I managed not to do that and felt much better with myself > when I left the voting booth. MB Ja me too. Of course I have the luxury of living in a state where it doesn't matter. We Taxifornians can vote for whomever we like, without worry of impacting the outcome. I don't expect that to change. I must say, it worries me to have the whitehouse and both houses of congress in the same party. That empowers government, which always bodes ill. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 4 04:38:39 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:38:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Bush's triumph: gettingthe poor to favour the rich In-Reply-To: <20041104025713.D7129C1BF@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <005101c4c228$2ab51f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Sean Diggins ... RE: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Bush's > triumph: gettingthe poor to favour the rich > > > Bush's triumph: getting the poor to favour the rich > By Anatole Kaletsky - The London Times > > WHATEVER happens in today's American election - and the odds still > marginally favour a Kerry victory, for reasons which I explain for the > benefit of political junkies at the bottom of this page - one thing is > absolutely certain. This has not been an election about > economics... Interesting essay, but I long for people everywhere to recognize a simple fact. It is not the president's job to give us a job. It is the *venture capitalists'* job to give us a job. The president might encourage venture capitalists to give us jobs, but he is only very indirectly responsible for unemployment. I do hope that message becomes clear: the president is not the CEO of America. His powers are much more restricted, fortunately. Those who hold the real capital are those who control the economy. If we want them to make the economy good, we need to pay them. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 4 04:45:42 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 22:45:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] pay the CEOs! In-Reply-To: <005101c4c228$2ab51f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <20041104025713.D7129C1BF@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <005101c4c228$2ab51f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041103224343.01adaec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:38 PM 11/3/2004 -0800, Spike wrote: >Those who hold the real capital are those >who control the economy. If we want them to make the >economy good, we need to pay them. I could have sworn I read in the papers that they do get paid, and often quite well. Damien Broderick From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Thu Nov 4 05:15:17 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 13:15:17 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Bush's triumph:gettingthe poor to favour the rich In-Reply-To: <005101c4c228$2ab51f50$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041104051520.A83E0C1CC@vscan02.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Spike S I do hope that message becomes clear: the president is not the CEO of America. ---------------------------- Except when it comes to invading sovereign nations without the sanction of the UN, as a premptive strike, based on misleading garbage, dragging other nations into the debacle (including my country, Australia, which invaded Iraq pre-emptively without the UN for the first time in history) and then carving up the spoils in a very obvious case of cynical war profiteering. But GWB didn't decide to do this? Then, may I ask, who _made_ him do it? Could it be.....THE RULING CLASS? Ooops, sorry, there's that phrase again.... Those of you on this list who come from America seeme oblivious, uncomprehending and wilfully ignorant of widespread world opinion regarding this. The US is seen as the Death Star....and I fully understand why. Look beyond your shores for once. Have some goddam empathy, especially those of you who call yourselves "Libertarians", all the while not giving two hoots about the deeds done in your name, on your behalf. But YOU buy the oil products..right? And given a chance, my bet is ALL you Libertarians would have gladly been there at the Big Haliburton Carve Up Iraq Barbeque if you had the chance.......you are rank opportunists, like the Bush administration and their corporate friends. "venture capitalists"??? What a concept. Why don't you examine in depth how the accounting actually works for your average, run of the mill VC setup, particularly where the money comes from and how it is carved up. Employment is the last thing that is about. Sean From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Nov 4 06:08:04 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 22:08:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> "The president got re-elected by dividing the country along fault lines of fear, intolerance, ignorance and religious rule. He doesn't want to heal rifts; he wants to bring any riffraff who disagree to heel. W. ran a jihad in America so he can fight one in Iraq - drawing a devoted flock of evangelicals, or "values voters," as they call themselves, to the polls by opposing abortion, suffocating stem cell research and supporting a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.": http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/opinion/04dowd.html?hp ... and four more years of *that smirk.* Bushed, bamboozled and bewildered, Olga From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 07:14:24 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:14:24 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> Olga, I couldn't agree more on what you say here, but the fact is, he has won. And I don't think this depends too much on the money his camp could spend on the campaign: for what I have seen, the networks were saturated with advertisement from both camps. Perhaps we will just have to acknowledge that for the time being his message of fundamentalist jihad just resonates more than ours with the average American (yes, American: a politician like Bush would never get elected in Europe where the average citizen is a bit less vulnerable to advertising and listens a bit more to what is actually said). It is up to us to change that. I think our friend Mike has a very valid point when he calls for a fact check: most people just disagree with us. Again, it is up to us to change that. A way is not to limit ourselves to preaching to the converted, but also engage in debate with those who disagree. On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 22:08:04 -0800, Olga Bourlin wrote: > "The president got re-elected by dividing the country along fault lines of > fear, intolerance, ignorance and religious rule. He doesn't want to heal > rifts; he wants to bring any riffraff who disagree to heel. > > W. ran a jihad in America so he can fight one in Iraq - drawing a devoted > flock of evangelicals, or "values voters," as they call themselves, to the > polls by opposing abortion, suffocating stem cell research and supporting a > constitutional amendment against gay marriage.": > > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/opinion/04dowd.html?hp > > ... and four more years of *that smirk.* > > Bushed, bamboozled and bewildered, > > Olga From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 4 07:06:42 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:06:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: to the list: I apologize for taking Mike Lorrey's bait ('chatterbox class'). It was so bizarre, that I had to say something, but I should have kept my mouth shut and let his words stand on their own. to Mike Lorrey: I don't like my words being twisted to support your rant. If you are so inclined, read what I wrote again without your baggage; I think you'll find that my words have no correspondence with what you wrote. In the future, please say what you need to say without stepping on people's back. It's better communication. From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 07:54:15 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 23:54:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> But remember the millions of Americans who are intolerant, who think homosexuality is wicked; who think their god is the one & only; who think they are going to Heaven, others are damned to hell. They put Bush where he is today. Without Bush they are still something, without them Bush is nothing. > "The president got re-elected by dividing the > country along fault lines of > fear, intolerance, ignorance and religious rule. He > doesn't want to heal > rifts; he wants to bring any riffraff who disagree > to heel. ===== Nixon for '08 - he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 08:04:25 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 00:04:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104080425.68522.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Mike, let's look at Bush's anti-gay aspect. Bush knows that those who oppose tobacco are picking on the minority of smokers, yet he cannot admit the millions trying to outlaw gay marriage (and succeeding) are also picking on a minority-- gays. In the past gays wanted affirmative action, the power to force firms to hire them, plus other powers; today the situation is different. You describe the situation from both sides and we'll take it from there. > >I didn't, Amara did talking about how all of her > academia friends are > >so anti-Bush. You try to trot out that your opinion > and those of your > >friends is better because you are so well educated, > you are declaring > >your own superiority and elitism. >>Mike Lorrey ===== Nixon for '08 - he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 4 09:36:46 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:36:46 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals (was: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins...) Message-ID: Natasha: >> What can our organizations, such as Extropy Institute, do to promote good >> relations between ourselves and others throughout the world? That is a >> first step. Given the strong individualist personalities here, I think that one can add to the above: "What can *individuals* do to promote good relations between ourselves and others throughout the world?" Hal Finney: >I think that's a great question. Of course, ExI is not a major player on >the world stage and can't by itself rehabilitate America's international >image. After Bush is out, then I think that ten or twenty years will be needed to recover its reputation (America's international image). It will be a long road. >But just by asking it, we are reminded that we are not our country. Or rather, we are not our government. I would like to say something about linking people to particular places and governments. During human interactions with those in our environments, many people seem to need to fix a person to a place ("Where are you from?"), perhaps in order to categorize that person in their mind. Because once they've categorized that person, their interactions becomes easier: they can use a mental lookup table to form hypotheses, conclusions, 'facts' or prejudices, in order to know what behavior to use in order to proceed in that interaction. It's natural, because it can be scary (unconsciously) to interact with strangers, so then categorizing another person helps to overcome a person's fears. You know that I don't like categorization and 'group thinking', but to some extent, all of us use it in our daily lives. I think a worthwhile goal for improving one's inner state is to catch it and try to break it, in ourselves, or if we have energy, in others, when it happens. Starting with stereotypes. Stereotypes are all around us. Individuals initiate them, media and governments amplify them, and a feedback loop is in motion. It's hard work to filter what is possibly real and what is probably fiction. I try very hard, in the places where I live, to gather alot of data, treat people as individuals, and in my most critical mindset, I expect people to treat me the same (that is, with no stereotypes). I knew some of the stereotypes that the U.S. media/culture/government presented about other countries outside before I moved away from the U.S. I've learned, since I moved out, of some of the U.S. stereotypes that nonU.S. media/culture/government give. So then what can individuals in this extropian/transhuman community do? Try to break the stereotypes. Put this thought in the back of your mind and bring to the forefront when you feel ready to tackle it. Perhaps you will be lucky (because this is the best way) to be in a foreign place and such an opportunity will be placed in your forefront without any effort. For example: [one conversation with an old Italian man 8 months ago on the train between Frascati and Rome] him: "Where are you from?" me: "I was born in Hawaii." him: "Nice life there isn't it? But do they have good food there? You Americans like McDonalds for your food." me: "I don't remember when I ate McDonalds food last. Perhaps five years ago I ate something from McDonalds." him: "Then what do you eat?" me: "I like fresh fruit and vegetables and fresh seafood." him: "Oh! Italians like that too." ------ [one conversation with a medium age Turkish man several years ago at the dentist office in Heidelberg] him: "Where are you from?" me: "I am from California" him: "Oh! I've never visited there. I _do_ want to visit but I don't like your president, so I don't want to visit California for very long." me: "I didn't vote for the U.S. president." him: "But why did other Americans?" me: "I don't know. I think that September 11 triggered a huge fear in some Americans, and they feel safer with that man." him: "Well, I don't like him. Do you know what I want to do in California?" me: "No, tell me." him: "I want to see the Pacific Ocean, and feel it. Run from the sand on the beach and tip my toes in the wonderful ocean, and then leave California. That is enough for me." me: "It is a nice image. A dream you can work for." When I lived in the U.S. (38 years), I was annoyed that 'my society', that is, culture, media, etc. in the U.S. places where I lived gave such stereotypical or else little attention to the world outside of its borders. I wanted more data, so then with a PhD potential, I moved to Germany. Immediately, I stepped outside of the stereotypes, and I played around for a while with the idea of assuming different identities. I was 'free' to try on different personnas, perspectives, viewpoints, and it was a liberating feeling to discover that I could be whatever I wanted without the U.S. baggage. At the end of this discovery, I found that I was most comfortable with no masks, no assumed baggage, at all. I liked (and still like) this maskless way of living a great deal. However, the question: "Where are you from?" is something from which I could not escape. What do I answer? I don't like governments, and after Bush was elected, his administration become something I especially didn't agree with, so saying "United States" was out of the question for me. If I answered with particular states like Hawaii, California, then I could see in the other person's eyes, the stereotypes attached with those places (Hawaii: "paradise", California: "wacky"), but for a while: California was a good working answer. Then I moved to Italy, and it no longer worked either. [Accidently I brought my language class to hysterical laughter when I answered 'California' - they thought that my answering with a state when the correct answer was a country was very goofy. "And was I born in California?" "No I was not, I was born in Hawaii, but I have not lived in Hawaii in 30 years." "But you should have said that. Aren't you Hawaiian?" "No I am not Hawaiian. I'm half Latvian, one-quarter Greek, one-quarter German." "Oh! So then you are from Latvia." "No I am not, but my father was born in Riga. He lives in the US, now" ... and so on. This is the kind of confusion I encounter in my (rather provincial) little Italian town, where I live.] >By asking what we can do, as individuals united with common beliefs, >we emphasize that our individual actions must be distinguished from >the collective actions taken in our name by nations and other political >bodies. It's a two-way street with all of our interactions. No matter what each of us think and feel with regards to our identification (or not) with our government, state, city, family, etc., the person with whom we interact has their own perspective of us (or rather, me, the individual). So then a constantly recurring decision must be made: "Do I spend the time/energy to communicate individual-to-individual, with no masks and stereotypes, or do I slide by this opportunity because ... " (fill in the blank: "I am tired", "I am in a hurry", etc.). You see, no matter what our own perception is, communication involves (at least) two people. >Political bodies are not voluntary societies. But in democracies there are votes. Many voting systems are not perfect, but still, *some* people voted for that government. Even though _I_ know, and _you_ know how deeply split the U.S. population is/was over this election, it will be forgotten by many people out of the U.S. in a short time, and then Bush will be seen as the representative face. Bush was elected for a second term. That says *something* about the American people. The eyes looking on the U.S. will, much more than before, closely align the American people with their government, for this reason. I think individuals like ourselves have our work cut out for us, to separate ourselves from that government; if we so choose that task. I am not very willing to do that now because I would much rather focus my attention on other things. My own goal now is take care of my immediate environment (myself, family, good friends). If I do a good enough job, then what I succeed in my immediate world will spill out in my larger world. >The direction I would pursue in response to Natasha's question is simply >to emphasize this reality. We in the United States are not our country. >Neither are Europeans their countries, or their continent. Likewise with >people in all parts of the world. We are individuals, with individual >beliefs. Those beliefs are what should govern our interactions, not >the views which happen to have a numerical majority in the region where >we live. Yes.. Sometimes, I _do_ try to get this point across (see below). Amara -------------November 29, 2002------------------------------------ To: extropians at extropy.org From: Amara Graps Subject: Re: green-blue mudball (Re: ANTIOPTIMISM: Pakistan and North Korea) RonH: >That's not true. At this level, you can indeed see "borders"--they >look like fences and walls and uniformed men with guns. They are >every bit as much a part of nature as trees and mountains. I would >expect that kind "nature good, man bad" argument from Luddites, but >I expect better from Amara. It had nothing to do with "nature good, man bad", Lee. Alex understood what I was getting at. Here was the conversation again. If you want me to explain, then I will. ---------- RonH >Perhaps I am being unduly harsh in my estimate of European strategy and >I am certainly willing to listen but from here that is how it looks. Amara Graps >Last time I saw a photograph of the Earth from space, I did not >notice any lines drawn on the land masses. >From here, that is how it looks. RonH >Amara, >What does that mean? Here: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-2/html/iss002e5489.html (beautiful isn't it?) Amara ------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Amara Graps, PhD Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 10:38:25 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 02:38:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals (was: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104103825.44693.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> I can't think of anything do-able, except maybe finding someone interested in communicating with select persons in the 'Middle East' to attempt to interest them in transhumanism/extropianism. The communicator would have to be someone who knows science, who is diplomatic & empathetic. A one in a million sort of person. > Natasha: > >> What can our organizations, such as Extropy > Institute, do to promote good > >> relations between ourselves and others > throughout the world? That is a > >> first step. > > Given the strong individualist personalities here, I > think that one can > add to the above: "What can *individuals* do to > promote good relations > between ourselves and others throughout the world?" > > Hal Finney: > >I think that's a great question. Of course, ExI is > not a major player on > >the world stage and can't by itself rehabilitate > America's international > >image. > > After Bush is out, then I think that ten or twenty > years will be needed > to recover its reputation (America's international > image). It will be a > long road. > > >But just by asking it, we are reminded that we are > not our country. > > Or rather, we are not our government. > > I would like to say something about linking people > to particular places > and governments. > > During human interactions with those in our > environments, many people > seem to need to fix a person to a place ("Where are > you from?"), perhaps > in order to categorize that person in their mind. > Because once they've > categorized that person, their interactions becomes > easier: they can use > a mental lookup table to form hypotheses, > conclusions, 'facts' or > prejudices, in order to know what behavior to use in > order to proceed in > that interaction. It's natural, because it can be > scary (unconsciously) > to interact with strangers, so then categorizing > another person helps to > overcome a person's fears. > > You know that I don't like categorization and 'group > thinking', but to > some extent, all of us use it in our daily lives. I > think a worthwhile > goal for improving one's inner state is to catch it > and try to break it, > in ourselves, or if we have energy, in others, when > it happens. Starting > with stereotypes. > > Stereotypes are all around us. Individuals initiate > them, media and > governments amplify them, and a feedback loop is in > motion. It's hard work > to filter what is possibly real and what is probably > fiction. I try very > hard, in the places where I live, to gather alot of > data, treat people as > individuals, and in my most critical mindset, I > expect people to treat > me the same (that is, with no stereotypes). I knew > some of the > stereotypes that the U.S. media/culture/government > presented about other > countries outside before I moved away from the U.S. > I've learned, since > I moved out, of some of the U.S. stereotypes that > nonU.S. > media/culture/government give. So then what can > individuals in this > extropian/transhuman community do? Try to break the > stereotypes. > Put this thought in the back of your mind and bring > to the forefront > when you feel ready to tackle it. > > Perhaps you will be lucky (because this is the best > way) to be in a > foreign place and such an opportunity will be placed > in your forefront > without any effort. For example: > > [one conversation with an old Italian man 8 months > ago on the > train between Frascati and Rome] > > him: "Where are you from?" > > me: "I was born in Hawaii." > > him: "Nice life there isn't it? But do they have > good food there? > You Americans like McDonalds for your food." > > me: "I don't remember when I ate McDonalds food > last. Perhaps > five years ago I ate something from McDonalds." > > him: "Then what do you eat?" > > me: "I like fresh fruit and vegetables and fresh > seafood." > > him: "Oh! Italians like that too." > > ------ > > [one conversation with a medium age Turkish man > several years ago > at the dentist office in Heidelberg] > > him: "Where are you from?" > > me: "I am from California" > > him: "Oh! I've never visited there. I _do_ want to > visit but I don't > like your president, so I don't want to visit > California for very long." > > me: "I didn't vote for the U.S. president." > > him: "But why did other Americans?" > > me: "I don't know. I think that September 11 > triggered a huge > fear in some Americans, and they feel safer with > that man." > > him: "Well, I don't like him. Do you know what I > want to do > in California?" > > me: "No, tell me." > > him: "I want to see the Pacific Ocean, and feel it. > Run from the sand on > the beach and tip my toes in the wonderful ocean, > and then leave > California. That is enough for me." > > me: "It is a nice image. A dream you can work for." > > > When I lived in the U.S. (38 years), I was annoyed > that 'my society', > that is, culture, media, etc. in the U.S. places > where I lived gave such > stereotypical or else little attention to the world > outside of its > borders. I wanted more data, so then with a PhD > potential, I moved to > Germany. Immediately, I stepped outside of the > stereotypes, and I played > around for a while with the idea of assuming > different identities. I was > 'free' to try on different personnas, perspectives, > viewpoints, and it > was a liberating feeling to discover that I could be > whatever I wanted > without the U.S. baggage. At the end of this > discovery, I found that I was > most comfortable with no masks, no assumed baggage, > at all. I liked (and > still like) this maskless way of living a great > deal. > > However, the question: "Where are you from?" is > something from which I > could not escape. What do I answer? I don't like > governments, and after > Bush was elected, his administration become > something I especially > didn't agree with, so saying "United States" was out > of the question for > me. If I answered with particular states like > Hawaii, California, then I > could see in the other person's eyes, the > stereotypes attached with those > places (Hawaii: "paradise", California: "wacky"), > but for a while: > California was a good working answer. Then I moved > to Italy, and it no > longer worked either. > > [Accidently I brought my language class to > hysterical laughter when I > === message truncated === ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 4 10:37:28 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:37:28 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals (was: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins...) Message-ID: Al Brooks: >I can't think of anything do-able, except maybe finding someone >interested in communicating with select persons in the 'Middle East' to >attempt to interest them in transhumanism/extropianism. The >communicator would have to be someone who knows science, who is >diplomatic & empathetic. A one in a million sort of person. Not at all one in million. (that's the first premise you can drop). Open your mind, open your heart, look around, and smile. You'll find persons like this, if you use something like this approach. Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." --Anais Nin From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 11:57:18 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:57:18 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Prop 71: The New Gold Rush Message-ID: <470a3c5204110403576917e016@mail.gmail.com> Wired: Scientists around the country who study embryonic stem cells may be mourning four more years of President Bush's restrictive funding policy, but California scientists are throwing a party, and top researchers in less-funded states are hoping for invitations. In the Golden State, stem cell researchers will see a windfall of $3 billion over the next 10 years, averaging about $300 million a year, thanks to the passage of Proposition 71, the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative. It shouldn't be difficult to entice the best minds in the country to move to a place where their work is fully supported by a state known for its mild climate. California has found a way to supplant federal money with its stem cell initiative, and it's the envy of the rest of the country's stem cell researchers. http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,65588,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1 From riel at surriel.com Thu Nov 4 12:38:45 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:38:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals (was: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins...) In-Reply-To: <20041104103825.44693.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104103825.44693.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Al Brooks wrote: > I can't think of anything do-able, except maybe > finding someone interested in communicating with > select persons in the 'Middle East' to attempt to > interest them in transhumanism/extropianism. The > communicator would have to be someone who knows > science, who is diplomatic & empathetic. > A one in a million sort of person. You appear to be making the assumption that it is hard to communicate with middle eastern people. This is contrary to my experiences. I have found some middle eastern people to be very openminded and easy to communicate with. 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 emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 14:08:01 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:38:01 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <004f01c4c221$587ccde0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <004f01c4c221$587ccde0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411040608227a0de1@mail.gmail.com> I've been wondering whether generation Y can't actually connect with government. It seems to have much less influence in the modern western world, where each person needs to act like a service company of size 1 rather than an employee... each person secures job security (or not) through peddling a skillset rather than long service, "loyalty", or any of the other job market anachronisms. Life takes place in a chaotic decentralised self organising milleau of economy, and the top level of control seems increasingly to be a mirage. So even if Y was convinced to come out and vote, perhaps there is no generational shape to their voting, and thus the almost random split. Perhaps the left/right two party politics of today really is meaningless? The opposing major parties, especially in Australia, look more and more like factions of one party, or maybe like football teams; you back the one you were brought up to support, but really there is no difference outside of the colour of the jerseys. Vote 1 Chelsea for President! Emlyn On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:49:54 -0800, Spike wrote: > > Brian Lee > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > > > What puzzles me is how so many first time voters went for > > Bush. I expected all of the increase in new voter registrations to be > anti-Bush. Wierd. > > > > BAL > > > That was a common mistake, a view held by both parties. > The dems were struggling to get young voters to register > and turn out, whereas the reps were hesitant to the point > of being uncomfortable. But I saw a few interviews where > they actually went onto campuses, and learned that as a > whole, young people are not particularly liberal. They > seem balanced about the same as their parents generation. > Perhap we made an incorrect generalization about 20-somethings > based on their predecessors. Their presence at the polls > did not seem to have a big impact either way. > > Im trying to get a feel for generation Y issues. I would > think that the draft would be one of them, but the two major > parties both opposed a draft. There is a great reason for > this: we can't trust draftees in any conceivable future > conflict. I would think the right to abortion would be > a generation Y issue, but birth control is getting better, > more foolproof, so perhaps this isn't such a big deal. > > So what are the young voters thinking? > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 14:08:48 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:38:48 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411040608227a0de1@mail.gmail.com> References: <004f01c4c221$587ccde0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <710b78fc0411040608227a0de1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411040608386a3069@mail.gmail.com> urrrh, Chelsea is an english football team btw. Emlyn On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:38:01 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > I've been wondering whether generation Y can't actually connect with > government. It seems to have much less influence in the modern western > world, where each person needs to act like a service company of size 1 > rather than an employee... each person secures job security (or not) > through peddling a skillset rather than long service, "loyalty", or > any of the other job market anachronisms. Life takes place in a > chaotic decentralised self organising milleau of economy, and the top > level of control seems increasingly to be a mirage. > > So even if Y was convinced to come out and vote, perhaps there is no > generational shape to their voting, and thus the almost random split. > Perhaps the left/right two party politics of today really is > meaningless? The opposing major parties, especially in Australia, look > more and more like factions of one party, or maybe like football > teams; you back the one you were brought up to support, but really > there is no difference outside of the colour of the jerseys. Vote 1 > Chelsea for President! > > Emlyn > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 14:45:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 06:45:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <004f01c4c221$587ccde0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041104144559.95853.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > Im trying to get a feel for generation Y issues. I would > think that the draft would be one of them, but the two major > parties both opposed a draft. There is a great reason for > this: we can't trust draftees in any conceivable future > conflict. I would think the right to abortion would be > a generation Y issue, but birth control is getting better, > more foolproof, so perhaps this isn't such a big deal. > > So what are the young voters thinking? Actually, the kids are more conservative than their parents. The kids voting now are kids who were born after the advent of AIDS as a deadly epidemic, where they've learned teenage superstitions, without rational thought, that risky (shall we say, left-wing) behaviors can kill you, personally. Kids do see the consequences of drug abuse (while ignoring or unaware of the impact of black markets on quality control) as well. This is also the age of Austin Powers. Doctor Evil tried to claim that the free love of Austin's 60's persona was now considered in the 90's to be evil. Powers retorts that "if we'd known the consequences of our actions, we would have done things differently, but the spirit would be the same. Now we have freedom AND responsibility. It is a groovy time to be alive, baby, yeah." This is the message kids today are seeing and they are making a visceral connection to their political stances. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 4 15:00:36 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:00:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Al Brooks > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > > But remember the millions of Americans who are > intolerant, who think homosexuality is wicked... Boy not me. I think heterosexuality is wicked. Of course I like wickedness. I wonder, Al, you might be right. Several states had anti-gay-marriage on their ballots. Perhaps the fundy ministers energized their flocks of sheeple to go the polls to vote on that, then while there they voted for the shrub? Oy. Isn't it shocking? Religion Incorporated seems to be making a raging comeback in our modern world. spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 15:12:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:12:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] pay the CEOs! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041103224343.01adaec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041104151216.39704.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:38 PM 11/3/2004 -0800, Spike wrote: > > > >Those who hold the real capital are those > >who control the economy. If we want them to make the > >economy good, we need to pay them. > > I could have sworn I read in the papers that they do get paid, and > often quite well. Yes, and while those same papers always seem to write about those CEO's who get paid more for eliminating jobs, they rarely seem to write about those who get paid more for creating more jobs. One more media bias. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Nov 4 15:18:48 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:18:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals (was: Aw Nuts! BushWins...) Message-ID: <187170-220041144151848188@M2W098.mail2web.com> From: Amara Natasha: >> What can our organizations, such as Extropy Institute, do to promote good >> relations between ourselves and others throughout the world? That is a >> first step. "Given the strong individualist personalities here, I think that one can add to the above: "What can *individuals* do to promote good relations between ourselves and others throughout the world?"" Yes, that as well, but since I was speaking on behalf of ExI, it seemed more relevant in that post. Hal Finney: >I think that's a great question. Of course, ExI is not a major player on >the world stage and can't by itself rehabilitate America's international >image. "After Bush is out, then I think that ten or twenty years will be needed to recover its reputation (America's international image). It will be a long road." I don't think so. I think that what we need now is humility and dignity and that the Bush administration just might begin to show some of each. Maybe not, but I'm forecasting here and it would be in his and his administration's best interest and I think they are so self-centered that they would even go this far. As a professional futurist, one of my goals is to be more involved with the EU. If we multitrack across the economic, political, social, environmental, and technological trends, then we can see evidence of an American willingness to be more understanding of the world. The damage is done, and I think most people know that if we are to continue to be a "super" power, we better get along with everyone, especially in light of the rise in popularity and economic growth of China/Asia. >But just by asking it, we are reminded that we are not our country. "Or rather, we are not our government." Yes, good point. I have never considered myself an "American," although I still think that this country is fantastic, but am very concerned about the religious/moral movement that is in opposition to gays, abortion, and agnosticism. I certainly do not identify with any one state of the many states I have lived in; but if I did, it would be New York first. Likewise, when people as me where I am from, I say that I am transglobal (or something like that). Best, Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 4 15:23:09 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 09:23:09 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:00 AM 11/4/2004 -0800, the Spikester wrote: >Isn't it shocking? Religion Incorporated seems >to be making a raging comeback in our modern world. In all sorts of brands and guises. It's bitterly ironic (to me, anyway) that avowedly hi-tech widely educated societies such as the USA and Russia have so many citizens reaching for the god pill, while their antagonists are swigging madly from the god bottle, all factions boiling away with contrived and almost arbitrary iconologies of bigotry. It starts to look as if people really *do* find secular scientific cultures too `cold' and `impersonal' and even `inhaman' to sustain the glow of life. True, there are parts of Europe and Australasia where Religion Incorporated has been sidelined for a few generations, but I'll bet it comes ripping back in the clutches. Time for humanism and transhumanism to start thinking seriously once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others did nearly a century ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of secular equivalent of worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive emotionally enriched fellowship. But I don't imagine it will emerge from any bunch of INTJs like this list... Damien Broderick From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Nov 4 15:37:03 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:37:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <008801c4c284$227c2750$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" > I think our friend Mike has a very valid point when he calls for a > fact check: most people just disagree with us. Again, it is up to us > to change that. A way is not to limit ourselves to preaching to the > converted, but also engage in debate with those who disagree. Yes, you're right. About all we can do is try to be good emissaries for our point of view, I suppose... As for the two "divided Americas" (as described by John Edwards in this article - the article is not all that well written, but has a few good points), it just seems as if the gap gets wider (as science and technology marches forward), and "reasoning" with those on the evangelicals' side doesn't seem to work at all.: http://www.alternet.org/election04/20406/ Olga From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 15:44:32 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:44:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <20041104080425.68522.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041104154432.6764.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > Mike, let's look at Bush's anti-gay aspect. Bush knows > that those who oppose tobacco are picking on the > minority of smokers, yet he cannot admit the millions > trying to outlaw gay marriage (and succeeding) are > also picking on a minority-- gays. In the past gays > wanted affirmative action, the power to force firms to > hire them, plus other powers; today the situation is > different. > You describe the situation from both sides and we'll > take it from there. Marriage licensing is an institution that was founded and steeped in bigotry, classism, racism, and superstition. Before the US Civil War, here in the US free white persons needed no marriage license. Licensing was created to control inter-racial marriage, only inter-racial and other freed black couples needed marriage licenses, while the slave states also kept records of black breeding to prevent incest. In other countries, licensing of marriage by the state was created under the feudal system to enforce the monarch's right of prima nocti (first night) to intercourse with the bride before her groom. Today the state forces couples who are not even married into common law marriage unless they've specifically signed statements before hand that they are not. The states do this to control how parents raise their kids, to force the kids into public schools, among other things. Just as being married to both your spouse and the King under prima nocti, state sanctioned marriage is a polygamous relationship with an unjust tyrant that would presume to be your superior. That gays would WANT to subject themselves to this institution indicates to those of us who know the facts that they have some ulterior motive. That motive is clearly that they want to be able to inherit their partners social security benefits, as this is the only benefit that cannot be replicated via contract law in the private sphere. I propose a deal with the gay community: you can have gay marriage licensing if you agree to let people be lawfully, rather than legally, married, outside of state sanction, and that the government won't persecute people who stay out of or retract themselves from the Social Security System. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 15:54:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 07:54:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041104155452.8325.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > > Al Brooks > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > > > > > But remember the millions of Americans who are > > intolerant, who think homosexuality is wicked... > > > Boy not me. I think heterosexuality is wicked. > > Of course I like wickedness. > > I wonder, Al, you might be right. Several states > had anti-gay-marriage on their ballots. Perhaps > the fundy ministers energized their flocks of > sheeple to go the polls to vote on that, then > while there they voted for the shrub? Yeah, we saw it here. THe fundies in Manchester, NH with new support from the Catholics here, turned out in droves and voted in record numbers for Bush, so this solidly democratic city of 104,000 was won by Bush by 1,000 votes. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 16:12:08 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:12:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <008801c4c284$227c2750$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041104161208.52089.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > As for the two "divided Americas" (as described by John Edwards in > this article - the article is not all that well written, but has a few > good points), it just seems as if the gap gets wider (as science and > technology marches forward), and "reasoning" with those on the > evangelicals' side doesn't seem to work at all. Because you walk in mocking what they believe. You then use terms that are outside their reference set. Roman Catholicism became the dominant religion in Europe because it took some core philosophy and repackaged it in the religious framework of the major groups they came across: first the Roman sun worshippers. The principles of individual liberty became dominant here because they were packaged as an 'enlightenment', which is a spiritual referent, not a scientific one. Rationalists earned tolerance and comity by presenting themselves as their own protestant sect of Unitarianism. Every attempt that is made to repackage transhumanism in a religious context is mocked. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Nov 4 16:22:33 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:22:33 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041104155452.8325.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104155452.8325.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Natasha, Mike and others on this list: Is there some sort of Extropian scorecard for the different (ex-)candidates? I am sort of curious how Bush and Kerry would have stacked up. Its seems obvious to me that Bush would score very poorly on many measures, but apparently there are smart people here who voted for Bush. It would seem to me that they would have to have voted for Bush while holding their noses against his anti-extropian stench, but I am willing to convinced otherwise. So putting aside from the possibility put forward by Mike that Bush is more likely to lead to the collapse of the US economic system, thereby making way for an Extropian paradise built on its ashes, what are the good Extropian reasons for voting for Bush? On many issues it would seem obvious that fundamentalist beliefs put forward by supporters of Bush - anti-stem cell research, anti-science, anti-homosexuality (actually any sexuality that doesn't lead to a traditional Christian nuclear family), anti-drugs, anti-division between church and state, anti-privacy - are anti-extropian. The only pro-extropian statement I have see clearly articulated for Bush on this list is that he would be better (in some vague sense) for the economy. Though given what he has achieved for the US economy to date it seems more that that this is a knee-jerk reaction equating Republicans with better stewardship for economic matters than than Democrats. So please tell me why any Extropian would be willing to stand up and proudly say they voted for Bush. best, patrick From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Nov 4 16:40:37 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:40:37 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals (was: Aw Nuts! Bush Wins...) In-Reply-To: <20041104103825.44693.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104103825.44693.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41DB29A4-2E80-11D9-8560-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 4 Nov 2004, at 11:38, Al Brooks wrote: > I can't think of anything do-able, except maybe > finding someone interested in communicating with > select persons in the 'Middle East' to attempt to > interest them in transhumanism/extropianism. What about the Midwest and the South? It would seem to me that the problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that the insane Christian meme that we have been politely ignoring for years has come home to roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not able to control the strings of government too tightly, but there are now enough fundamentalist christians to control the fate of the only remaining superpower. http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ I live in a small East German town. Just down the street I have a bunch of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up a cafe to lure and convert secular communists. These guys are really well organized and funded. Not only that I constantly bump into Mormons from Utah on the tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas trying to spread the word? What hope do progressive forces have in a democracy when they are not willing to actively engage those who disagree with them? Reading (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not going to change anyone's views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We need to become much more directly active if we want to change beliefs. We need Extropian missionaries in the South and Midwest! best, patrick From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Nov 4 17:05:04 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:05:04 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Supernova close to Earth Message-ID: According to this report a supernova occurred 100-200 light years distant about 2.8 million years ago: http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041101/full/041101-5.html Authors make the grandiose statement that their supernova may have been directly responsible for the emergence of Homo sapiens as a dominant species due to resultant changes in climate. best, patrick From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 4 16:56:49 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:56:49 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard Message-ID: Patrick Wilken Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE : >So please tell me why any Extropian would be willing to stand up and >proudly say they voted for Bush. Certainly not me, but with some irony, I note some possibilities for those here who might not like big government: Perhaps in the not-to-distant future, there will be so many discontented, angry and frustrated people under the Bush administration, that serious and long-lasting changes to the US government and to US religious fundamentalistalist institutions will be the only option to head off mass emigration or mass suicide. Amara P.S. I recommend the posts from the boingboing web site yesterday (recommended reading for all) http://www.boingboing.net/ -- *********************************************************************** 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/ *********************************************************************** "Never squat with your spurs on." -- Texan Proverb From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 4 17:21:04 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:21:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Supernova close to Earth In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104111649.0199a458@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:05 PM 11/4/2004 +0100, Patrick Wilken wrote: >According to this report a supernova occurred 100-200 light years distant >about 2.8 million years ago: > >http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041101/full/041101-5.html > >Authors make the grandiose statement that their supernova may have been >directly responsible for the emergence of Homo sapiens as a dominant >species due to resultant changes in climate. That would be the one I conjectured in THE DREAMING DRAGONS back in 1980. :) There, it was also responsible for the emergence of H. sap., but by somewhat... different... means. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 4 17:41:33 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:41:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] "Religious" transhumanism In-Reply-To: <20041104161208.52089.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041104174133.63133.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > As for the two "divided Americas" (as described by > John Edwards in > > this article - the article is not all that well > written, but has a > few > > good points), it just seems as if the gap gets > wider (as science and > > technology marches forward), and "reasoning" with > those on the > > evangelicals' side doesn't seem to work at all. > > Because you walk in mocking what they believe. You > then use terms that > are outside their reference set. > > Roman Catholicism became the dominant religion in > Europe because it > took some core philosophy and repackaged it in the > religious framework > of the major groups they came across: first the > Roman sun worshippers. > > The principles of individual liberty became dominant > here because they > were packaged as an 'enlightenment', which is a > spiritual referent, not > a scientific one. Rationalists earned tolerance and > comity by > presenting themselves as their own protestant sect > of Unitarianism. > > Every attempt that is made to repackage > transhumanism in a religious > context is mocked. ...not *quite* every attempt. But almost. I've managed to score the occasional success with the religious, by preaching on the evidence of what God gave us. "If God meant for us to figure out His powers, He would have given us the ability to do so. Oh, wait - He did!" Any major invention or discovery, such as flight or genetics, can be claimed to have had divine inspiration. Part of His plan...but for what? How about to guide us towards being His companions? Our powers and abilities seem to grow closer to what would have been considered supernatural everyday. So does humanity's collective wisdom, despite certain notable instances of lack of wisdom. If you take it as faith that mankind is meant to become a race of gods, then the Singularity (or, at least, certain forms of it) seems but a step along that path. This includes evolving ethics and morals: accept all thy neighbors, save those that seek to harm others. (Thus, gay marriage is simply a non-issue. But people who commit violence against others knowing no reason other than claiming "God's will" are, in fact, acting against God's will. Catholics, Protestants, Muslims - it doesn't matter: to fight in God's name alone, as opposed to fighting for peace or some other part of the divine wisdom, is to blaspheme God, no matter how much you may worship.) Some may seek to hold to tradition for tradition's sake, but it is mankind's power to learn and change, not to fossilize. God provides, via evolution, the slow mechanism that the beasts of the wild need to adapt to changing circumstance, but we are blessed with the ability to change ourselves - which we are clearly meant to use. Witness the largely self-inflicted suffering of that portion of humanity which refuses to adapt, not just the physical technologies, but also the social wisdom that has been invented: democracies works much better than dictatorships, as can be seen by taking an honest look at the current examples of both. (The CIA World Factbook, among other sources, can give stats to back this up. Who needs revealed wisdom as translated, and possibly mistranslated, from our ancestors? People write books, but God writes our modern day-to-day reality that even dispassionate, neutral observers observe.) This even works with agnosticism or atheism: just preface it all with "If God exists". If not, then these same things need no divine blessing (given the lack of a divine), and are merely paths to the empowerment of all humanity, giving us the ability to master the universe we happen to find ourselves in - which is surely the next best thing to divine purpose. (This is the version that I personally believe, but I am willing to admit my morals are justified even if there is a God, as described above.) How's that for a start? From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 17:42:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:42:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Supernova close to Earth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104174235.68107.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > According to this report a supernova occurred 100-200 light years > distant about 2.8 million years ago: > > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041101/full/041101-5.html > > Authors make the grandiose statement that their supernova may have > been > directly responsible for the emergence of Homo sapiens as a dominant > species due to resultant changes in climate. Tabloid headline: Planet Krypton found.... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Thu Nov 4 18:00:35 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:00:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: <20041104180035.9BF7457E2A@finney.org> Damien writes: > It's bitterly ironic (to me, anyway) > that avowedly hi-tech widely educated societies such as the USA and Russia > have so many citizens reaching for the god pill, while their antagonists > are swigging madly from the god bottle, all factions boiling away with > contrived and almost arbitrary iconologies of bigotry. It starts to look as > if people really *do* find secular scientific cultures too `cold' and > `impersonal' and even `inhaman' to sustain the glow of life. True, there > are parts of Europe and Australasia where Religion Incorporated has been > sidelined for a few generations, but I'll bet it comes ripping back in the > clutches. Time for humanism and transhumanism to start thinking seriously > once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others did nearly a century > ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of secular equivalent of > worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive emotionally enriched > fellowship. But I don't imagine it will emerge from any bunch of INTJs like > this list... There was an article in the Los Angeles Times last week, http://www.latimes.com/news/local/state/la-me-beliefs30oct30,1,223262.story?coll=la-news-state (for subscribers): : Nation's Unchurched Doubled in Decade, Poll Finds : : The proportion of Americans who say they have no religious affiliation : doubled over the last decade and now stands at 16% of the population, : according to a new study on religious identity. : : Only Catholics (24%) and Baptists (17%) outnumber the so-called : "non-identifiers," or "nones," said the report - "The Decline of : Religious Identity in the United States" - by the Institute for Jewish : & Community Research in San Francisco. : : The nationwide survey, based on telephone interviews with more than : 10,000 randomly selected people, said about one in six answered : "none" or "no religion" or described themselves as secular, humanist, : ethical-culturalist, agnostic or atheist. : : Their ranks will continue to grow, and they'll soon outnumber Baptists, : according to Gary A. Tobin, president of the institute and a coauthor : of the study. : : "They may believe in God," he said of the unaffiliated. "The : question is: Why don't they want to be associated with some religious : denomination? It's probably time for organized religion to take a look : at itself and see what they should be doing differently or better to : involve more people." : ... : Americans younger than 35 are most likely to be nonidentifiers, : and those over 65 are least likely to be unaffiliated, the study : said. Residents of the West lead the nation in the proportion of those : who don't identity with a religion - 24% compared to 14% for the rest : of the country except New England, which had 21%. Men are less likely : to identify with a religious denomination than women, 20% to 13%. This could be a further sign of the much-noted American polarization, with religious people perhaps becoming more entrenched in their beliefs, while the "no religions" are expanding their numbers as well. Hal From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Nov 4 18:15:14 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 13:15:14 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard Message-ID: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com> Hi Patrick, I am a non-party voter, and at the moment, I do not have much to say on this. But to answer your questino, I suppose one way of looking at it is that President Bush would be more aggressive toward protecting the U.S. and its citizens against terrorism. He also says he wants to reform taxation. I'm not sure either of these two examples would be in any way extropic because of the nature of the President. His "heart" just isn't in the right place. I think Greg Burch said it best a month or two ago. Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Patrick Wilken Patrick.Wilken at nat.uni-magdeburg.de Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:22:33 +0100 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard Natasha, Mike and others on this list: Is there some sort of Extropian scorecard for the different (ex-)candidates? I am sort of curious how Bush and Kerry would have stacked up. Its seems obvious to me that Bush would score very poorly on many measures, but apparently there are smart people here who voted for Bush. It would seem to me that they would have to have voted for Bush while holding their noses against his anti-extropian stench, but I am willing to convinced otherwise. So putting aside from the possibility put forward by Mike that Bush is more likely to lead to the collapse of the US economic system, thereby making way for an Extropian paradise built on its ashes, what are the good Extropian reasons for voting for Bush? On many issues it would seem obvious that fundamentalist beliefs put forward by supporters of Bush - anti-stem cell research, anti-science, anti-homosexuality (actually any sexuality that doesn't lead to a traditional Christian nuclear family), anti-drugs, anti-division between church and state, anti-privacy - are anti-extropian. The only pro-extropian statement I have see clearly articulated for Bush on this list is that he would be better (in some vague sense) for the economy. Though given what he has achieved for the US economy to date it seems more that that this is a knee-jerk reaction equating Republicans with better stewardship for economic matters than than Democrats. So please tell me why any Extropian would be willing to stand up and proudly say they voted for Bush. best, patrick _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 4 18:19:22 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 10:19:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <418A72AA.1080704@jefallbright.net> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:00 AM 11/4/2004 -0800, the Spikester wrote: > >> Isn't it shocking? Religion Incorporated seems >> to be making a raging comeback in our modern world. > > > In all sorts of brands and guises. It's bitterly ironic (to me, > anyway) that avowedly hi-tech widely educated societies such as the > USA and Russia have so many citizens reaching for the god pill, while > their antagonists are swigging madly from the god bottle, all factions > boiling away with contrived and almost arbitrary iconologies of > bigotry. It starts to look as if people really *do* find secular > scientific cultures too `cold' and `impersonal' and even `inhaman' to > sustain the glow of life. True, there are parts of Europe and > Australasia where Religion Incorporated has been sidelined for a few > generations, but I'll bet it comes ripping back in the clutches. Time > for humanism and transhumanism to start thinking seriously once again > (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others did nearly a century ago, > without getting anywhere) about some sort of secular equivalent of > worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive emotionally enriched > fellowship. But I don't imagine it will emerge from any bunch of INTJs > like this list... > > Damien Broderick I think I see how it could be done in a completely honest and pragmatic way, as many scientists know the experience of awesome beauty, the feelings of humility and oneness, and the practical advantages of a scientific and rational approach to understanding our place in the universe. I think INTJs and INTPs are the personalities most in touch with this and would have little problem developing it and presenting it to similar types, which, however, amount to only a few percent of the population. The difficulty is in how to present such concepts to a wider audience, as a path of inspiration and growth, in such a way that they aren't distorted and diluted beyond recognition. - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 4 18:32:03 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:32:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > It starts to look as > if people really *do* find secular scientific > cultures too `cold' and > `impersonal' and even `inhaman' to sustain the glow > of life. True, there > are parts of Europe and Australasia where Religion > Incorporated has been > sidelined for a few generations, but I'll bet it > comes ripping back in the > clutches. Time for humanism and transhumanism to > start thinking seriously > once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others > did nearly a century > ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of > secular equivalent of > worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive > emotionally enriched > fellowship. Consider the psychological needs that are fulfilled through worship. No matter who you are or how you have conducted your life, there is someone who cares about you, and who values your efforts. You have no need to justify yourself; you are accepted, even if everyone else believes you're a total screw-up whose negligence kills people on a regular basis. Religion is spiritual candy, while we offer spiritual nutrition. Similar tactics may work in selling our philosophy: find ways that the nutritional alternative still "tastes" good. But one must consider different peoples' tastes. Those who strongly prefer self-empowerment already come to us. Leaving things to some unapproachable God while one's own efforts ultimately come to nought? No thanks: I'd rather be my own person, among others who are their own people. But homo sapiens is a social animal, so we should not be so surprised to find humans whose most important need (beyond needs related to continued physical existance) are for community and acceptance. "I screwed up; do you still love me?" This is, perhaps, inherently difficult for us to convey: there is no source of love separate from the mass of humanity that an evil person may harm. God would still accept a sinner, they claim, but those who are sinned against are naturally upset. We might claim "tough love" when we punish minor sinners before releasing them back into society - but "tough love" can be hard to perceive, and God usually does not even inflict that in practice. (Biblical stories are one thing, but most believers probably at least subconsciously know the difference between reality and what they profess. Else why so much sorrow at funerals, when there should be joy that the departed is going to a better place?) Perhaps this just boils down to a lesson in the nature of humanity: always try to deliver your message in a friendly tone. Never discard happiness unless dealing with people who admit they are trying to destroy your happiness as a goal in itself. (Anyone sophisticated enough to actually have this as a goal without admitting it is also almost certainly aware of the desirability of achieving the goals they do admit to without destroying your happiness if possible. But more often, those who seem to be intent on destroying happiness only do so incidental to their real goal, no matter how blind to your suffering they are, and would be willing to avoid angering you if they were aware of alternatives that achieve their goal without the negative consequences.) Happiness may be incidental to the message you are trying to deliver, but it is a method that works - and in the end, are we not mostly about doing that which works? ...although this is a tough problem. I review the above, and I'm not entirely happy with my proposed solution. But what do others think? From glc at cartwrightlawgroup.com Thu Nov 4 18:36:31 2004 From: glc at cartwrightlawgroup.com (Gregory Cartwright) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:36:31 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <20041104155452.8325.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <012701c4c29d$357a7b90$1300005a@greg> Why I Voted For Bush (or how I quit worrying and learned to love the war) While I generally try not to label myself with terms like extropian, libertarian, progressive, transhumanist, etc., I can say that I am sympathetic to these ideas and that they come closest to the "isms" I've accepted as more true than not. So the question is why I voted for Bush. I guess one of the first lessons I learned about politics from a libertarian view is that the attempt at a perfect social order through a particular ism, (communmism, fascism, socialism) usually only leads to a worsening of the human condition. It is better to look at the world as it is, and understand human behavior as it is and base your decisions on that. Without democracy and capitalism, I don't feel that extropian concepts will get very far. Before Bush, there was a theocracy in Afghanistan. Now there is a fledgling democracy. Before Bush there was a dictator in Iraq. Now there will be elections in January. Before Bush Libya was a rogue nation, now it has given up its weapons program, paid a huge cash settlement for its sponsorship of terrorism and is beginning to normalize relations with the rest of the world. Before Bush, North Korea refused to participate in multilateral talks, now it has agreed and participated in those. (In fact, South Korea just announced it is opening a diplomatic office in North Korea after the first of the year.) Somebody much smarter than me once said that for evil to flourish requires only that good men do nothing. While American foreign policy is not infallible, and is often brutish, what is the alternative? To do nothing? I think as Americans we bear a special burdern with respect to Iraq since we supported evil there for so long. That was wrong for us to do. Is continuing to do nothing with respect to that regime better? Many, including Kerry want the US to engage in cooperation. Multi-lateralism is easy to claim as the right way to proceed, but doesn't always easy to make work. We all know that decision making by committee does not always yield the best outcome. Add to that the problems when those on the committee have financial interests. It is now well established that member states on the security counsel illegally allowed their companies to do business with Saddam. Others within the UN food-for-oil program were being bribed with oil contracts and/or futures contracts. Is it any wonder that the US acted alone? Much of the hatred for Bush is based upon his personality as much as the mistakes he's made. I cannot help but see the similarities with Clinton in this respect. While these the personality traits complained of are different as well as the the detractors, the result is much the same. People have a hard time separating these two things. I really object to Bush's religious bent, and what on this listserve has been described as "anti-science" or "anti-extropian." worldview. But there is never a perfect candidate. The only question for me was who will continue to aggressively expand democracy and fight terrorism. More importantly, what policies will reduce the conditions which give terrorism its base. I believe that a secular, relatively well off country that is democractic is less likely to sponsor terrorist and less likely to support the conditions which give rise to it. After thinking about these issues, I held my nose and pulled the lever. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Wilken" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 8:22 AM Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard > Natasha, Mike and others on this list: > > Is there some sort of Extropian scorecard for the different > (ex-)candidates? I am sort of curious how Bush and Kerry would have > stacked up. Its seems obvious to me that Bush would score very poorly on > many measures, but apparently there are smart people here who voted for > Bush. It would seem to me that they would have to have voted for Bush > while holding their noses against his anti-extropian stench, but I am > willing to convinced otherwise. So putting aside from the possibility put > forward by Mike that Bush is more likely to lead to the collapse of the US > economic system, thereby making way for an Extropian paradise built on its > ashes, what are the good Extropian reasons for voting for Bush? > > On many issues it would seem obvious that fundamentalist beliefs put > forward by supporters of Bush - anti-stem cell research, anti-science, > anti-homosexuality (actually any sexuality that doesn't lead to a > traditional Christian nuclear family), anti-drugs, anti-division between > church and state, anti-privacy - are anti-extropian. > > The only pro-extropian statement I have see clearly articulated for Bush > on this list is that he would be better (in some vague sense) for the > economy. Though given what he has achieved for the US economy to date it > seems more that that this is a knee-jerk reaction equating Republicans > with better stewardship for economic matters than than Democrats. > > So please tell me why any Extropian would be willing to stand up and > proudly say they voted for Bush. > > best, patrick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 18:39:17 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:39:17 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... References: <20041104154432.6764.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005401c4c29d$97fada30$a51e4842@kevin> This is similar to a proposal I have been constructing. The problem is not that gays should be allowed to marry. The problem is that the state should get out of the marriage business altogether. Churches should marry people, the state should enforce contract law. Any two people can create a contract. Of course, This means doing away with the entire "married filing jointly" or "married filing separately" lines on the 1040. Instead, you get individual returns only.... But I would rather see a national sales tax which would do away with this as well. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... > > --- Al Brooks wrote: > > > Mike, let's look at Bush's anti-gay aspect. Bush knows > > that those who oppose tobacco are picking on the > > minority of smokers, yet he cannot admit the millions > > trying to outlaw gay marriage (and succeeding) are > > also picking on a minority-- gays. In the past gays > > wanted affirmative action, the power to force firms to > > hire them, plus other powers; today the situation is > > different. > > You describe the situation from both sides and we'll > > take it from there. > > Marriage licensing is an institution that was founded and steeped in > bigotry, classism, racism, and superstition. Before the US Civil War, > here in the US free white persons needed no marriage license. Licensing > was created to control inter-racial marriage, only inter-racial and > other freed black couples needed marriage licenses, while the slave > states also kept records of black breeding to prevent incest. > > In other countries, licensing of marriage by the state was created > under the feudal system to enforce the monarch's right of prima nocti > (first night) to intercourse with the bride before her groom. > > Today the state forces couples who are not even married into common law > marriage unless they've specifically signed statements before hand that > they are not. The states do this to control how parents raise their > kids, to force the kids into public schools, among other things. Just > as being married to both your spouse and the King under prima nocti, > state sanctioned marriage is a polygamous relationship with an unjust > tyrant that would presume to be your superior. > > That gays would WANT to subject themselves to this institution > indicates to those of us who know the facts that they have some > ulterior motive. That motive is clearly that they want to be able to > inherit their partners social security benefits, as this is the only > benefit that cannot be replicated via contract law in the private > sphere. > > I propose a deal with the gay community: you can have gay marriage > licensing if you agree to let people be lawfully, rather than legally, > married, outside of state sanction, and that the government won't > persecute people who stay out of or retract themselves from the Social > Security System. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 18:40:16 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:40:16 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... References: Message-ID: <005a01c4c29d$bb30fb60$a51e4842@kevin> Out of curiosity, did you personally benefit from President Bush's tax cuts? From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Nov 4 19:08:30 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:08:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <418A7E2E.7030700@jefallbright.net> Adrian Tymes wrote: > Happiness may be incidental to the message you are trying to deliver, > but it is a > method that works - and in the end, are we not mostly about doing that > which works? This is a key piece of the puzzle, true and profound. - Jef From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 19:22:54 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:22:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041104111039.029010d0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I've been a cryonicist for years. Last year, at a local cryo meeting a woman who has been a member for a few years, remarked, "You just can't change human nature". She got an education on this topic from me! Very few people think very far. The culture outside of the rational world is based on feelings and not thinking. The New Age disdains thinking. (Several months ago the Skeptical Inquirer had a good article by a woman who had spent most her life in New Agery, and came over to rationalism.) If the history of accepting medical procedures, jet planes, and the internet are a guide, it is direct self interest which wins the day. In your face, everyone else is doing it, gotta deal with it, oh, really is useful after all. I personally went through two versions of this lately. 1: Cell Phone, after 5 months of not using it, suddenly was useful to coordinate a meeting in a strange town. Oh. 2: Starting a non centralized business thing, mostly on email, cornered into using Skpye for teleconferencing, OH, nice to have email on screen while we talk. If it is useful, and it is easier to use it since others do so anyway, it gets accepted. If any of the pills spammers try to sell men actually worked, we would all know it soon, and fortunes would be made, within a few months. Reality supercedes possibility. The usual objection to Cryonics these days is "if it worked, I'd sign up". Well, a rabbit has been to -22deg C and back, so this may come any day now..... >...although this is a tough problem. I review the >above, and I'm not entirely happy with my proposed >solution. But what do others think? >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 19:24:21 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:24:21 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... In-Reply-To: <005a01c4c29d$bb30fb60$a51e4842@kevin> References: <005a01c4c29d$bb30fb60$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041104112349.028f7ff8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> HAH. I happened to owe $ to tax, so I never got the check, just a new lower number I owed. At 10:40 AM 11/4/2004, you wrote: >Out of curiosity, did you personally benefit from President Bush's tax cuts? > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Thu Nov 4 19:49:44 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:49:44 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Perhaps we will just have to acknowledge that for the time being his > message of fundamentalist jihad just resonates more than ours with the > average American (yes, American: a politician like Bush would never > get elected in Europe where the average citizen is a bit less > vulnerable to advertising and listens a bit more to what is actually > said). It is up to us to change that. This clueless nonsense is PRECISELY why the Democrats lose generally (ignoring that Kerry was a really lousy candidate). And I'm saying this as someone who is neither a Republican nor a Democrat and has lived in a great many places and is familiar with their local cultures. The Democrats and the left wing at large and the Europeans (which have attrocious media coverage of US politics -- it is more "fair and balanced" in Communist Asia) need to come to grips with the fact that the majority of Republicans are neither ill-educated, un-worldly, or even particularly religious. Some factions are, but not the major portion of the party. That is nothing more than the liberal Democrats trying to make themselves feel better by putting down the other guy and not bothering to really study their opponent. Most Republicans I know, and I know many having lived in many traditionally conservative areas (I even have aunts and uncles who are fairly senior GOP officials), are pro-choice, very well travelled and worldly, non-religious (many atheists), and as educated as your average Democrat. As long as the Democrats and liberals maintain the fiction that Republicans are ignorant hillbillies, religious white trash, and country club executives, they will continue to get their clocks cleaned in the elections because they do not know their opponent (see: Sun Tzu). A great many average people in the US still believe in the Constitutional notion that the job of the Federal government is to take care of security, foreign policy, and to make the economy run smoothly. That's it. A lot of those Red State folks would just as soon have the Federal government stay out of everything else. You'll notice that marijuana decriminalization acts and similar are being put on the ballot and passing NOT in liberal states, but primarily in "conservative" western states. The Democrats *used* to be primarily about blue collar economic issues, which is where they found most of their power in the 20th century, and had minimal differences on foreign policy with the Republicans. Now they've essentially abandoned those and are all about social issues that the blue collar class does not believe is the domain of the Federal government in general but the local government's, and often does not reflect their personal values anyway. The bottom line is that the Republicans have a well-vetted and well-known economic and foreign policy plan, whether you agree with it or not, and they run on it. The Democrats stopped talking about real meat-and-potatoes economics years ago in favor of stumping on social issues and no longer even have a coherent and well-vetted economic and foreign policy strategy that most people can describe or follow. At the very least it pales in comparison to the Republicans in that area. There is a huge number of people who vote primarily on economics and foreign policy, and would rather social policy be a local issue. Given that the Democrats are very muddy on both economics and foreign policy, and many people don't believe the Feds (nor judges) should be involved in social policy, the choice is obvious for many people because the Democrats provide no credible alternative. This includes a hell of a lot of pro-choice, non-religious, gay-friendly people that the Democrats foolishly claim as their own -- I know many, many Republicans throughout "Red States" that meet this description. The Democrats will continue to lose ground until they start stumping for credible economic policies again, and clean up their foreign policy positions. And the best thing they could do on social issues is to push for local control of such things. If they just dig in and try more strident Federal social policy positions as the centerpiece of their party, they will continue to lose support among "average" Americans. It seems to me that the Democrats are misreading the outcome and are bound and determined to make the same mistakes all over again, primarily because they are working off a ridiculous stereotype of their opposition as though it had some grounding in reality. j. andrew rogers From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 4 20:08:02 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:08:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: <20041104200802.83269.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Much of what you say makes sense, but... --- "J. Andrew Rogers" wrote: > Given > that the Democrats are very muddy on both economics > and foreign policy, > and many people don't believe the Feds (nor judges) > should be involved > in social policy, the choice is obvious for many > people because the > Democrats provide no credible alternative. This > includes a hell of a > lot of pro-choice, non-religious, gay-friendly > people that the Democrats > foolishly claim as their own -- I know many, many > Republicans throughout > "Red States" that meet this description. ...explain the anti-gay-marriage proposals that passed in several of these states, then. (Unless these people would prefer that "marriage", as a term, be removed from government control, though civil unions could be recognized. But I heard that at least one of the proposals specifically banned civil unions between members of the same gender as well.) From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 20:44:46 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:44:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... Message-ID: Everyone who makes over the minimum deduction and pays US taxes benefit from Bush's tax cuts (since he introduced a 10% bracket for the low end). You may want to rephrase your question to "How much did you benefit from Bush's tax cuts?" since pretty much everyone saved a couple hundred bucks or so. BAL >From: "Kevin Freels" >To: "ExI chat list" >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Aw Nuts! Bush Wins... >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:40:16 -0600 > >Out of curiosity, did you personally benefit from President Bush's tax >cuts? > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Thu Nov 4 20:55:57 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:55:57 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: <1099601757.12057@whirlwind.he.net> Adrian Tymes wrote: > ...explain the anti-gay-marriage proposals that passed > in several of these states, then. (Unless these > people would prefer that "marriage", as a term, be > removed from government control, though civil unions > could be recognized. But I heard that at least one of > the proposals specifically banned civil unions between > members of the same gender as well.) Maybe you should look at a map of California's results on the same ballot initiative. Same overwhelming results, even in many very liberal counties. This isn't a conservative religious issue, since they can't even make this fly in many very liberal political districts in which the Religious Right is all but non-existent. I know more than one homosexual in the Bay Area who is against it. The reasons people are against it often aren't even based in religion. Top reasons why it people voted it down here in Silicon Valley, from my own personal purely anecdotal polling: Wrong solution to the issue; the state should get out of the "marriage" business altogether. This is my personal position. It is a well-defined cultural institution independent of religion, and no one is prohibited from being married. This is entirely consistent with most law, and one could view virtually *any* law as discriminatory to some group if this was viewed as discriminatory. Detaching any special considerations from legal marriage and letting the definition stand is a better solution. Many people like the institution the way it is in the same way they like Christmas the way it is even if they are not Christians. And of course, the moral/religious objection, which you don't see much of in Silicon Valley, though it is undoubtedly more common in places like the deep south. There are plenty of reasons that people are vote down gay marriage initiatives that cannot reasonably be construed as "anti-gay", particularly since some gays subscribe to one or more of these reasons. Hell, one can even find examples of the very rare homosexual who objects to this on religious grounds. Given the diversity of reasonable positions against gay marriage out there even if one is gay or not religious, I am not surprised that gay marriage is DOA as an issue. It crosses a lot of political positions. Anybody who thinks gay marriage is purely a religious issue is ignoring the data. I have a hard time believing that two-thirds of the California population are members of the "Religious Right". j. andrew rogers From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 22:20:08 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:20:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: I think the anti-Gay spans parties too. The percentages in favor of the anti-Gay marriage acts in the 11 states included dems and repubs. This is why Kerry wouldn't come out in favor of gay marriage. I think this can be attributed to the fact that lots of Americans are anti-homosexual, don't approve of their "lifestyle" and don't want to allow same sex marriage. As to why this is? My guess is religious roots as it's not really very logical. I favor someone else on this list who suggested that the gov't get out of the marriage business altogether and only allow civil unions. Then any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. I sort of think back 50 years to when civil rights and racism spaned party lines until the civil rights movements. 50 years from now we'll be looking back in shock at how backwards we were. BAL >From: Adrian Tymes >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville >Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:08:02 -0800 (PST) > >Much of what you say makes sense, but... > >--- "J. Andrew Rogers" >wrote: > > Given > > that the Democrats are very muddy on both economics > > and foreign policy, > > and many people don't believe the Feds (nor judges) > > should be involved > > in social policy, the choice is obvious for many > > people because the > > Democrats provide no credible alternative. This > > includes a hell of a > > lot of pro-choice, non-religious, gay-friendly > > people that the Democrats > > foolishly claim as their own -- I know many, many > > Republicans throughout > > "Red States" that meet this description. > >...explain the anti-gay-marriage proposals that passed >in several of these states, then. (Unless these >people would prefer that "marriage", as a term, be >removed from government control, though civil unions >could be recognized. But I heard that at least one of >the proposals specifically banned civil unions between >members of the same gender as well.) >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Nov 4 22:38:16 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:38:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Issue: Norton AntiVirus Affecting my Brain Message-ID: <410-220041144223816938@M2W099.mail2web.com> Does anyone have a contact at Symatic, or know of how to get through their iron wall? Thanks Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 22:48:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 14:48:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104224807.17010.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brian Lee wrote: > I think the anti-Gay spans parties too. The percentages in favor of > the anti-Gay marriage acts in the 11 states included dems and repubs. > This is why Kerry wouldn't come out in favor of gay marriage. > > I think this can be attributed to the fact that lots of Americans are > anti-homosexual, don't approve of their "lifestyle" and don't want to > allow same sex marriage. > > As to why this is? My guess is religious roots as it's not really > very logical. Still not getting it. The most common refrain that pollsters found was that people were saying "I'm not against gays, I just don't want them rubbing my face in it." If a person likes to look at pictures only of beautiful people, you can't say they hate ugly people. Cultural extroverts are offended that cultural introverts don't like extroverts 'rubbing their faces in it'. It isn't about hate, or being 'anti-extrovert', its about having an equal right to be an introvert in peace and quiet. The extrovert may feel that their rights are being restrained when they are restrained from rubbing introverts faces in their extroversion, but too friggin bad, there are limits. > > I favor someone else on this list who suggested that the gov't get > out of the marriage business altogether and only allow civil unions. > Then any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. Thank you. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com Thu Nov 4 23:06:43 2004 From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:06:43 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <418AB603.1030204@dsl.pipex.com> Brian Lee wrote: > I favor someone else on this list who suggested that the gov't get out > of the marriage business altogether and only allow civil unions. Then > any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. I don't understand this position at all. You'd be allowing gay marriage, but not calling any marriage marriage, but any organisation that wants to call a marriage marriage would be free to do so and would also be free to discriminate against homosexuals? Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease bigots? BM From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 4 23:17:45 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:17:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Face Rubbing in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041104224807.17010.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104224807.17010.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104171411.01985498@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:48 PM 11/4/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: >Still not getting it. The most common refrain that pollsters found was >that people were saying "I'm not against gays, I just don't want them >rubbing my face in it." The usual way this sort of response is framed in Australia, to my amazed mirth, is: `I'm not against ho-mo-sexuals, I just don't want them shoving it down my throat.' Damien Broderick From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 23:20:58 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:20:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: I was suggesting that marriage no longer be a legal arrangement, but a social one only. Then civil unions would take the place of marriage but would not have the cultural/religious heterosexual element to them. The government would then recognize civil unions for tax purposes, power of attorney, etc but not marriage. BAL >From: Bryan Moss >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville >Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:06:43 +0000 > >Brian Lee wrote: > >>I favor someone else on this list who suggested that the gov't get out of >>the marriage business altogether and only allow civil unions. Then any >>marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. > > >I don't understand this position at all. You'd be allowing gay marriage, >but not calling any marriage marriage, but any organisation that wants to >call a marriage marriage would be free to do so and would also be free to >discriminate against homosexuals? > >Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease bigots? > >BM >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From pharos at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 23:33:04 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:33:04 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Issue: Norton AntiVirus Affecting my Brain In-Reply-To: <410-220041144223816938@M2W099.mail2web.com> References: <410-220041144223816938@M2W099.mail2web.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:38:16 -0500, natasha wrote: > Does anyone have a contact at Symatic, or know of how to get through their > iron wall? > Give up the struggle. Delete it - they don't deserve your money. Install AVG Free (or pay for the Professional version) though you may want to wait a week or so as they are just about to upgrade to the next version. Or, Install Avast! Home edition (Free) or buy the professional version. Either is as good as Norton antivirus and they both provide free database updates every day or two. Best wishes, BillK From etcs.ret at verizon.net Thu Nov 4 23:39:24 2004 From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:39:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] marriage and the State In-Reply-To: <200411041900.iA4J0A006349@tick.javien.com> References: <200411041900.iA4J0A006349@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <1adlo0hiv7o4p0cdtf9nle5vo169skttn1@4ax.com> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:39:17 -0600 Kevin Freels wrote in extropy-chat Digest, Vol 14, Issue 9 > [ ... ] > The problem is not >that gays should be allowed to marry. The problem is that the state should >get out of the marriage business altogether. Churches should marry people, >the state should enforce contract law. Any two people can create a contract. The churches, or at least the Church, are quick and strong to protest that they are not in the marrying business, nor is anyone else with the sole exception of the couple directly involved. http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/__P3U.HTM As Mike Lorrey indicated, the actions of the Roman church, of other churches, and of secular states, have largely focused on prohibiting or rewarding marriages to achieve various agendas unrelated to marriage per se. If one ignores or evades canon law's qualifiers, the core definition of marriage identifies it as an act will shared by the partners, and a resulting ongoing condition; If he and she, or you and your partner, or Geoffrey and his refrigerator, mutually will yourselves to be a partnership, then the magic works, and marriage is. The obvious problem is that, having snuck in to see the show, you lack a ticket stub when time comes to distribute the door prizes. Since in most Western countries the material benefits of sanctioned marriage greatly outweigh plain-vanilla connubial bliss (Google, "divorce") ya gotta believe that gay marriage is merely another porkbarrel scheme, the moral equivalent of a research grant to dig up the Ohio mounds in search of artifacts of the lost tribes of the Bible. If the taxpayers don't buy into it, it doesn't necessarily mean they're archaeological or ecclesiastical bigots; they may just see better uses for their money. stencil sends From mbb386 at main.nc.us Thu Nov 4 23:45:05 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:45:05 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think this may be where I would stand also. It disturbs me when long-term partners are not afforded "next-of-kin" status in emergency health situations. Or inheiritance. I have friends who've been together more than 25 years... they're more "married" than most married couples I know. But not in the eyes of the law. Something needs adjusting here. ... it sounds like I'm only respecting long-term relationships, but that's not the point. Regards, MB On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Brian Lee wrote: > I was suggesting that marriage no longer be a legal arrangement, but a > social one only. Then civil unions would take the place of marriage but > would not have the cultural/religious heterosexual element to them. > > The government would then recognize civil unions for tax purposes, power of > attorney, etc but not marriage. > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 23:48:16 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:18:16 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Issue: Norton AntiVirus Affecting my Brain In-Reply-To: References: <410-220041144223816938@M2W099.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc041104154810020091@mail.gmail.com> I'm using AVG, just started, it's awesome. It picked up a file that's been lying dormant on my machine, which *did* contain a trojan, for the past year; during that year, McAffee (on autoupdate) had been scanning my machine every night and never noticed. Emlyn On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:33:04 +0000, BillK wrote: > On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:38:16 -0500, natasha wrote: > > Does anyone have a contact at Symatic, or know of how to get through their > > iron wall? > > > > Give up the struggle. Delete it - they don't deserve your money. > > Install AVG Free (or pay for the Professional version) > > though you may want to wait a week or so as they are just about to > upgrade to the next version. > > Or, Install Avast! Home edition (Free) or buy the professional version. > > > Either is as good as Norton antivirus and they both provide free > database updates every day or two. > > Best wishes, BillK > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 4 23:59:21 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:29:21 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04110415592412af85@mail.gmail.com> Hasn't this been predicted in sci-fi many times before? This is a mainstream backlash against the pace of development. Free society is becoming scary now, not safe like the good ole days; jobs are insecure, social attitudes and norms storm and flow, the surface layer is the same as it's been for a while (phones, cars, houses, buildings) but underneath it's unrecognisable, and the unrecognisable is ever more bubbling to the top. So, leap back flock-style to the good times of old. Of course they weren't that good, and we rejected the stuff for a reason, but it's hard to remember as the world explodes around you. Even good change is change, and mostly people really only like change when it happens to other people. The kicker though, the irony, the punchline, is that the outraged masses react against the change, and against the surface elements of the technology that underpins it, but no way no day are they going to give up the gains they've grabbed on to. What they miss is that those gains are a side effect of a dynamic system in motion. The only way to stop it is to stop the whole system; back lash must be crack down and repress, all long beards and beheadings, or it's doomed. As transhumanists, a useful job would be one of reassurance; lots of head patting and comforting... "there there, it's ok, look out the window can you see it's a beautiful day? The world your children and your grandchildren are inheriting and creating may be weird and fast, but it is really good, better than you might have dreamed." Emlyn On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 09:23:09 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:00 AM 11/4/2004 -0800, the Spikester wrote: > > >Isn't it shocking? Religion Incorporated seems > >to be making a raging comeback in our modern world. > > In all sorts of brands and guises. It's bitterly ironic (to me, anyway) > that avowedly hi-tech widely educated societies such as the USA and Russia > have so many citizens reaching for the god pill, while their antagonists > are swigging madly from the god bottle, all factions boiling away with > contrived and almost arbitrary iconologies of bigotry. It starts to look as > if people really *do* find secular scientific cultures too `cold' and > `impersonal' and even `inhaman' to sustain the glow of life. True, there > are parts of Europe and Australasia where Religion Incorporated has been > sidelined for a few generations, but I'll bet it comes ripping back in the > clutches. Time for humanism and transhumanism to start thinking seriously > once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others did nearly a century > ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of secular equivalent of > worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive emotionally enriched > fellowship. But I don't imagine it will emerge from any bunch of INTJs like > this list... > > Damien Broderick > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 5 00:00:49 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 16:00:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <418AB603.1030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <20041105000049.57222.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Moss wrote: > Brian Lee wrote: > > I favor someone else on this list who suggested > that the gov't get out > > of the marriage business altogether and only allow > civil unions. Then > > any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. > Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease > bigots? Yes - except for the fact of the strong (apparently much stronger than some of us realised) religious connotations surrounding the current name. We want to emphasize that the government-granted right is non-religious - so, in the same way that the government does not "baptize" or "convert" immigrants (it "naturalizes" them), nor does it "excommunicate" people (though it does "repatriate" them, and declare certain people "persona non grata"), it does not recognize "marriages" (though it does recognize "civil unions"). From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 00:26:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 16:26:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <418AB603.1030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <20041105002610.1522.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Moss wrote: > > I don't understand this position at all. You'd be allowing gay > marriage, but not calling any marriage marriage, but any organisation > that wants to call a marriage marriage would be free to do so and > would also be free to discriminate against homosexuals? > > Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease bigots? Not at all. It is getting government out of marriage. Free human beings do not need governments approving of or licensing their relationships or families. If you think they do, then you are the one who is bigoted and fascist. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 01:05:30 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:05:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105002610.1522.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105010530.276.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> This is sophistry; you simply don't want gays to file joint returns. You secretly want to subsidise heterosexual marriage as I openly wish to subsidise homosexual marriage. There's more to it, but that's the long & short of it. > Not at all. It is getting government out of > marriage. Free human beings > do not need governments approving of or licensing > their relationships > or families. If you think they do, then you are the > one who is bigoted > and fascist. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From brentn at freeshell.org Fri Nov 5 01:08:25 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:08:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105002610.1522.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/4/04 16:26) Mike Lorrey wrote: >Not at all. It is getting government out of marriage. Free human beings >do not need governments approving of or licensing their relationships >or families. If you think they do, then you are the one who is bigoted >and fascist. Yes, but I don't see you clamoring to get the government out of het marriage. Sauce for the goose, etc. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 01:36:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:36:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105010530.276.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105013607.10753.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> You have no idea what I want if you are so blind as to not listen to a word I say, Trend. Your blindness is the exact reason why your buddy Kerry lost the election. --- Al Brooks wrote: > This is sophistry; you simply don't want gays to file > joint returns. You secretly want to subsidise > heterosexual marriage as I openly wish to subsidise > homosexual marriage. > There's more to it, but that's the long & short of it. > > > > Not at all. It is getting government out of > > marriage. Free human beings > > do not need governments approving of or licensing > > their relationships > > or families. If you think they do, then you are the > > one who is bigoted > > and fascist. > > > > ===== > > Mike Lorrey > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > > "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!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 01:37:11 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:37:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041105013711.48968.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brent Neal wrote: > (11/4/04 16:26) Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >Not at all. It is getting government out of marriage. Free human > beings > >do not need governments approving of or licensing their > relationships > >or families. If you think they do, then you are the one who is > bigoted > >and fascist. > > > Yes, but I don't see you clamoring to get the government out of het > marriage. Sauce for the goose, etc. I certainly am clamoring for getting government out of het marriage. That you can't read plainly written english statements without overlaying your own bias is exactly the reason why Kerry lost. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 5 01:44:43 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 17:44:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041102182750.17640.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105014443.94292.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Okay...so how do you prevent managers from cashing > > out the company between reports and leaving > > shareholders with an empty bag? > > If the managers obtain their stock via employee > purchase or options > programs, they would be required to only buy or sell > stock in the month > or two AFTER the annual or bi-annual report is > released. Which requires government regulation to enforce. > Anyone who > purchases stock on the open market could buy and > sell whenever they > want. What of managers who more literally "cash out" the company by rigging their compensation, then resigning just before the report to the board is due, but never own (or don't care about) shares in the company? > I'd generally discourage this. The reporting system > is so frequently > used by corporations to collude at a distance with > their competitors to > exploit the consumer that I'd say that either all > companies in a given > industry report on the same day, or else the four > largest competitors > in a market must report 3 months apart from each > other. Requiring reports to be synchronized doesn't sound too bad. Income taxes are synchronized in the same way, so it's not like there isn't precedent for setting this kind of thing up. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 01:50:47 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:50:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041105000049.57222.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <014601c4c2d9$df310500$a51e4842@kevin> I wouldn;t even call it a civil union. People could live together or not. It doesn;t matter what sex or haow many are involved. Marriage can continue to be a religious ceremony, but it would have no government benefit or recognition. When it comes to property, it becomes a matter of contract law. If you want someone to have a right to your property, you draw it up in a contract. If you want to will something, you make a will. Not only does it simplify things, it also opens a lot of doors. Right now, my girlfriend (happily co-habitating for four years) has no say over what happens to me when I die. She knows I plan to go to Alcor. My parents are both Catholic and would resist this. Since I am not married, my parents would be making the decisions. My only option at this moment to give my girlfriend control over this is to marry her, which is against my (non)"religion". EVen if I go to the JP to get married instead of a church, they still invoke God. Doing away with marriage...and civil unions would force everyone to make those arrangements in contracts. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 6:00 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > --- Bryan Moss wrote: > > Brian Lee wrote: > > > I favor someone else on this list who suggested > > that the gov't get out > > > of the marriage business altogether and only allow > > civil unions. Then > > > any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. > > > Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease > > bigots? > > Yes - except for the fact of the strong (apparently > much stronger than some of us realised) religious > connotations surrounding the current name. We want to > emphasize that the government-granted right is > non-religious - so, in the same way that the > government does not "baptize" or "convert" immigrants > (it "naturalizes" them), nor does it "excommunicate" > people (though it does "repatriate" them, and declare > certain people "persona non grata"), it does not > recognize "marriages" (though it does recognize "civil > unions"). > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 01:56:27 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:56:27 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041105010530.276.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <014e01c4c2da$aa390860$a51e4842@kevin> DId you just say that Mike Lorrey wants to subsidize "____________"? You don;t know Mike very well. Mike doesn;t much care for subsidizing anything. Mike would prefer you didn;t file tax returns at all. He doesn't want gays to benefit from the government, but that isn't singling gays out. He doesn;t want ANYONE on the dole. Gay, straight, bi, white, black, mixed, etc ad-nauseum. It never fails that when someone recomends getting rid of a benefit, all minorities think they are being singled out. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 7:05 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > This is sophistry; you simply don't want gays to file > joint returns. You secretly want to subsidise > heterosexual marriage as I openly wish to subsidise > homosexual marriage. > There's more to it, but that's the long & short of it. > > > > Not at all. It is getting government out of > > marriage. Free human beings > > do not need governments approving of or licensing > > their relationships > > or families. If you think they do, then you are the > > one who is bigoted > > and fascist. > > > > ===== > > Mike Lorrey > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > > "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!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com Fri Nov 5 01:55:21 2004 From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 01:55:21 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041104224807.17010.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104224807.17010.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <418ADD89.9070901@dsl.pipex.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >Still not getting it. The most common refrain that pollsters found was >that people were saying "I'm not against gays, I just don't want them >rubbing my face in it." > > It would take a pretty extravagant wedding ring to amount to "rubbing their face in it," wouldn't it? BM From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 01:58:53 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:58:53 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: Message-ID: <015601c4c2db$013bd020$a51e4842@kevin> Can you read? That statement doesn't single out gays. It says marriage in general. Gay or straight. Marriage is not the role of the government. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brent Neal" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > (11/4/04 16:26) Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >Not at all. It is getting government out of marriage. Free human beings > >do not need governments approving of or licensing their relationships > >or families. If you think they do, then you are the one who is bigoted > >and fascist. > > > Yes, but I don't see you clamoring to get the government out of het marriage. Sauce for the goose, etc. > > B > -- > Brent Neal > Geek of all Trades > http://brentn.freeshell.org > > "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 5 02:12:07 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:12:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <014601c4c2d9$df310500$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105021207.53917.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I wouldn;t even call it a civil union. Technically, I think that Brian Lee was referring to me suggestion, which definitely was for "civil unions". Perhaps you meant to say, "I would go further than civil unions"? ;) > When it comes to property, it becomes a matter of > contract law. And a government-recognized special form of contract which can affect things like taxes. (It shouldn't, but better that we use "civil unions" than "marriage". Getting government out of social engineering is another debate entirely - no need to make those who want social engineering oppose the measure to only officially recognize civil unions, especially since some who might get all emotional about not recognizing marriage would, in a debate over civil unions, come to agree that this form of social engineering should end.) > If you want > someone to have a right to your property, you draw > it up in a contract. If > you want to will something, you make a will. Are you going to require everyone to do this? > Right now, my > girlfriend (happily > co-habitating for four years) has no say over what > happens to me when I die. > She knows I plan to go to Alcor. My parents are both > Catholic and would > resist this. Since I am not married, my parents > would be making the > decisions. My only option at this moment to give my > girlfriend control over > this is to marry her, which is against my > (non)"religion". EVen if I go to > the JP to get married instead of a church, they > still invoke God. > Doing away with marriage...and civil unions would > force everyone to make > those arrangements in contracts. Don't most cities or counties offer to issue marriage certificates to individuals who don't go through officially recognized churches? For instance, it is traditional that the captain of a ship has the power to marry, and you can probably find one willing to do so with no reference to the supernatural. Yet any captains who do this (save for cruise ship captains) are unlikely to file paperwork with authorities already familiar with the ones performing the ceremony. But a couple who planned to do this could go to city hall and ask for the necessary documents, to be filed upon return. There are other examples, but this may be the best if the government officials you deal with demand some sort of traditional authority, since the existance of ship captains is far older than Christianity. Then again, almost any judge could also claim the power to marry - again, without need of reference to the supernatural - based on similarly ancient tradition. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 02:25:37 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:25:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage (WAS: No Joy in Mudville) References: <418AB603.1030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <015e01c4c2de$bd14c600$a51e4842@kevin> I keep seeing these statements going back and forth. I think something is missing here. I would like to start this over. Mike Lorrey and I have both proposed that rather than allowing gay marriage, the government should get out of the marriage business altogether. Some who have responded have acted as if Mike and I are bigots, homophobes, etc. I can;t speak for Mike, but I assure you I am not. This idea makes sense. To understand, we need to define the function of marriage as it is and how it applies to the idea of getting gov't out of marriage. Marriage, as I understand it, serves three purposes in our society. 1.) A contract allowing certain rights to property and access to certain gov't benefits 2.) A religious ceremony and a faith based somethingorother 3.) A social contract that binds two people together with promises of monogamy As far as I am concerned, marriage should be an entirely religious ceremony. It should have nothing to do with government. It should not be regulated by the state. If a certain church wants to keep a certain type of people out of their group, then so be it. Groups with like beliefs should be allowed to congregate with like minded people. I don't think I would be accepted too well with a bunch of bikers...and that is fine. I wouldn;t want to be with a bunch of bikers who didn;t want me to be around! Gays in church are the same way. People who are anti-gay should have just as much a right to congregate as the KKK, atheists, pagans, or a bunch of anti-Bush supporters. Boy Scouts should be for boys, girl scouts for girls. Why would a girls want to be a boy scout anyways? The solution is not to force a group to accept people who don;t fit the group. The solution is to form more groups. I don;t see the members here complaining that they don;t get a Catholic newsletter! So if the issue is whether or not gays are allowed church marriages, that is up to the church. And I am sure that there are Christian denominations that recognize gay marriages. I know of such a church right here in Evansville, IN. But I don;t think that is a problem on this list. The people here seem to think about matters in more of a logical sense rather than caring what the church thinks. I am sure the church would condemn my decisions of cryo-preservation, atheism, cloning, etc just as much as they condemn gays. Homosexuality is only one sin. I commit many! lol So I can only assume the matter has to do with either contract law, or benefits. As a matter of contract, eliminating marriage puts everyone on an equal footing. my girlfried and I can have a contract, and so can two roommates in college that buy a frat house together. All matters of contract, property, and those evil government benefits that keep people as slaves to the state should stand on their own. They should not have anything to do with race, religion. color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, or what kind of ice cream a person likes. I am not completely sure what Mike thinks here, but I would like his opinion. I don;t even care for the civil union idea. It is just another name for marriage. I want the state out of the relationship regulation business altogether. People can make contracts with one another as they wish. We would need a lot more attorneys, but they should get less expensive too. :-) Finally, regarding benefits....We are talking about benefits that both Mike and I think should not be there to begin with. It is silly to imply that Mike is singling out gays when getting rid of marriage. That is paranoia. A lot of people would lose government benefits by getting rid of marriage. But the reduction in tax expenditures would be offset by a reduction in taxes. Why people think it is OK for the government to take our money and give it back to those who "earn" it by following certain behaviors is beyond me. Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Moss" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 5:06 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > Brian Lee wrote: > > > I favor someone else on this list who suggested that the gov't get out > > of the marriage business altogether and only allow civil unions. Then > > any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. > > > I don't understand this position at all. You'd be allowing gay > marriage, but not calling any marriage marriage, but any organisation > that wants to call a marriage marriage would be free to do so and would > also be free to discriminate against homosexuals? > > Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease bigots? > > BM > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 02:30:22 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:30:22 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com><005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY><6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc04110415592412af85@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <016601c4c2df$66c664b0$a51e4842@kevin> > As transhumanists, a useful job would be one of reassurance; lots of > head patting and comforting... "there there, it's ok, look out the > window can you see it's a beautiful day? The world your children and > your grandchildren are inheriting and creating may be weird and fast, > but it is really good, better than you might have dreamed." > This is a really good point. I try to do this at times, but more often than not, I get going about how great the future is going to be and end up scaring the hell out of people. Often I am reminded that these are "obvious" hints that Armageddon is upon us (again). I really should spend a bit more time head-patting. Maybe if we all do a little of this, people will relax a bit. :-) From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 02:30:58 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:30:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105013607.10753.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105023058.53971.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Yes, concerning this issue I am as blind as Helen Keller, thoroughly biased in favor of gay marriage; I didn't hold this position previous to the last few years but gays have demonstrated they are no longer generally interested in affirmative action or court clogging. You're the guy who likes the status quo, I want hetero marriage to go south, and Up with other forms of marriage. If you want government out of marriage then let's end all state benefits for heteros, let's get government out of hetero-sponsorship. Mike, this is America, you've got to pull every string you can. --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > You have no idea what I want if you are so blind as > to not listen to a > word I say, Trend. Your blindness is the exact > reason why your buddy > Kerry lost the election. > > --- Al Brooks wrote: > > > This is sophistry; you simply don't want gays to > file > > joint returns. You secretly want to subsidise > > heterosexual marriage as I openly wish to > subsidise > > homosexual marriage. > > There's more to it, but that's the long & short of > it. > > > > > > > Not at all. It is getting government out of > > > marriage. Free human beings > > > do not need governments approving of or > licensing > > > their relationships > > > or families. If you think they do, then you are > the > > > one who is bigoted > > > and fascist. > > > > > > ===== > > > Mike Lorrey > > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of > NH > > > "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!? > > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From rhanson at gmu.edu Fri Nov 5 02:34:31 2004 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:34:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enhancing Our Truth Orientation Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041104211509.02f21070@mail.gmu.edu> A draft of this new paper is available. Comments welcome. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://hanson.gmu.edu/moretrue.pdf To appear in How Can Human Nature be Ethically Improved?, ed. Julian Savulescu, Oxford University Press, 2005. Enhancing Our Truth Orientation by Robin Hanson, November 2004 Humans lie to others and to themselves, and often choose beliefs for reasons other than how closely those beliefs approximate truth. This epistemic vice may well be reduced in the future. Increased documentation and surveillance should make it harder to lie and self-deceive about the patterns of our lives. Speculative markets can create a relatively unbiased consensus on most debated topics in science, business, and policy. Eventually, brain modifications may even make minds more transparent, so that lies and self-deception become harder to hide. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Robin Hanson rhanson at gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 02:42:16 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:42:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage In-Reply-To: <015e01c4c2de$bd14c600$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105024216.1054.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> Right-- as far as you are concerned. For me there's no reason to think those who say they want government out of marriage actually do, so I reject religious ceremony contract marriage. I want parity for any alternatives to hetero marriage based on what the benefits are for heteros at the time. If on January 1st 2015 straights have x, then I want gays and polys to be granted x as well. > As far as I am concerned, marriage should be an > entirely religious ceremony. > It should have nothing to do with government. It > should not be regulated by > the state. If a certain church wants to keep a > certain type of people out of > their group, then so be it. Groups with like beliefs > should be allowed to > congregate with like minded people. I don't think I > would be accepted too > well with a bunch of bikers...and that is fine. I > wouldn;t want to be with a > bunch of bikers who didn;t want me to be around! > > Gays in church are the same way. People who are > anti-gay should have just as > much a right to congregate as the KKK, atheists, > pagans, or a bunch of > anti-Bush supporters. Boy Scouts should be for boys, > girl scouts for girls. > Why would a girls want to be a boy scout anyways? > > The solution is not to force a group to accept > people who don;t fit the > group. The solution is to form more groups. I don;t > see the members here > complaining that they don;t get a Catholic > newsletter! > > So if the issue is whether or not gays are allowed > church marriages, that is > up to the church. And I am sure that there are > Christian denominations that > recognize gay marriages. I know of such a church > right here in Evansville, > IN. > > But I don;t think that is a problem on this list. > The people here seem to > think about matters in more of a logical sense > rather than caring what the > church thinks. I am sure the church would condemn my > decisions of > cryo-preservation, atheism, cloning, etc just as > much as they condemn gays. > Homosexuality is only one sin. I commit many! lol > > So I can only assume the matter has to do with > either contract law, or > benefits. > > As a matter of contract, eliminating marriage puts > everyone on an equal > footing. my girlfried and I can have a contract, and > so can two roommates in > college that buy a frat house together. > All matters of contract, property, and those evil > government benefits that > keep people as slaves to the state should stand on > their own. They should > not have anything to do with race, religion. color, > creed, sex, sexual > orientation, or what kind of ice cream a person > likes. > > I am not completely sure what Mike thinks here, but > I would like his > opinion. I don;t even care for the civil union idea. > It is just another name > for marriage. I want the state out of the > relationship regulation business > altogether. People can make contracts with one > another as they wish. We > would need a lot more attorneys, but they should get > less expensive too. :-) > > Finally, regarding benefits....We are talking about > benefits that both Mike > and I think should not be there to begin with. It is > silly to imply that > Mike is singling out gays when getting rid of > marriage. That is paranoia. A > lot of people would lose government benefits by > getting rid of marriage. But > the reduction in tax expenditures would be offset by > a reduction in taxes. > Why people think it is OK for the government to take > our money and give it > back to those who "earn" it by following certain > behaviors is beyond me. > > Kevin Freels > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Moss" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 5:06 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > > > Brian Lee wrote: > > > > > I favor someone else on this list who suggested > that the gov't get out > > > of the marriage business altogether and only > allow civil unions. Then > > > any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. > > > > > > I don't understand this position at all. You'd be > allowing gay > > marriage, but not calling any marriage marriage, > but any organisation > > that wants to call a marriage marriage would be > free to do so and would > > also be free to discriminate against homosexuals? > > > > Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease > bigots? > > > > BM > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 02:52:05 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 18:52:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <014e01c4c2da$aa390860$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105025205.16596.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> I only know what Mike says, not what he thinks. Mike has family and he wants to protect his family from alternatives to family as we know it. I want to help try to 'diversify' the family, which is a PC way of saying erode the conventional nuclear family. Anything goes, all is fair in love & 'marriage'. I know what Mike is saying but do not agree with him, we're communicating at cross purposes. > DId you just say that Mike Lorrey wants to subsidize > "____________"? > You don;t know Mike very well. Mike doesn;t much > care for subsidizing > anything. Mike would prefer you didn;t file tax > returns at all. > > He doesn't want gays to benefit from the government, > but that isn't singling > gays out. He doesn;t want ANYONE on the dole. Gay, > straight, bi, white, > black, mixed, etc ad-nauseum. It never fails that > when someone recomends > getting rid of a benefit, all minorities think they > are being singled out. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 7:05 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > > > This is sophistry; you simply don't want gays to > file > > joint returns. You secretly want to subsidise > > heterosexual marriage as I openly wish to > subsidise > > homosexual marriage. > > There's more to it, but that's the long & short of > it. > > > > > > > Not at all. It is getting government out of > > > marriage. Free human beings > > > do not need governments approving of or > licensing > > > their relationships > > > or families. If you think they do, then you are > the > > > one who is bigoted > > > and fascist. > > > > > > ===== > > > Mike Lorrey > > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of > NH > > > "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!? > > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:02:17 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:02:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041104224807.17010.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105030217.24154.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> This kills me- peace & quiet! Wrong century, Mike, wrong century. Invent a time machine to go back to 1890. You could buy a cabin, shoot your grub. I like you, Mike, you are entertaining, ought have your own radio show. > equal right to be an introvert in peace and quiet. > The extrovert may > feel that their rights are being restrained when > they are restrained > from rubbing introverts faces in their extroversion, > but too friggin > bad, there are limits. > > > > > I favor someone else on this list who suggested > that the gov't get > > out of the marriage business altogether and only > allow civil unions. > > Then any marriage is purely non-legal and > ceremonial. > > Thank you. > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 03:04:13 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 13:34:13 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com> References: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc041104190414afda8c@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 13:15:14 -0500, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > Hi Patrick, > > I am a non-party voter, and at the moment, I do not have much to say on > this. But to answer your questino, I suppose one way of looking at it is > that President Bush would be more aggressive toward protecting the U.S. and > its citizens against terrorism. Building bigger walls around nations is just never going to be extropic. Also, ponder why the walls are necessary in the first place. Realpolitik has long term consequences demonstrated amply by the situation the US finds itself in right now. Some walls are undoubtedly necessary to keep the barbarians out. You guys could really do with a government that would also consider talking to the barbarians and finding out what they want; quite possibly, sacking your citadel is only a means to an end. Is it possible that this end might be a lot easier to live with than big walls? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 03:06:01 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:06:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Marriage (was: No Joy in Mudville) In-Reply-To: <20041105023058.53971.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041105013607.10753.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <20041105023058.53971.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041104185248.029380f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I think a problem here is what exactly is a "marriage'. My men's group here in Santa Cruz, a rather liberal place, went kinda nuts on this issue. There are several notions using the same terminology, here is an incomplete list: union of man and woman union of any legal adults term for defining property rights, wills, etc union for creating and nurture of children I don't see any solutions any time soon. The eskimo supposedly has 150 words for snow, we have maybe 7. English is a language very poor in words for kinds, objects, types of interpersonal unions. I personally avoid the issue by using the term "partner", in our case a person, female, with commitment equivalent to 'marriage' but not closed; and after 3 'marriages' there is an aversion to something so easily entered, and so difficult to end. We would legally marry if and only if there is some really significant advantage to it. (Which might happen, but it is using a legal convention to our advantage.) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:07:36 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:07:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <20041105025205.16596.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041105025205.16596.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Perhaps in order to refocus this discussion in to a possibly more positive direction, what about considering the following question: If we (whoever) were to build a society from the bottom up (on the moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the ocean, etc), ie: from scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc should such a society have (if any) for "Marriage"? From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 5 03:14:15 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:14:15 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <710b78fc041104190414afda8c@mail.gmail.com> References: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com> <710b78fc041104190414afda8c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104211236.01dadf88@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:34 PM 11/5/2004 +1030, Emlyn wrote: >You >guys could really do with a government that would also consider >talking to the barbarians and finding out what they want; quite >possibly, sacking your citadel is only a means to an end. No, no, Emlyn, don't you understand? They hate us because we're *good*. The President said so. Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:25:29 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:25:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041105032529.80495.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Any sort of marriage anyone wants or doesn't want. Right now there's pressure for people to get married-- and believe it or nor I accept this opposition. But there are those of us who will pull the tug o' war rope from the other direction. You know what this country is about, how Americans change things-- with utmost fuss & bother. There was a four year war merely to abolish slavery. To grant women the vote took how many decades? > If we (whoever) were to build a society from the > bottom up (on the > moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the > ocean, etc), ie: from > scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc should > such a society have > (if any) for "Marriage"? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 03:28:37 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:28:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... References: <20041105025205.16596.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01d401c4c2e7$89cb1c00$a51e4842@kevin> None. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:07 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... > Perhaps in order to refocus this discussion in to a possibly more > positive direction, what about considering the following question: > > If we (whoever) were to build a society from the bottom up (on the > moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the ocean, etc), ie: from > scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc should such a society have > (if any) for "Marriage"? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:33:06 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:33:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <016601c4c2df$66c664b0$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105033306.35068.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> We can't be smarmy about it all the time, can we? Then we become suck-ups and schmoozers. > > As transhumanists, a useful job would be one of > reassurance; lots of > > head patting and comforting... "there there, it's > ok, look out the > > window can you see it's a beautiful day? The world > your children and > > your grandchildren are inheriting and creating may > be weird and fast, > > but it is really good, better than you might have > dreamed." > > > > > This is a really good point. I try to do this at > times, but more often than > not, I get going about how great the future is going > to be and end up > scaring the hell out of people. Often I am reminded > that these are "obvious" > hints that Armageddon is upon us (again). > I really should spend a bit more time head-patting. > Maybe if we all do a > little of this, people will relax a bit. :-) > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:44:04 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:44:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <20041105032529.80495.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041105032529.80495.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: True enough. However, still, this makes me think that since what we are really talking about is something far more general than the notion of marriage, shouldn't we, as Extropians, really be trying to abolish the specific-notion of "marriage" altogether ? I mean, I can understand that gays want simply to have the same rights as heteros (and they should), but ultimately if the "traditional" notion of marriage is backwards (in a certain Extropian sense), shouldn't we be trying to go way further here? Death To Marriage! On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Al Brooks wrote: Any sort of marriage anyone wants or doesn't want. Right now there's pressure for people to get married-- and believe it or nor I accept this opposition. But there are those of us who will pull the tug o' war rope from the other direction. You know what this country is about, how Americans change things-- with utmost fuss & bother. There was a four year war merely to abolish slavery. To grant women the vote took how many decades? > If we (whoever) were to build a society from the > bottom up (on the > moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the > ocean, etc), ie: from > scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc should > such a society have > (if any) for "Marriage"? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nigel. --- "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " -Buckaroo Banzai -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 2074 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:50:03 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:50:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] traditional baloney In-Reply-To: <20041105033306.35068.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041105033306.35068.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: If I hear another schmo talk about the "traditional" values of this great Country of ours, I'll hemorrhage grey-matter...Guess I shouldn't be watching CNN (but I can't help it!) Traditional values dictates that blacks should be in bondage and women should be barefoot and pregnant and children should be working in mines. From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 03:56:56 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 14:26:56 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105033306.35068.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <016601c4c2df$66c664b0$a51e4842@kevin> <20041105033306.35068.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04110419566b0d9483@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:33:06 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > We can't be smarmy about it all the time, can we? Then > we become suck-ups and schmoozers. > Where's smarminess come in? Things really are going well. The world appears to be becoming gradually more free, temporary movements in the opposite direction by major powers notwithstanding. We seem to be becoming wealthier, we have a lot more options with regard to technology, health, lifestyle. I get the general impression that across the world, the movement is toward democracy and away from totalitarianism. Sure there is heaps to do, and the more we chip in and help the better. Still, we musn't let the fear of change, and the disimilarity of the present to a (partially fictitious) past we are more familiar with hide the fact that things are better than ever. Transhumanists as a whole have a lot to be optimistic about (excepting maybe the overtly socialist faction). I think one of the biggest issues we have in the west at present is that we (generally) don't realise just how good we have it. People are only seeing the bad stuff. We need to remind everyone (and ourselves) that personal freedom and self direction are going gangbusters. Don't sell it short! Happier people would make decisions we could all be proud of, I think, rather than thinking and acting meanly as I see too many people do, especially in areas like foreign policy. It *should* be a no brainer, because there's a lot to be happy about. > > > As transhumanists, a useful job would be one of > > reassurance; lots of > > > head patting and comforting... "there there, it's > > ok, look out the > > > window can you see it's a beautiful day? The world > > your children and > > > your grandchildren are inheriting and creating may > > be weird and fast, > > > but it is really good, better than you might have > > dreamed." > > > > > > > > > This is a really good point. I try to do this at > > times, but more often than > > not, I get going about how great the future is going > > to be and end up > > scaring the hell out of people. Often I am reminded > > that these are "obvious" > > hints that Armageddon is upon us (again). > > I really should spend a bit more time head-patting. > > Maybe if we all do a > > little of this, people will relax a bit. :-) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:59:25 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 19:59:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041105035925.83683.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Well, you got right to it. look, I'll be 50 in another year or so, do not want to be an old maid, so what is so terrible about marrying a 15 year old before my body is unmarketable? We put on this brave front like we're going to live indefinitely but anybody could die in an accident, the future is great but there's today too. If I have a good time, make it to 65 then get suspended, that's good enough. If you make it to 65 or 70 it can be called a good life. Aren't you thankful for small favors? --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > True enough. However, still, this makes me think > that since what we are > really talking about is something far more general > than the notion of > marriage, shouldn't we, as Extropians, really be > trying to abolish the > specific-notion of "marriage" altogether ? > > I mean, I can understand that gays want simply to > have the same rights > as heteros (and they should), but ultimately if the > "traditional" > notion of marriage is backwards (in a certain > Extropian sense), > shouldn't we be trying to go way further here? > > Death To Marriage! > > > On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > > Any sort of marriage anyone wants or doesn't want. > Right now there's pressure for people to get > married-- and believe it or nor I accept this > opposition. But there are those of us who will pull > the tug o' war rope from the other direction. You > know > what this country is about, how Americans change > things-- with utmost fuss & bother. There was a four > year war merely to abolish slavery. To grant women > the > vote took how many decades? > > > > If we (whoever) were to build a society from the > > bottom up (on the > > moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the > > ocean, etc), ie: from > > scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc > should > > such a society have > > (if any) for "Marriage"? > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > Cheers, > Nigel. > --- > "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be > mean because, > remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " > > -Buckaroo Banzai > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 04:07:45 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:07:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: References: <20041105031605.45039.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <020401c4c2ed$01c175b0$a51e4842@kevin> Well as I said, I can;t speak for Mike. I have custody of two children from a previous marriage and have a girlfriend that I have lived with for several years. They are both girls and they are being brought up in the most untraditional way. They are taught to respect everyone, but to question everything. They are taught that the very worst thing a person could be is a non-thinking hater and a hypocrite. I don't personally see how one's sexual orientation has any bearing on family except for in a few cases. One such case is mine. I have two girls and I have custody. I would have a very tough time teaching them all that girl stuff myself. A male mate wouldn;t be much of a help either. BUT, all that means is that I would have to find a way to make sure a woman was in their lives. That woman could be my mother, sister, a friend, or someone I hired to be their "woman tutor". I will say that I think it is important that children be brought up to know how to function in a hetero society. Hetero must be the norm, or the population would crash and our species would become extinct. Since the majority then must be hetero, they need to learn to live in a hetero society. They need to understand gender roles. They do not, however, need to be brainwashed into those roles. In fact, I think their awareness of these roles will make them always conscious of what they are doing rather than reacting with the masses. They need to understand all of the options available to them, then be treated with respect regardless of what they choose.... So what of the traditional family? There is nothing wrong with it. It is a good thing. It only becomes a problem when people become narrow minded and think that their way is right. It becomes a problem when parents teach their children to hate. It is not a bad thing and Mike is right to protect it. But I don;t see how he could perceive gay marriage as a threat to that. It has no bearing on his family. People who are closed minded come from all different ways of life. There are close minded gays who want to rub homosexuality in people's faces. There are Christians who do the same with their religion. There are blacks who rub their blackness in people's faces. I could go on and on. None of these people are being productive. I think Mike has a difefrent agenda. He wants to protect your rights..but not at the expense of everyone elses. To him, and to me, an American isn;t a Gay American, or African American, or Islamic American. Everyone is just a plain old boring American...and if you are on the public dole, he is after you. In short, Mike is an equal-opportunity hater. Gay families are not a threat to hetero families. It is either the excuse that anti-gay people use to justify their behavior, or ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "Kevin Freels" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:16 PM > Okay, nevertheless we're not objective in these > matters, perhaps it's me projecting on you, yet as far > as I know from everything I've observed, most everyone > is grinding an axe concerning the family institution: > "my family right or wrong". > Now of course the things have to be done slowly, if > straights dominate until, say, the 2070s or '80s > that's fine w/ me, but to change you've got to have > those who push to get the ball rolling. If we listened > to Mike heteros would rule until after 2100. > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > > Not anarchists. Government has many necessary > > functions. Handing out other > > people's money isn;t one of them. It doesn;t matter > > if you give it to a str8 > > guy or a gay woman; it is still wrong. > > > > You said, "For me there's no reason to think those > > who say they want > > government out of marriage actually do," > > Don;t be so paranoid. There are a lot of bad people > > out there, but that is > > no way to live. We're not all bad. Any time you push > > against the norm, you > > get a lot of resistance. Most of us here push those > > envelopes regularly. > > Being gay is no different. I didn;t choose to be an > > atheist....God made me > > that way. :-) > > > > The only reason gays have gotten so much resistance > > is because they are > > normalizing homosexuality. Us cryo, AI, MNT, > > transhumanism people simply > > haven;t become a large enough target yet. Give it > > time. Eventually there > > will be a group out there called "Gays Against > > Artificial Intelligrnce" and > > they will be working right alongside the church. > > > > Parity is a worthy goal. Personally I would be happy > > if all people were > > treated equally by the state. That is what I am > > after. I want to see the > > government put back to something that makes sense > > and is consistent. > > > > Cheers! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Al Brooks" > > To: "Kevin Freels" ; "ExI > > chat list" > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 8:42 PM > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage > > > > > > > Right-- as far as you are concerned. For me > > there's no > > > reason to think those who say they want government > > out > > > of marriage actually do, so I reject religious > > > ceremony contract marriage. > > > I want parity for any alternatives to hetero > > marriage > > > based on what the benefits are for heteros at the > > > time. If on January 1st 2015 straights have x, > > then I > > > want gays and polys to be granted x as well. > > > > > > > As far as I am concerned, marriage should be an > > > > entirely religious ceremony. > > > > It should have nothing to do with government. It > > > > should not be regulated by > > > > the state. If a certain church wants to keep a > > > > certain type of people out of > > > > their group, then so be it. Groups with like > > beliefs > > > > should be allowed to > > > > congregate with like minded people. I don't > > think I > > > > would be accepted too > > > > well with a bunch of bikers...and that is fine. > > I > > > > wouldn;t want to be with a > > > > bunch of bikers who didn;t want me to be around! > > > > > > > > Gays in church are the same way. People who are > > > > anti-gay should have just as > > > > much a right to congregate as the KKK, atheists, > > > > pagans, or a bunch of > > > > anti-Bush supporters. Boy Scouts should be for > > boys, > > > > girl scouts for girls. > > > > Why would a girls want to be a boy scout > > anyways? > > > > > > > > The solution is not to force a group to accept > > > > people who don;t fit the > > > > group. The solution is to form more groups. I > > don;t > > > > see the members here > > > > complaining that they don;t get a Catholic > > > > newsletter! > > > > > > > > So if the issue is whether or not gays are > > allowed > > > > church marriages, that is > > > > up to the church. And I am sure that there are > > > > Christian denominations that > > > > recognize gay marriages. I know of such a church > > > > right here in Evansville, > > > > IN. > > > > > > > > But I don;t think that is a problem on this > > list. > > > > The people here seem to > > > > think about matters in more of a logical sense > > > > rather than caring what the > > > > church thinks. I am sure the church would > > condemn my > > > > decisions of > > > > cryo-preservation, atheism, cloning, etc just > > as > > > > much as they condemn gays. > > > > Homosexuality is only one sin. I commit many! > > lol > > > > > > > > So I can only assume the matter has to do with > > > > either contract law, or > > > > benefits. > > > > > > > > As a matter of contract, eliminating marriage > > puts > > > > everyone on an equal > > > > footing. my girlfried and I can have a contract, > > and > > > > so can two roommates in > > > > college that buy a frat house together. > > > > All matters of contract, property, and those > > evil > > > > government benefits that > > > > keep people as slaves to the state should stand > > on > > > > their own. They should > > > > not have anything to do with race, religion. > > color, > > > > creed, sex, sexual > > > > orientation, or what kind of ice cream a person > > > > likes. > > > > > > > > I am not completely sure what Mike thinks here, > > but > > > > I would like his > > > > opinion. I don;t even care for the civil union > > idea. > > > > It is just another name > > > > for marriage. I want the state out of the > > > > relationship regulation business > > > > altogether. People can make contracts with one > > > > another as they wish. We > > > > would need a lot more attorneys, but they should > > get > > > > less expensive too. :-) > > > > > > > > Finally, regarding benefits....We are talking > > about > > > > benefits that both Mike > > > > and I think should not be there to begin with. > > It is > > > > silly to imply that > > > > Mike is singling out gays when getting rid of > > > > marriage. That is paranoia. A > > > > lot of people would lose government benefits by > > > > getting rid of marriage. But > > > > the reduction in tax expenditures would be > > offset by > > > > a reduction in taxes. > > > > Why people think it is OK for the government to > > take > > > > our money and give it > > > > back to those who "earn" it by following certain > > > > behaviors is beyond me. > > > > > > > > Kevin Freels > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Bryan Moss" > > > > To: "ExI chat list" > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 5:06 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > > > > > > > > > > > > Brian Lee wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I favor someone else on this list who > > suggested > > > > that the gov't get out > > > > > > of the marriage business altogether and only > > > > allow civil unions. Then > > > > > > any marriage is purely non-legal and > > ceremonial. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand this position at all. > > You'd be > > > === message truncated === > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 04:12:53 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:12:53 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] traditional baloney References: <20041105033306.35068.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <021e01c4c2ed$b8e464f0$a51e4842@kevin> Have faith. A traditional person like you should treat this a bit more traditionally. With God behind us, we will bring everyone back into the nuclear family and do away with the sinners. This great country of ours is ready to enter a period of healing and return to the roots of our heritage..... OK. I am just joking. Please don't let your brain explode like that scene on Scanners. I need you to help me get rid of marriage! ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:50 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] traditional baloney > If I hear another schmo talk about the "traditional" values of this > great Country of ours, I'll hemorrhage grey-matter...Guess I shouldn't > be watching CNN (but I can't help it!) > > Traditional values dictates that blacks should be in bondage and women > should be barefoot and pregnant and children should be working in > mines. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:12:42 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:12:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04110419566b0d9483@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041105041242.63263.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Sure & I'm thankful just for agricultural, whether it's high tech or organic hippie farms. It's not the 'West' that is getting worrisome it's West and Central Asia. Of course it probably wont go down this line too far yet there's fair odds of a general war where many get killed or sick from the... whatever. My Dad didn't think he'd have to go off to WWII but it came closer & closer inching up until he could see it coming. > I think one of > the biggest > issues we have in the west at present is that we > (generally) don't > realise just how good we have it. People are only > seeing the bad > stuff. We need to remind everyone (and ourselves) > that personal > freedom and self direction are going gangbusters. > Don't sell it short! > > Happier people would make decisions we could all be > proud of, I think, > rather than thinking and acting meanly as I see too > many people do, > especially in areas like foreign policy. It *should* > be a no brainer, > because there's a lot to be happy about. > > > > > As transhumanists, a useful job would be one > of > > > reassurance; lots of > > > > head patting and comforting... "there there, > it's > > > ok, look out the > > > > window can you see it's a beautiful day? The > world > > > your children and > > > > your grandchildren are inheriting and creating > may > > > be weird and fast, > > > > but it is really good, better than you might > have > > > dreamed." > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a really good point. I try to do this at > > > times, but more often than > > > not, I get going about how great the future is > going > > > to be and end up > > > scaring the hell out of people. Often I am > reminded > > > that these are "obvious" > > > hints that Armageddon is upon us (again). > > > I really should spend a bit more time > head-patting. > > > Maybe if we all do a > > > little of this, people will relax a bit. :-) > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > -- > Emlyn > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software > * > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From sahynepu at concentric.net Fri Nov 5 03:54:35 2004 From: sahynepu at concentric.net (Sahyinepu) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:54:35 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <418AB603.1030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> In my faith we have several gay people, and their grip on the issue, and why they want some sort of legal recognition, etc, is for the same legal rights straights have..like say for example, if one person gets really ill and has to go to the hospital, the other person may not be able to see them. Also, if someone dies, the states tend to seek out family member of the deceased, where as the person who the loved and whom they shared their life with is ignored. They spend several thousand dollars more than any straight couple would with legal nonsense just trying to overcome some of these issues. People should rely on the state for legal recognition only, as far as how the law recognizes them with regards to wills, etc, same as current marriages give protection. As for the religious aspect of marriage, that is up to the person religious affiliation. My faith has married several members who are gay, that is our choice...if Baptists don't want to do it, that is their choice...no one is being forced to marry anyone...but the state should give the same legal protection and recognition to gays as it gives to non-gays. The Ancient Egyptians(and modern followers of the faith like myself) viewed marriage as a legal contract only...America should do the same. Sah On Thursday, November 4, 2004, at 05:06 PM, Bryan Moss wrote: > Brian Lee wrote: > >> I favor someone else on this list who suggested that the gov't get >> out of the marriage business altogether and only allow civil unions. >> Then any marriage is purely non-legal and ceremonial. > > > I don't understand this position at all. You'd be allowing gay > marriage, but not calling any marriage marriage, but any organisation > that wants to call a marriage marriage would be free to do so and > would also be free to discriminate against homosexuals? > > Doesn't it just amount to a name change to appease bigots? > > BM > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:32:45 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:32:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <20041105035925.83683.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041105035925.83683.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: What we've (speaking for myself) come to realize is that the old forms of relationships simply don't work as well as was once thought. Marriage never used to be about love...it was an economic idea. Purely a tribal notion based on procreation, quelling inter-tribe violence, etc. Now we expect marriage to be the vehicle for interpersonal and individual happiness. But there's notion inherent to the notion of marriage that says it will provide these things. It was never designed to. So, we're in a period of flux. How do we remake inter-personal relationships so as to maximize our ability to lead a good life (by whatever measure). The answer clearly seems to be that what works for some people doesn't work for everyone. However, the prevalent social mores in this country preclude us from experimenting in any meaningful way in trying to create new kinds of interpersonal bonds. Given the option and the will, there are a lot of possibilities that one could try. Maybe some people would opt for chemical/hormonal de-sexing. Maybe sex is too much of a hindrance in finding the kind of happiness I'm talking about. I don't know. The point is, if we don't develop an environment that encourages that kind of experimentation and exploration then we will be selling ourselves short. -NJ On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:59 PM, Al Brooks wrote: Well, you got right to it. look, I'll be 50 in another year or so, do not want to be an old maid, so what is so terrible about marrying a 15 year old before my body is unmarketable? We put on this brave front like we're going to live indefinitely but anybody could die in an accident, the future is great but there's today too. If I have a good time, make it to 65 then get suspended, that's good enough. If you make it to 65 or 70 it can be called a good life. Aren't you thankful for small favors? --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > True enough. However, still, this makes me think > that since what we are > really talking about is something far more general > than the notion of > marriage, shouldn't we, as Extropians, really be > trying to abolish the > specific-notion of "marriage" altogether ? > > I mean, I can understand that gays want simply to > have the same rights > as heteros (and they should), but ultimately if the > "traditional" > notion of marriage is backwards (in a certain > Extropian sense), > shouldn't we be trying to go way further here? > > Death To Marriage! > > > On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > > Any sort of marriage anyone wants or doesn't want. > Right now there's pressure for people to get > married-- and believe it or nor I accept this > opposition. But there are those of us who will pull > the tug o' war rope from the other direction. You > know > what this country is about, how Americans change > things-- with utmost fuss & bother. There was a four > year war merely to abolish slavery. To grant women > the > vote took how many decades? > > >> If we (whoever) were to build a society from the >> bottom up (on the >> moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the >> ocean, etc), ie: from >> scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc > should >> such a society have >> (if any) for "Marriage"? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat >> > > ===== > Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > Cheers, > Nigel. > --- > "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be > mean because, > remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " > > -Buckaroo Banzai > >> _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nigel. --- "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " -Buckaroo Banzai -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 4763 bytes Desc: not available URL: From zero.powers at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 04:39:05 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:39:05 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Prop 71: The New Gold Rush In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204110403576917e016@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c5204110403576917e016@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7a321705041104203914873a77@mail.gmail.com> Some choose to deride my beloved State of Taxifornia, but after this election I love my country a little bit less and my state a little bit more. I wonder if it's too late for California to get on the secession bandwagon? Those southern rebels may have been on to something after all. Heck, maybe we could persuade New York to join in with us for a bi-coastal confederacy. That way we'd have the buggers surrounded! The coasts shall rise again!!! Zero On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:57:18 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Wired: Scientists around the country who study embryonic stem cells > may be mourning four more years of President Bush's restrictive > funding policy, but California scientists are throwing a party, and > top researchers in less-funded states are hoping for invitations. > In the Golden State, stem cell researchers will see a windfall of $3 > billion over the next 10 years, averaging about $300 million a year, > thanks to the passage of Proposition 71, the California Stem Cell > Research and Cures Initiative. It shouldn't be difficult to entice the > best minds in the country to move to a place where their work is fully > supported by a state known for its mild climate. > California has found a way to supplant federal money with its stem > cell initiative, and it's the envy of the rest of the country's stem > cell researchers. > http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,65588,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:44:21 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:44:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <41DB29A4-2E80-11D9-8560-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041105044421.72383.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we have it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the culture at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: Jesus, booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir practice. 23 skidoo. But they look at me and are sickened too; life extension, music, trendology- all that pointyheaded intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is superior, they think there's is. It's moving so slow but the years are going so fast. > What about the Midwest and the South? It would seem > to me that the > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that the > insane Christian > meme that we have been politely ignoring for years > has come home to > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not able > to control the > strings of government too tightly, but there are now > enough > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of the > only remaining > superpower. > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > I live in a small East German town. Just down the > street I have a bunch > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up a > cafe to lure and > convert secular communists. These guys are really > well organized and > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into Mormons > from Utah on the > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > trying to spread the > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > democracy when they are > not willing to actively engage those who disagree > with them? Reading > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not going to > change anyone's > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We need > to become much more > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > Midwest! > > best, patrick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:55:35 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:55:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041105045535.43048.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> More good points here esp. regarding chemical, hormonal desexing. That's an important option. Anyhow, I just want to sow a few more wild oats before the box of oats goes six feet under, "get it while you can". pangs & longing and love is like high school. --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > What we've (speaking for myself) come to realize is > that the old forms > of relationships simply don't work as well as was > once thought. > Marriage never used to be about love...it was an > economic idea. Purely > a tribal notion based on procreation, quelling > inter-tribe violence, > etc. Now we expect marriage to be the vehicle for > interpersonal and > individual happiness. But there's notion inherent to > the notion of > marriage that says it will provide these things. It > was never designed > to. > > So, we're in a period of flux. How do we remake > inter-personal > relationships so as to maximize our ability to lead > a good life (by > whatever measure). The answer clearly seems to be > that what works for > some people doesn't work for everyone. However, the > prevalent social > mores in this country preclude us from experimenting > in any meaningful > way in trying to create new kinds of interpersonal > bonds. Given the > option and the will, there are a lot of > possibilities that one could > try. Maybe some people would opt for > chemical/hormonal de-sexing. Maybe > sex is too much of a hindrance in finding the kind > of happiness I'm > talking about. I don't know. The point is, if we > don't develop an > environment that encourages that kind of > experimentation and > exploration then we will be selling ourselves short. > > -NJ > > > On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:59 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > > Well, you got right to it. > look, I'll be 50 in another year or so, do not want > to > be an old maid, so what is so terrible about > marrying > a 15 year old before my body is unmarketable? We put > on this brave front like we're going to live > indefinitely but anybody could die in an accident, > the > future is great but there's today too. > If I have a good time, make it to 65 then get > suspended, that's good enough. If you make it to 65 > or > 70 it can be called a good life. Aren't you thankful > for small favors? > > --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > > True enough. However, still, this makes me think > > that since what we are > > really talking about is something far more general > > than the notion of > > marriage, shouldn't we, as Extropians, really be > > trying to abolish the > > specific-notion of "marriage" altogether ? > > > > I mean, I can understand that gays want simply to > > have the same rights > > as heteros (and they should), but ultimately if > the > > "traditional" > > notion of marriage is backwards (in a certain > > Extropian sense), > > shouldn't we be trying to go way further here? > > > > Death To Marriage! > > > > > > On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > > > > Any sort of marriage anyone wants or doesn't want. > > Right now there's pressure for people to get > > married-- and believe it or nor I accept this > > opposition. But there are those of us who will > pull > > the tug o' war rope from the other direction. You > > know > > what this country is about, how Americans change > > things-- with utmost fuss & bother. There was a > four > > year war merely to abolish slavery. To grant women > > the > > vote took how many decades? > > > > > >> If we (whoever) were to build a society from > the > >> bottom up (on the > >> moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the > >> ocean, etc), ie: from > >> scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc > > should > >> such a society have > >> (if any) for "Marriage"? > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> extropy-chat mailing list > >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >> > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > >> > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > Cheers, > > Nigel. > > --- > > "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be > > mean because, > > remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " > > > > -Buckaroo Banzai > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > Cheers, > Nigel. > --- > "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be > mean because, > remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " > > -Buckaroo Banzai > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From trichrom at optusnet.com.au Fri Nov 5 04:58:46 2004 From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 14:58:46 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... References: <20041105035925.83683.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002a01c4c2f4$245cd950$925eecdc@turtle> I thought marriage was one of the success's of the western world created by the church. It addresses issues of public health in expanding populations by minimising people 'sleeping around' and spreading diseases (also by promoting the family and home unit perhaps), and that kids grow up better if parentage is relatively stable and ownership of the kid is supported by heritage. Of course that was useful hundreds of years ago, and also if you dont believe the spiritual aspects of joining soul's, reincarnation, etc. RobKPO From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 05:03:45 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:03:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: References: <20041105042152.65761.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <023f01c4c2f4$d4653db0$a51e4842@kevin> lol! I used to think that way. Then I realized that on my own, I could do very little to change the world. This is especially because I didn;t even realize it needed changing until I was already in my late 20s. I have an agenda to do away with irrational decision making about my future based on a book that is thousands of years old. Then I realized just how important children were to the equation. First of all, if I can get all three to think similar to me, then I have increased the odds of accomplishing my goals. Also, they will be able to accomplish more since they are already exposed to my mindset. Also, if Christians and the uneducated are having lots of children, and the number of children continues to go down with increased education, then we will be overrun before we ever reach the singularity. I figured I would do my part and raise a total of three. These three increase my chances of accomplishing my goals, and also will have an incentive to bring me back should the technology to do so come about in their lifetimes. All I am teaching them is to be open minded, to question everything, to never stop learning, and that they can live forever without the hocus pocus of the bible. I encourage any kind of learning they take on. My house is like a freaking kids laboratory/library with unrestricted Google access for all. I carefully guide them though the tough questions, but I answer them. Above all, I teach them to think for themselves. All I can do is hope that they think like me, but as long as they think doe themselves, I will have accomplished a great deal for the future. When I am done with these three, I will probably adopt 1 or 2 just for kicks. Then at least I know I did my part to keep them out of a Christian household. :-) Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "Kevin Freels" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:21 PM Subject: Re: > I like women better, but don't want to have any > children at all. My friend is 50 with a kid, he's a > professor but he's got three on-off freelance jobs > plus his wife is swamped, she's making snide remarks > about their 'love child', they hardly have time to > smile. Frankly I'd rather live in a boring trailer > park in the sticks watching TV than take care of > anyone's children. > > > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > > Well as I said, I can;t speak for Mike. I have > > custody of two children from > > a previous marriage and have a girlfriend that I > > have lived with for several > > years. They are both girls and they are being > > brought up in the most > > untraditional way. They are taught to respect > > everyone, but to question > > everything. They are taught that the very worst > > thing a person could be is a > > non-thinking hater and a hypocrite. I don't > > personally see how one's sexual > > orientation has any bearing on family except for in > > a few cases. One such > > case is mine. I have two girls and I have custody. I > > would have a very tough > > time teaching them all that girl stuff myself. A > > male mate wouldn;t be much > > of a help either. BUT, all that means is that I > > would have to find a way to > > make sure a woman was in their lives. That woman > > could be my mother, sister, > > a friend, or someone I hired to be their "woman > > tutor". > > > > I will say that I think it is important that > > children be brought up to know > > how to function in a hetero society. Hetero must be > > the norm, or the > > population would crash and our species would become > > extinct. Since the > > majority then must be hetero, they need to learn to > > live in a hetero > > society. They need to understand gender roles. They > > do not, however, need to > > be brainwashed into those roles. In fact, I think > > their awareness of these > > roles will make them always conscious of what they > > are doing rather than > > reacting with the masses. They need to understand > > all of the options > > available to them, then be treated with respect > > regardless of what they > > choose.... > > > > So what of the traditional family? There is nothing > > wrong with it. It is a > > good thing. It only becomes a problem when people > > become narrow minded and > > think that their way is right. It becomes a problem > > when parents teach their > > children to hate. It is not a bad thing and Mike is > > right to protect it. But > > I don;t see how he could perceive gay marriage as a > > threat to that. It has > > no bearing on his family. > > People who are closed minded come from all different > > ways of life. There are > > close minded gays who want to rub homosexuality in > > people's faces. There are > > Christians who do the same with their religion. > > There are blacks who rub > > their blackness in people's faces. I could go on and > > on. None of these > > people are being productive. > > > > I think Mike has a difefrent agenda. He wants to > > protect your rights..but > > not at the expense of everyone elses. To him, and to > > me, an American isn;t a > > Gay American, or African American, or Islamic > > American. Everyone is just a > > plain old boring American...and if you are on the > > public dole, he is after > > you. > > > > In short, Mike is an equal-opportunity hater. > > > > > > Gay families are not a threat to hetero families. It > > is either the excuse > > that anti-gay people use to justify their behavior, > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Al Brooks" > > To: "Kevin Freels" > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:16 PM > > > > > > > Okay, nevertheless we're not objective in these > > > matters, perhaps it's me projecting on you, yet as > > far > > > as I know from everything I've observed, most > > everyone > > > is grinding an axe concerning the family > > institution: > > > "my family right or wrong". > > > Now of course the things have to be done slowly, > > if > > > straights dominate until, say, the 2070s or '80s > > > that's fine w/ me, but to change you've got to > > have > > > those who push to get the ball rolling. If we > > listened > > > to Mike heteros would rule until after 2100. > > > > > > > > > --- Kevin Freels > > wrote: > > > > > > > Not anarchists. Government has many necessary > > > > functions. Handing out other > > > > people's money isn;t one of them. It doesn;t > > matter > > > > if you give it to a str8 > > > > guy or a gay woman; it is still wrong. > > > > > > > > You said, "For me there's no reason to think > > those > > > > who say they want > > > > government out of marriage actually do," > > > > Don;t be so paranoid. There are a lot of bad > > people > > > > out there, but that is > > > > no way to live. We're not all bad. Any time you > > push > > > > against the norm, you > > > > get a lot of resistance. Most of us here push > > those > > > > envelopes regularly. > > > > Being gay is no different. I didn;t choose to be > > an > > > > atheist....God made me > > > > that way. :-) > > > > > > > > The only reason gays have gotten so much > > resistance > > > > is because they are > > > > normalizing homosexuality. Us cryo, AI, MNT, > > > > transhumanism people simply > > > > haven;t become a large enough target yet. Give > > it > > > > time. Eventually there > > > > will be a group out there called "Gays Against > > > > Artificial Intelligrnce" and > > > > they will be working right alongside the church. > > > > > > > > Parity is a worthy goal. Personally I would be > > happy > > > > if all people were > > > > treated equally by the state. That is what I am > > > > after. I want to see the > > > > government put back to something that makes > > sense > > > > and is consistent. > > > > > > > > Cheers! > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Al Brooks" > > > > To: "Kevin Freels" ; > > "ExI > > > > chat list" > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 8:42 PM > > > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right-- as far as you are concerned. For me > > > > there's no > > > > > reason to think those who say they want > > government > > > > out > > > > > of marriage actually do, so I reject religious > > > > > ceremony contract marriage. > > > > > I want parity for any alternatives to hetero > > > > marriage > > > > > based on what the benefits are for heteros at > > the > > > > > time. If on January 1st 2015 straights have x, > > > > then I > > > > > want gays and polys to be granted x as well. > > > > > > > > > > > As far as I am concerned, marriage should be > > an > > > > > > entirely religious ceremony. > > > > > > It should have nothing to do with > > government. It > > > > > > should not be regulated by > > > > > > the state. If a certain church wants to keep > > a > > > > > > certain type of people out of > > > > > > their group, then so be it. Groups with like > > > > beliefs > > > > > > should be allowed to > > > > > > congregate with like minded people. I don't > > > === message truncated === > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 05:08:58 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:08:58 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals References: <20041105044421.72383.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all those huge SUVs, Nascar, sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with gunracks, big number "3"s, and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the little man "pissing" on "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen it around on about 15 different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and prominently displayed on the rear windshield!) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we have > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the culture > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: Jesus, > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir practice. 23 > skidoo. > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > extension, music, trendology- all that pointyheaded > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is superior, > they think there's is. > It's moving so slow but the years are going so fast. > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would seem > > to me that the > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that the > > insane Christian > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for years > > has come home to > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not able > > to control the > > strings of government too tightly, but there are now > > enough > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of the > > only remaining > > superpower. > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down the > > street I have a bunch > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up a > > cafe to lure and > > convert secular communists. These guys are really > > well organized and > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into Mormons > > from Utah on the > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > trying to spread the > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > democracy when they are > > not willing to actively engage those who disagree > > with them? Reading > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not going to > > change anyone's > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We need > > to become much more > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > Midwest! > > > > best, patrick > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:09:02 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:09:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <002a01c4c2f4$245cd950$925eecdc@turtle> References: <20041105035925.83683.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> <002a01c4c2f4$245cd950$925eecdc@turtle> Message-ID: Well, marriage is certainly far older than any modern church. Marriage in every time is about you and someone else filling a place in your local social system so that it can continue to function. However, with sophisticated political systems marriage doesn't need to fill that role anymore. So, what do we do with it? Toss it? Develop something better? As far as the spiritual aspects of marriage go, don't worry, we'll have a drug for that soon. On Nov 4, 2004, at 11:58 PM, RobKPO wrote: I thought marriage was one of the success's of the western world created by the church. It addresses issues of public health in expanding populations by minimising people 'sleeping around' and spreading diseases (also by promoting the family and home unit perhaps), and that kids grow up better if parentage is relatively stable and ownership of the kid is supported by heritage. Of course that was useful hundreds of years ago, and also if you dont believe the spiritual aspects of joining soul's, reincarnation, etc. RobKPO _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nigel. --- "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " -Buckaroo Banzai -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1413 bytes Desc: not available URL: From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:12:53 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:12:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: In-Reply-To: <023f01c4c2f4$d4653db0$a51e4842@kevin> References: <20041105042152.65761.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> <023f01c4c2f4$d4653db0$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <58AE978E-2EE9-11D9-A86B-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> We each have a profound ability to change the world...if even only for one person...ourselves. Don't underestimate the power and usefulness of radically changing your worldview. After all, that's all the world really is. Ever read JDBernal's: the World the Flesh and Devil? On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:03 AM, Kevin Freels wrote: lol! I used to think that way. Then I realized that on my own, I could do very little to change the world. This is especially because I didn;t even realize it needed changing until I was already in my late 20s. I have an agenda to do away with irrational decision making about my future based on a book that is thousands of years old. Then I realized just how important children were to the equation. First of all, if I can get all three to think similar to me, then I have increased the odds of accomplishing my goals. Also, they will be able to accomplish more since they are already exposed to my mindset. Also, if Christians and the uneducated are having lots of children, and the number of children continues to go down with increased education, then we will be overrun before we ever reach the singularity. I figured I would do my part and raise a total of three. These three increase my chances of accomplishing my goals, and also will have an incentive to bring me back should the technology to do so come about in their lifetimes. All I am teaching them is to be open minded, to question everything, to never stop learning, and that they can live forever without the hocus pocus of the bible. I encourage any kind of learning they take on. My house is like a freaking kids laboratory/library with unrestricted Google access for all. I carefully guide them though the tough questions, but I answer them. Above all, I teach them to think for themselves. All I can do is hope that they think like me, but as long as they think doe themselves, I will have accomplished a great deal for the future. When I am done with these three, I will probably adopt 1 or 2 just for kicks. Then at least I know I did my part to keep them out of a Christian household. :-) Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "Kevin Freels" Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:21 PM Subject: Re: > I like women better, but don't want to have any > children at all. My friend is 50 with a kid, he's a > professor but he's got three on-off freelance jobs > plus his wife is swamped, she's making snide remarks > about their 'love child', they hardly have time to > smile. Frankly I'd rather live in a boring trailer > park in the sticks watching TV than take care of > anyone's children. > > > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > >> Well as I said, I can;t speak for Mike. I have >> custody of two children from >> a previous marriage and have a girlfriend that I >> have lived with for several >> years. They are both girls and they are being >> brought up in the most >> untraditional way. They are taught to respect >> everyone, but to question >> everything. They are taught that the very worst >> thing a person could be is a >> non-thinking hater and a hypocrite. I don't >> personally see how one's sexual >> orientation has any bearing on family except for in >> a few cases. One such >> case is mine. I have two girls and I have custody. I >> would have a very tough >> time teaching them all that girl stuff myself. A >> male mate wouldn;t be much >> of a help either. BUT, all that means is that I >> would have to find a way to >> make sure a woman was in their lives. That woman >> could be my mother, sister, >> a friend, or someone I hired to be their "woman >> tutor". >> >> I will say that I think it is important that >> children be brought up to know >> how to function in a hetero society. Hetero must be >> the norm, or the >> population would crash and our species would become >> extinct. Since the >> majority then must be hetero, they need to learn to >> live in a hetero >> society. They need to understand gender roles. They >> do not, however, need to >> be brainwashed into those roles. In fact, I think >> their awareness of these >> roles will make them always conscious of what they >> are doing rather than >> reacting with the masses. They need to understand >> all of the options >> available to them, then be treated with respect >> regardless of what they >> choose.... >> >> So what of the traditional family? There is nothing >> wrong with it. It is a >> good thing. It only becomes a problem when people >> become narrow minded and >> think that their way is right. It becomes a problem >> when parents teach their >> children to hate. It is not a bad thing and Mike is >> right to protect it. But >> I don;t see how he could perceive gay marriage as a >> threat to that. It has >> no bearing on his family. >> People who are closed minded come from all different >> ways of life. There are >> close minded gays who want to rub homosexuality in >> people's faces. There are >> Christians who do the same with their religion. >> There are blacks who rub >> their blackness in people's faces. I could go on and >> on. None of these >> people are being productive. >> >> I think Mike has a difefrent agenda. He wants to >> protect your rights..but >> not at the expense of everyone elses. To him, and to >> me, an American isn;t a >> Gay American, or African American, or Islamic >> American. Everyone is just a >> plain old boring American...and if you are on the >> public dole, he is after >> you. >> >> In short, Mike is an equal-opportunity hater. >> >> >> Gay families are not a threat to hetero families. It >> is either the excuse >> that anti-gay people use to justify their behavior, >> or >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Al Brooks" >> To: "Kevin Freels" >> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 9:16 PM >> >> >>> Okay, nevertheless we're not objective in these >>> matters, perhaps it's me projecting on you, yet as >> far >>> as I know from everything I've observed, most >> everyone >>> is grinding an axe concerning the family >> institution: >>> "my family right or wrong". >>> Now of course the things have to be done slowly, >> if >>> straights dominate until, say, the 2070s or '80s >>> that's fine w/ me, but to change you've got to >> have >>> those who push to get the ball rolling. If we >> listened >>> to Mike heteros would rule until after 2100. >>> >>> >>> --- Kevin Freels >> wrote: >>> >>>> Not anarchists. Government has many necessary >>>> functions. Handing out other >>>> people's money isn;t one of them. It doesn;t >> matter >>>> if you give it to a str8 >>>> guy or a gay woman; it is still wrong. >>>> >>>> You said, "For me there's no reason to think >> those >>>> who say they want >>>> government out of marriage actually do," >>>> Don;t be so paranoid. There are a lot of bad >> people >>>> out there, but that is >>>> no way to live. We're not all bad. Any time you >> push >>>> against the norm, you >>>> get a lot of resistance. Most of us here push >> those >>>> envelopes regularly. >>>> Being gay is no different. I didn;t choose to be >> an >>>> atheist....God made me >>>> that way. :-) >>>> >>>> The only reason gays have gotten so much >> resistance >>>> is because they are >>>> normalizing homosexuality. Us cryo, AI, MNT, >>>> transhumanism people simply >>>> haven;t become a large enough target yet. Give >> it >>>> time. Eventually there >>>> will be a group out there called "Gays Against >>>> Artificial Intelligrnce" and >>>> they will be working right alongside the church. >>>> >>>> Parity is a worthy goal. Personally I would be >> happy >>>> if all people were >>>> treated equally by the state. That is what I am >>>> after. I want to see the >>>> government put back to something that makes >> sense >>>> and is consistent. >>>> >>>> Cheers! >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Al Brooks" >>>> To: "Kevin Freels" ; >> "ExI >>>> chat list" >>>> >>>> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 8:42 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage >>>> >>>> >>>>> Right-- as far as you are concerned. For me >>>> there's no >>>>> reason to think those who say they want >> government >>>> out >>>>> of marriage actually do, so I reject religious >>>>> ceremony contract marriage. >>>>> I want parity for any alternatives to hetero >>>> marriage >>>>> based on what the benefits are for heteros at >> the >>>>> time. If on January 1st 2015 straights have x, >>>> then I >>>>> want gays and polys to be granted x as well. >>>>> >>>>>> As far as I am concerned, marriage should be >> an >>>>>> entirely religious ceremony. >>>>>> It should have nothing to do with >> government. It >>>>>> should not be regulated by >>>>>> the state. If a certain church wants to keep >> a >>>>>> certain type of people out of >>>>>> their group, then so be it. Groups with like >>>> beliefs >>>>>> should be allowed to >>>>>> congregate with like minded people. I don't >> > === message truncated === > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nigel. --- "Hey, hey, hey. Don't be mean. We don't have to be mean because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are. " -Buckaroo Banzai -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 10332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 05:32:20 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:02:20 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105041242.63263.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <710b78fc04110419566b0d9483@mail.gmail.com> <20041105041242.63263.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc041104213270dcefbb@mail.gmail.com> But in this case, if you mean the middle east, it'd most likely settle down if it was left alone. It's the US that proposes to go tearing through it starting general war. The driver for that is greedy people supported by a fearful populace, a populace afraid of "terror" (lol!). So, it's the fear for security that'll end up causing any such war. Whereas, if there was more idea that things are generally good and the outlook positive, the reactions from fear would subside and that war and related trouble become less likely. Like economics, politics is shaped by confidence. We are in a very low confidence phase, like a global political depression, but it doesn't reflect the reality of our lives imo. Emlyn On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:12:42 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > Sure & I'm thankful just for agricultural, whether > it's high tech or organic hippie farms. It's not the > 'West' that is getting worrisome it's West and Central > Asia. Of course it probably wont go down this line too > far yet there's fair odds of a general war where many > get killed or sick from the... whatever. > My Dad didn't think he'd have to go off to WWII but > it came closer & closer inching up until he could see > it coming. > > > > > > I think one of > > the biggest > > issues we have in the west at present is that we > > (generally) don't > > realise just how good we have it. People are only > > seeing the bad > > stuff. We need to remind everyone (and ourselves) > > that personal > > freedom and self direction are going gangbusters. > > Don't sell it short! > > > > Happier people would make decisions we could all be > > proud of, I think, > > rather than thinking and acting meanly as I see too > > many people do, > > especially in areas like foreign policy. It *should* > > be a no brainer, > > because there's a lot to be happy about. > > > > > > > As transhumanists, a useful job would be one > > of > > > > reassurance; lots of > > > > > head patting and comforting... "there there, > > it's > > > > ok, look out the > > > > > window can you see it's a beautiful day? The > > world > > > > your children and > > > > > your grandchildren are inheriting and creating > > may > > > > be weird and fast, > > > > > but it is really good, better than you might > > have > > > > dreamed." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a really good point. I try to do this at > > > > times, but more often than > > > > not, I get going about how great the future is > > going > > > > to be and end up > > > > scaring the hell out of people. Often I am > > reminded > > > > that these are "obvious" > > > > hints that Armageddon is upon us (again). > > > > I really should spend a bit more time > > head-patting. > > > > Maybe if we all do a > > > > little of this, people will relax a bit. :-) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > > > -- > > Emlyn > > > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software > > * > > _______________________________________________ > > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > ===== > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:39:12 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:39:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105053912.54458.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> three years I spent in Vermont were good- yet New England is more crowded and you can feel it. It's OK because Yankees leave you alone. Farther out West you can spread out a little, despite the amusing, to say the least, culture. The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros like ours' better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:39:22 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:39:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105053922.86643.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> three years I spent in Vermont were good- yet New England is more crowded and you can feel it. It's OK because Yankees leave you alone. Farther out West you can spread out a little, despite the amusing, to say the least, culture. The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros like ours' better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:39:37 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:39:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105053937.86822.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> three years I spent in Vermont were good- yet New England is more crowded and you can feel it. It's OK because Yankees leave you alone. Farther out West you can spread out a little, despite the amusing, to say the least, culture. The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros like ours' better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:39:43 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:39:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105053943.86857.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> three years I spent in Vermont were good- yet New England is more crowded and you can feel it. It's OK because Yankees leave you alone. Farther out West you can spread out a little, despite the amusing, to say the least, culture. The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros like ours' better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:40:00 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:40:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105054000.86803.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> three years I spent in Vermont were good- yet New England is more crowded and you can feel it. It's OK because Yankees leave you alone. Farther out West you can spread out a little, despite the amusing, to say the least, culture. The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros like ours' better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:40:59 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:40:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105054059.87166.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros think we're better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:41:05 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:41:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105054105.20197.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros think we're better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I'm in the midwest too. Don;t you just love all > those huge SUVs, Nascar, > sports bars, and 4x4 trucks on huge wheels with > gunracks, big number "3"s, > and a huge WWJD sticker in the window next to the > little man "pissing" on > "Osma" sticker? (Yes, that's not a typo. I have seen > it around on about 15 > different vehicles. "Osama" misspelled and > prominently displayed on the rear > windshield!) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Al Brooks" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The next steps for > individuals > > > > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we > have > > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the > culture > > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: > Jesus, > > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir > practice. 23 > > skidoo. > > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > > extension, music, trendology- all that > pointyheaded > > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is > superior, > > they think there's is. > > It's moving so slow but the years are going so > fast. > > > > > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would > seem > > > to me that the > > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that > the > > > insane Christian > > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for > years > > > has come home to > > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not > able > > > to control the > > > strings of government too tightly, but there are > now > > > enough > > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of > the > > > only remaining > > > superpower. > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down > the > > > street I have a bunch > > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up > a > > > cafe to lure and > > > convert secular communists. These guys are > really > > > well organized and > > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into > Mormons > > > from Utah on the > > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > > trying to spread the > > > word? What hope do progressive forces have in a > > > democracy when they are > > > not willing to actively engage those who > disagree > > > with them? Reading > > > (or writing) op-ed pieces in NYTimes is not > going to > > > change anyone's > > > views in small towns in South or Mid-West. We > need > > > to become much more > > > directly active if we want to change beliefs. > > > > > > We need Extropian missionaries in the South and > > > Midwest! > > > > > > best, patrick > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > ===== > > Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:41:31 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:41:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105054131.68877.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros think we're better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:41:52 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:41:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <024501c4c2f5$8effee90$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105054152.87557.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> The funniest part is when you try to explain to them that their retro values are different but not necessarily better (even though we metros think we're better). They look at you all bug-eyed, as if you urinated in their flowerbeds. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:43:22 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 21:43:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <20041105054000.86803.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105054322.20681.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> this server is awry, a signal to go night-night. And We're supposed to stick to six posts a day. ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 05:54:43 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:24:43 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] The next steps for individuals In-Reply-To: <20041105044421.72383.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <41DB29A4-2E80-11D9-8560-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> <20041105044421.72383.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411042154382a09c7@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 20:44:21 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > It's not so bad in America, as a wise poster just > wrote "we in the West don't realise how good we have > it". I live in the Midwest and don't like the culture > at all, Midwestern Monster Mix, it is called: Jesus, > booze, bowling for Columbine, beer, Choir practice. 23 > skidoo. > But they look at me and are sickened too; life > extension, music, trendology- all that pointyheaded > intolech shoe-L stuff. I think my 'stuff' is superior, > they think there's is. > It's moving so slow but the years are going so fast. > > > What about the Midwest and the South? It would seem > > to me that the > > problem is a lot closer to home. Its clear that the > > insane Christian > > meme that we have been politely ignoring for years > > has come home to > > roost. It was ignorable as long as it was not able > > to control the > > strings of government too tightly, but there are now > > enough > > fundamentalist christians to control the fate of the > > only remaining > > superpower. > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ > > > > I live in a small East German town. Just down the > > street I have a bunch > > of Texan Baptist missionaries who have opened up a > > cafe to lure and > > convert secular communists. These guys are really > > well organized and > > funded. Not only that I constantly bump into Mormons > > from Utah on the > > tram. How many Extropians do you find in Texas > > trying to spread the > > word? As far as extros go, Texas is relatively packed out with them. You know who you are, Texas extros! -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 06:23:23 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:23:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> I may not have formulated my point well Andrew: I know what you say here is true. The difference between the two camps used to be, that Reps wanted a smaller state and more economic freedom, and the Dems wanted more state intervention and are prepared to accept less economic freedom against more social policies. You had smart and well educated people and good arguments in both camps and people used to vote on issues and not on ideology. But these elections were not about the size of the state. As many many Rep voters said in exit polls, they were about moral values. And they mentioned specifically God, gay marriage and stem cells. I am not complaining that you elected a Republican president. There have been many good Republican presidents. I am complaining that you elected a president who wants to turn the US into a fundamentalist theocracy in the purest taliban style. G. On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:49:44 -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > The Democrats and the left wing at large and the Europeans (which have > attrocious media coverage of US politics -- it is more "fair and > balanced" in Communist Asia) need to come to grips with the fact that > the majority of Republicans are neither ill-educated, un-worldly, or > even particularly religious. Some factions are, but not the major > portion of the party. That is nothing more than the liberal Democrats > trying to make themselves feel better by putting down the other guy and > not bothering to really study their opponent. > > Most Republicans I know, and I know many having lived in many > traditionally conservative areas (I even have aunts and uncles who are > fairly senior GOP officials), are pro-choice, very well travelled and > worldly, non-religious (many atheists), and as educated as your average > Democrat. As long as the Democrats and liberals maintain the fiction > that Republicans are ignorant hillbillies, religious white trash, and > country club executives, they will continue to get their clocks cleaned > in the elections because they do not know their opponent (see: Sun Tzu) From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Fri Nov 5 07:04:06 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:04:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:23 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > I am not complaining that you elected a Republican president. There > have been many good Republican presidents. I am complaining that you > elected a president who wants to turn the US into a fundamentalist > theocracy in the purest taliban style. This is yet another example of what I was talking about though. There is not a shred of evidence that the president "wants to turn the US into a fundamentalist theocracy in the purest taliban style". That is pure tin foil whack job conspiracy theory fodder. This is the type of crap the right wing fringe always said about Clinton, with the same level of enthusiasm and assuredness, and with the same quality of "proof" and "evidence". It is precisely the same comfortable fallacious reasoning that makes people believe that if a person owns a gun, they will commit a mass murder at some point in the future. Or that if you have a penis, you'll likely be a rapist given the opportunity. It is nonsense. Yet I hear garbage reasoning like this all the time, and after the election, on this list of all places. We have had plenty of very religious presidents in the past, and we undoubtedly will have more in the future. Never has it resulted in a taliban-style theocracy, or a real theocracy of any type. Although the left-wing uses this to great effect to whip up opposition from secular audiences. Old political trick, and you guys fell for it. Get a grip people, and some legitimate historical perspective. At least try to apply consistent and reasonable standards of analysis to the election. Stop drinking the hyperbole Kool-Aid that the opposition parties are always too willing to provide. j. andrew rogers From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 5 07:27:47 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:27:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> Message-ID: <006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Sahyinepu" > My faith has married > several members who are gay, that is our choice...if Baptists don't > want to do it, that is their choice...no one is being forced to marry > anyone...but the state should give the same legal protection and > recognition to gays as it gives to non-gays. Choice. There's the magic word. It implies a certain amount of freedom. To choose. To decide certain things for oneself, or not. You know, I was thinking about this very thing today ... this "great divide" that is pulling Americans apart is about freedom and control. Loosely speaking (yet seriously speaking) ... Republicans in office today want *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. Of course, many Democrat politicians sadly are destined to compromise on many issues just to be elected or just to stay in office - and so it's often difficult to tell who's about what. But, over the past half century, especially, generally Democrats have led the way in overturning many changes that resulted in more people having more freedom. I know, I know - Mike will disagree because (for example) if he owns a house he is no longer able to "discriminate" against certain people - so I will guess that Mike will define these kinds of societal changes as an invasion of *his* freedom. Olga From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 07:32:38 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:32:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041104111039.029010d0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041104111039.029010d0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041104233274dbee41@mail.gmail.com> Unfortunately I don't think there can be a secular worship as these two concepts do not fit together but are radically opposed. I am reading a very interesting article on "weak theology": http://www.jcrt.org/archives/05.2/robbins.pdf On secularism as weakening of thought: "Weak thought is not a term of derision, but a positive term of praise that can be used as a tool for political emancipation and a more democratic philosophy. It produces "a desirable humility about our own moral intuitions and about the social institutions to which we have become accustomed. This humility will encourage tolerance for other intuitions, and a willingness to experiment with ways of refashioning or replacing institutions." Now if this is "weak thought", I am happy to be a weak thinker and I am sure many on this list will agreee. But why is it called weak? It is called weak in opposition to "strong thought": thought based on absolute truths, unity, totality, strong categories, ultimate foundations, aiming at providing absolute foundations for knowledge and action. These terms have neen often used by the contemporary philosoper Gianni Vattimo. Now, as weak thinkers, I am afraid we have to acknowledge that strong thought is, well, stronger than weak thought in terms of its immediate appeal to the majority of people. Secularism is weak, worship is strong. Rights are weak, duties are strong. Tolerance is weak, righteousness is strong. Thinkers are weak, warriors are strong. Negotiation is weak, attack is strong. Love is strong, hate is strong, but understanding is weak. In other words: reason is weak, religion is strong. According to the last political news: a fundamentalist elected US president, a fundamentalist kicked out of the European Commission, most Europeans are weak thinkers, and most Americans are strong thinkers. Perhaps this is because in Europe we have already fallen in love with strong ideologies in Germany and Italy before the second world war, and have seen the catastrophic consequences. But going back to religion, perhaps the reason why it is still an important factor after centuries of scientific advances is that it is strong thought, and this is what most people still want: absolute certainties and strong truths. Is transhumanist strong or weak? Well it is clearly weak: it is based on calm logical reasoning, tolerance for diversity, etc. This is also evident from our linguistic habits on this list: we say too often "I think that", "in my own opinion", "I understand your point but", ... these are all weak statements that do NOT appeal to those who want strong certainties. Face it, they want strong systems of belief and messianic leaders. My question: can transhumanism be presented as strong thought? And who wants to be a charismatic leader? G. > Damien: Time for humanism and transhumanism to > start thinking seriously > once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others > did nearly a century > ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of > secular equivalent of > worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive > emotionally enriched > fellowship. From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Fri Nov 5 07:48:30 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:48:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> <006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 4, 2004, at 11:27 PM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > Republicans in office today want > *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. That you believe this is part of the problem. The Democrats no more want freedom than the Republicans do. You just prefer the shackles offered by the Democrats to the ones offered by the Republicans, happily volunteering to give up many freedoms for yourself and others nominally in exchange for some freedoms you have an emotional attachment to. All in the name of "freedom", of course. Just because you do not cherish certain freedoms and are willing to discard them without a second thought does not mean that everyone else does nor that you should have the right to arbitrarily discard *their* freedoms at the point of a gun because you have declared them unimportant. That is a grotesque kind of selfishness. j. andrew rogers From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 5 07:54:35 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:54:35 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net><470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <005001c4c30c$b19655e0$75bd1b97@administxl09yj> From: "J. Andrew Rogers" > Yet I hear garbage reasoning like this > all the time, and after the election, > on this list of all places. It is the old "it is bad to be oppressed by a minority but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority" effect. But in this expanding and mixing world (media, breaking walls, information tech, etc.) - and now http://ray.tomes.biz/expand.html :-) - it is more and more difficult to see a real majority and a real minority, at least to me. s. "For the Athenians were not only brave and patriotic and capable of generous sacrifice, but they were the most religious of the Greeks. They venerated the constitution which had given them prosperity and equality and the pride of freedom, and never questioned the fundamental laws which regulated the enormous power of the Assembly. They tolerated considerable variety of opinion, and great license of speech; and their humanity towards their slaves roused the indignation even of the most intelligent partisan of aristocracy. Thus they became the only people of antiquity that grew great by democratic institutions. But the possession of unlimited power, which corrodes the conscience, hardens the heart, and confounds the understanding of monarchs exercised its demoralizing influence on the illustrious Democracy of Athens. It is bad to be oppressed by a minority; but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority. For there is a reserve of latent power in the masses which, if it is called into play, the minority can seldom resist. But from the absolute will of an entire people there is no appeal, no redemption, no refuge but treason." http://www.acton.org/publicat/books/freedom/antiquity.html From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 5 07:54:04 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:54:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041105000049.57222.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> <014601c4c2d9$df310500$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <00b101c4c30c$9f9c48e0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Kevin Freels" > Even if I go to > the JP to get married instead of a church, they still invoke God. Really? When I got married in City Hall (San Francisco), there was *no* mention of any god. > Doing away with marriage...and civil unions would force everyone to make > those arrangements in contracts. I think it's all about options. Some people like the idea of marriage - sometimes (not always) because it binds families. It's like - we can't always choose our relatives, but we *can* choose to have someone be "related" to us by marriage. And speaking of families, I think it's been a boon for our society to have the prejudice against single parents lifted somewhat, as well as the stigma of "divorce." I'm neither for nor against marriage. I am, however, for options and the freedom to make the choices that are available to people (and, of course, this would include having the same set of rules for heterosexuals and homosexuals or asexuals). Olga From zero.powers at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 08:06:54 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:06:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7a32170504110500065c447241@mail.gmail.com> OK, OK, maybe Giu1i0 was exaggerating to make a point. But I think he makes a legitimate point. GWB has made no bones about his supposed belief that God has put him in office for a "divine" purpose. Personally I'm not convinced he's nearly has religious as he makes out. But he won this election largely on the backs of the religious right, and he's not about to let them down now. You can be damned sure he feels he's got a mandate now and he aims to use it to push the fundy agenda down our throats. Get ready for 4 more years of thinly veiled gay-bashing, and attempts to encroach on abortion rights. Four more years of furrowed Federal brows and hand-wringing over the fate and moral rights of clumps of cells. While, thankfully, California strikes out on it's own to pursue the probable biomedical gold mine of stem cell research. Taliban-style theocracy? No, not quite. Alright, not even close. But is there really *that* much difference between depriving a woman of her freedom of reproductive choice and forcing her to wear a burka? Or how about constraining the familial rights of committed couples simply because they happen to be of the same sex? So, no, the Christian fundamentalist political agenda is not quite the same as a Taliban-style theocracy. But in my view it's really only a difference of degree, not kind. Of course YMMV Zero On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:04:06 -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:23 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > I am not complaining that you elected a Republican president. There > > have been many good Republican presidents. I am complaining that you > > elected a president who wants to turn the US into a fundamentalist > > theocracy in the purest taliban style. > > > This is yet another example of what I was talking about though. > > There is not a shred of evidence that the president "wants to turn the > US into a fundamentalist theocracy in the purest taliban style". That > is pure tin foil whack job conspiracy theory fodder. This is the type > of crap the right wing fringe always said about Clinton, with the same > level of enthusiasm and assuredness, and with the same quality of > "proof" and "evidence". It is precisely the same comfortable > fallacious reasoning that makes people believe that if a person owns a > gun, they will commit a mass murder at some point in the future. Or > that if you have a penis, you'll likely be a rapist given the > opportunity. It is nonsense. Yet I hear garbage reasoning like this > all the time, and after the election, on this list of all places. > > We have had plenty of very religious presidents in the past, and we > undoubtedly will have more in the future. Never has it resulted in a > taliban-style theocracy, or a real theocracy of any type. Although the > left-wing uses this to great effect to whip up opposition from secular > audiences. Old political trick, and you guys fell for it. > > Get a grip people, and some legitimate historical perspective. At > least try to apply consistent and reasonable standards of analysis to > the election. Stop drinking the hyperbole Kool-Aid that the opposition > parties are always too willing to provide. > > > j. andrew rogers > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 5 08:06:55 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:06:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net><006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> <15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <00e801c4c30e$6b1b82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "J. Andrew Rogers" > On Nov 4, 2004, at 11:27 PM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Republicans in office today want > > *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. > > That you believe this is part of the problem. The Democrats no more > want freedom than the Republicans do. Let's just start with ... er, Republicans (all generally speaking here) support a woman's right to choose? Republicans led the marches for civil rights, gay rights and women's rights? Republicans want to support stem cell research? Republicans want the separation of church and state? And - horror of horrors - do you *really* want to see what a conservative Supreme Court? Seriously? Olga From zero.powers at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 08:30:53 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:30:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: <470a3c52041104233274dbee41@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041104111039.029010d0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <470a3c52041104233274dbee41@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7a321705041105003013b23e74@mail.gmail.com> Actually maybe "secular worship" is not the right lingo. After all, if it's truly secular, what is it that you're worshipping? Worship is, and should be, reserved for the divine. In the thoroughly secular world view, there is no divine, only the unknown. So perhaps instead of "secular worship" we should think (and talk) in terms of "secular fellowship." There is a church nearby where I live, Agape International Spiritual Center, http://www.agapelive.com. I am by no means a regular attendee. But on those rare occasions when I'm inclined toward group meditation, communion and entertainment (the musical department is off the hook!), that's where I head. Unlike me, they are not a bunch of atheists. But their spirituality is broad enough to encompass just about every belief. There are roughly equal numbers of people from Christian, Buddhist, Muslim and less main-stream spiritual backgrounds. There are even (I'm told) more than a few atheists besides me who attend. It is one of the VERY few churches I can stomach because while it is heavy on the love, service and communion of humanity it is very light on the religious dogma. Of course I'd prefer to commune at a place that left all aspects of fairy-tale belief out of the fellowship. If I could find a place as inviting, loving, entertaining and dedicated to meeting the needs of the local and global community as they are at Agape, but felt no need to encumber that sense of community with fairy tales, that would be my idea of a perfect place of secular fellowship. Secular worship? I agree that's pretty much an oxymoron. Secular fellowship on the other hand I think could work. Zero > On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:32:38 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Unfortunately I don't think there can be a secular worship as these > two concepts do not fit together but are radically opposed. > I am reading a very interesting article on "weak theology": > http://www.jcrt.org/archives/05.2/robbins.pdf > On secularism as weakening of thought: "Weak thought is not a term of > derision, but a positive term of praise that can be used as a tool for > political emancipation and a more democratic philosophy. It produces > "a desirable humility about our own moral intuitions and about the > social institutions to which we have become accustomed. This humility > will encourage tolerance for other intuitions, and a willingness to > experiment with ways of refashioning or replacing institutions." > Now if this is "weak thought", I am happy to be a weak thinker and I > am sure many on this list will agreee. But why is it called weak? > It is called weak in opposition to "strong thought": thought based on > absolute truths, unity, totality, strong categories, ultimate > foundations, aiming at providing absolute foundations for knowledge > and action. These terms have neen often used by the contemporary > philosoper Gianni Vattimo. > Now, as weak thinkers, I am afraid we have to acknowledge that strong > thought is, well, stronger than weak thought in terms of its immediate > appeal to the majority of people. > Secularism is weak, worship is strong. Rights are weak, duties are > strong. Tolerance is weak, righteousness is strong. Thinkers are weak, > warriors are strong. Negotiation is weak, attack is strong. Love is > strong, hate is strong, but understanding is weak. In other words: > reason is weak, religion is strong. > According to the last political news: a fundamentalist elected US > president, a fundamentalist kicked out of the European Commission, > most Europeans are weak thinkers, and most Americans are strong > thinkers. Perhaps this is because in Europe we have already fallen in > love with strong ideologies in Germany and Italy before the second > world war, and have seen the catastrophic consequences. > But going back to religion, perhaps the reason why it is still an > important factor after centuries of scientific advances is that it is > strong thought, and this is what most people still want: absolute > certainties and strong truths. > Is transhumanist strong or weak? Well it is clearly weak: it is based > on calm logical reasoning, tolerance for diversity, etc. This is also > evident from our linguistic habits on this list: we say too often "I > think that", "in my own opinion", "I understand your point but", ... > these are all weak statements that do NOT appeal to those who want > strong certainties. > Face it, they want strong systems of belief and messianic leaders. > My question: can transhumanism be presented as strong thought? And who > wants to be a charismatic leader? > G. > > > Damien: Time for humanism and transhumanism to > > > > start thinking seriously > > once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others > > did nearly a century > > ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of > > secular equivalent of > > worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive > > emotionally enriched > > fellowship. > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Fri Nov 5 09:08:01 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 01:08:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <00e801c4c30e$6b1b82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net><006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> <15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> <00e801c4c30e$6b1b82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <319263EB-2F0A-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:06 AM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > Let's just start with ... er, Republicans (all generally speaking here) > support a woman's right to choose? Yes. It has been dropped as a real platform for a reason -- there was no consensus within the party. I do not personally know any Republicans that are not pro-choice, and I know quite a few Republicans. > Republicans led the marches for civil > rights, gay rights and women's rights? You may want to read some history. The Democrats were on the wrong side of a great many civil rights issues. They've only claimed many of them after the fact. The Deep South has been pretty much 100% Democrat for more than a century up until the last few years and one of its core constituencies. Any faults regarding civil rights you see evident in or would paint on the Southern culture throughout history you'll have to paint on the Democratic party. Which includes race, gender, and sexual orientation discrimination. > Republicans want to support stem > cell research? Republicans want the separation of church and state? Yes, and yes. Your analysis has been shallow. The Republicans are a coalition of two major factions, a libertarian faction and a religious conservative faction. They have competing motivations but they've learned to get along. They originally formed a coalition to deal with the Democratic party back when they were a juggernaut for most of the 20th century. The religious conservative faction objects to stem cell research on moral grounds. The libertarian faction likes the research but objects to the Federal government funding it, particularly since there is no real shortage of private funding for it. The obvious policy compromise is to reduce or eliminate Federal funding of the research. The libertarian faction has long kept the religious faction in check with respect to the separation of church and state. I am not a Republican but I am an atheist, and I've never felt threatened by the bogeyman of the "religious right" in a legal sense. The Republican party has no designs toward establishing a state religion nor would the libertarian faction allow anything vaguely resembling that. And if the militant atheists in some Democrat factions would stop going out of their way to antagonize the religious Republicans (and yes, this does happen), this would largely dissipate as an issue. You need to learn to look at Republican policy from this perspective. Little gets done that does not pass the filter of both the libertarians and religious conservatives. This means that compromises usually only include things that both factions can agree on from an ideological standpoint. A few bones get thrown and occasionally there are very heated discussions within the party, but nothing really gets out of control. There are many, many pro-choice, atheist, gay-friendly Republicans, primarily because the Republicans only rarely step on the toes of these quasi-libertarian folks and vice-versa. Why do you think it is that drug legalization has occurred primarily in western Republican states rather than Democrat ones? The different factions have different proportional strengths in different parts of the country. Your view of Republicans is a highly biased caricature. > And - horror of horrors - do you *really* want to see what a > conservative > Supreme Court? Right now, I would settle for a non-activist court. The liberal courts have an egregious record in this regard (in evidence in the circuit courts and some State supreme courts), and to a greater extent than conservative courts generally. This is something I follow pretty closely, and the track records are not even close to similar in this respect. Knowing nothing else, I would choose a conservative court over a liberal court, only because conservative courts have a better track record of interpreting various constitutions in a reasonable and consistent fashion. That would be playing the odds. The push for more conservative courts and constitutional amendments rather than legislation is a backlash against what is rightly perceived as excessive and extra-constitutional legislation from liberal activist courts. I only hope that the conservative courts do not escalate the situation by responding in kind. cheers, j. andrew rogers From sjatkins at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 11:44:27 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 03:44:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: <7a321705041105003013b23e74@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041104183203.19053.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041104111039.029010d0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <470a3c52041104233274dbee41@mail.gmail.com> <7a321705041105003013b23e74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04110503449772744@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:30:53 -0800, Zero Powers wrote: > Actually maybe "secular worship" is not the right lingo. After all, > if it's truly secular, what is it that you're worshipping? Worship > is, and should be, reserved for the divine. In the thoroughly secular > world view, there is no divine, only the unknown. So perhaps instead > of "secular worship" we should think (and talk) in terms of "secular > fellowship." Are you sure about this notion of worship? What is the Divine exactly? Couldn't we have a state nearly again to worship for the highest human and > human potential? Do Buddhist worship? What do they worship? The enligthened one, no? So why would it be impossible to worship the Transcended One? That isn't quite it either but I believe it is somewhere in this direction. > > There is a church nearby where I live, Agape International Spiritual > Center, http://www.agapelive.com. I am by no means a regular > attendee. But on those rare occasions when I'm inclined toward group > meditation, communion and entertainment (the musical department is off > the hook!), that's where I head. Unlike me, they are not a bunch of > atheists. But their spirituality is broad enough to encompass just > about every belief. There are roughly equal numbers of people from > Christian, Buddhist, Muslim and less main-stream spiritual > backgrounds. There are even (I'm told) more than a few atheists > besides me who attend. It is one of the VERY few churches I can > stomach because while it is heavy on the love, service and communion > of humanity it is very light on the religious dogma. > Sounds like a lovely place . > Of course I'd prefer to commune at a place that left all aspects of > fairy-tale belief out of the fellowship. If I could find a place as > inviting, loving, entertaining and dedicated to meeting the needs of > the local and global community as they are at Agape, but felt no need > to encumber that sense of community with fairy tales, that would be my > idea of a perfect place of secular fellowship. > What kind of fairy tales exactly? How about our own fairy tales full of grasping for what we and our "mind-children" will become and what will be necessary to get there? Not fairy tales necessarily but good working mythology and other tools of envisioning and living into being. > Secular worship? I agree that's pretty much an oxymoron. Secular > fellowship on the other hand I think could work. > Again, Buddhists have been doing stuff that looks like worship more or less for a long time without the notion of a God that western raised people seem to associate with it. - samantha From mbb386 at main.nc.us Fri Nov 5 12:46:14 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:46:14 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> <006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> <15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > On Nov 4, 2004, at 11:27 PM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Republicans in office today want > > *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. > > > That you believe this is part of the problem. The Democrats no more > want freedom than the Republicans do. > > You just prefer the shackles offered by the Democrats to the ones > offered by the Republicans, happily volunteering to give up many > freedoms for yourself and others nominally in exchange for some > freedoms you have an emotional attachment to. All in the name of > "freedom", of course. Ah, take the smallest political quiz and see where you stand... http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html Regards, MB From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 13:35:20 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:35:20 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net><006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac><15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com><00e801c4c30e$6b1b82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <319263EB-2F0A-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <002001c4c33c$4bc85210$a51e4842@kevin> Nice analysis. I am one of those pro-choice, atheist, libertarian republicans. :-) I am surprised you didn;t mention that the democratic party likes to pass anti-gun laws, hate speech laws, stealing private property for environmental reasons, and rediculous requirements on business owners such as laws to prohibit smoking in restaraunts and handicap access to stripper stages. ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. Andrew Rogers" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:08 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:06 AM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Let's just start with ... er, Republicans (all generally speaking here) > > support a woman's right to choose? > > > Yes. It has been dropped as a real platform for a reason -- there was > no consensus within the party. I do not personally know any > Republicans that are not pro-choice, and I know quite a few > Republicans. > > > > Republicans led the marches for civil > > rights, gay rights and women's rights? > > > You may want to read some history. The Democrats were on the wrong > side of a great many civil rights issues. They've only claimed many of > them after the fact. The Deep South has been pretty much 100% Democrat > for more than a century up until the last few years and one of its core > constituencies. Any faults regarding civil rights you see evident in > or would paint on the Southern culture throughout history you'll have > to paint on the Democratic party. Which includes race, gender, and > sexual orientation discrimination. > > > > Republicans want to support stem > > cell research? Republicans want the separation of church and state? > > > Yes, and yes. Your analysis has been shallow. > > The Republicans are a coalition of two major factions, a libertarian > faction and a religious conservative faction. They have competing > motivations but they've learned to get along. They originally formed a > coalition to deal with the Democratic party back when they were a > juggernaut for most of the 20th century. > > The religious conservative faction objects to stem cell research on > moral grounds. The libertarian faction likes the research but objects > to the Federal government funding it, particularly since there is no > real shortage of private funding for it. The obvious policy compromise > is to reduce or eliminate Federal funding of the research. The > libertarian faction has long kept the religious faction in check with > respect to the separation of church and state. I am not a Republican > but I am an atheist, and I've never felt threatened by the bogeyman of > the "religious right" in a legal sense. The Republican party has no > designs toward establishing a state religion nor would the libertarian > faction allow anything vaguely resembling that. And if the militant > atheists in some Democrat factions would stop going out of their way to > antagonize the religious Republicans (and yes, this does happen), this > would largely dissipate as an issue. > > You need to learn to look at Republican policy from this perspective. > Little gets done that does not pass the filter of both the libertarians > and religious conservatives. This means that compromises usually only > include things that both factions can agree on from an ideological > standpoint. A few bones get thrown and occasionally there are very > heated discussions within the party, but nothing really gets out of > control. > > > There are many, many pro-choice, atheist, gay-friendly Republicans, > primarily because the Republicans only rarely step on the toes of these > quasi-libertarian folks and vice-versa. Why do you think it is that > drug legalization has occurred primarily in western Republican states > rather than Democrat ones? The different factions have different > proportional strengths in different parts of the country. Your view of > Republicans is a highly biased caricature. > > > > And - horror of horrors - do you *really* want to see what a > > conservative > > Supreme Court? > > > Right now, I would settle for a non-activist court. The liberal courts > have an egregious record in this regard (in evidence in the circuit > courts and some State supreme courts), and to a greater extent than > conservative courts generally. This is something I follow pretty > closely, and the track records are not even close to similar in this > respect. Knowing nothing else, I would choose a conservative court > over a liberal court, only because conservative courts have a better > track record of interpreting various constitutions in a reasonable and > consistent fashion. That would be playing the odds. > > The push for more conservative courts and constitutional amendments > rather than legislation is a backlash against what is rightly perceived > as excessive and extra-constitutional legislation from liberal activist > courts. I only hope that the conservative courts do not escalate the > situation by responding in kind. > > cheers, > > j. andrew rogers > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 5 14:23:51 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 06:23:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net><006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac><15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com><00e801c4c30e$6b1b82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <319263EB-2F0A-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <005401c4c343$13ba2d10$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "J. Andrew Rogers" > > On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:06 AM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Let's just start with ... er, Republicans (all generally speaking here) > > support a woman's right to choose? > > Yes. It has been dropped as a real platform for a reason -- there was > no consensus within the party. I do not personally know any > Republicans that are not pro-choice, and I know quite a few > Republicans. Yes, Bush carefully walked around the issue and only dealt with "partial birth abortion." And the whole matter with stem cells has something to do with the so-called "pro-life" stance, too. You may not personally know any Republicans that are not pro-choice, but certainly you have to admit there are many more Republicans (than Democrats) who are anti-choice out there. And Ashcroft (may he soon retire so he will have more time to handle snakes and sing gospel) - remember the brouhaha over the statue with exposed breasts? (he was against it, and put a drape over it before he would speak in front of it). That's another way conservatives/Republicans want to *control* things - censorship. > > Republicans led the marches for civil > > rights, gay rights and women's rights? > > You may want to read some history. The Democrats were on the wrong > side of a great many civil rights issues. They've only claimed many of > them after the fact. The Deep South has been pretty much 100% Democrat > for more than a century up until the last few years and one of its core > constituencies. Any faults regarding civil rights you see evident in > or would paint on the Southern culture throughout history you'll have > to paint on the Democratic party. Which includes race, gender, and > sexual orientation discrimination. Civil rights was a *liberal* cause and victory. Being spoon fed The "wrong side" you refer to here is, I suspect, having been reared in the heart of Dixie and been weaned > > Republicans want to support stem > > cell research? Republicans want the separation of church and state? > > > Yes, and yes. Your analysis has been shallow. > > The Republicans are a coalition of two major factions, a libertarian > faction and a religious conservative faction. They have competing > motivations but they've learned to get along. They originally formed a > coalition to deal with the Democratic party back when they were a > juggernaut for most of the 20th century. > > The religious conservative faction objects to stem cell research on > moral grounds. The libertarian faction likes the research but objects > to the Federal government funding it, particularly since there is no > real shortage of private funding for it. The obvious policy compromise > is to reduce or eliminate Federal funding of the research. The > libertarian faction has long kept the religious faction in check with > respect to the separation of church and state. I am not a Republican > but I am an atheist, and I've never felt threatened by the bogeyman of > the "religious right" in a legal sense. The Republican party has no > designs toward establishing a state religion nor would the libertarian > faction allow anything vaguely resembling that. And if the militant > atheists in some Democrat factions would stop going out of their way to > antagonize the religious Republicans (and yes, this does happen), this > would largely dissipate as an issue. > > You need to learn to look at Republican policy from this perspective. > Little gets done that does not pass the filter of both the libertarians > and religious conservatives. This means that compromises usually only > include things that both factions can agree on from an ideological > standpoint. A few bones get thrown and occasionally there are very > heated discussions within the party, but nothing really gets out of > control. > > > There are many, many pro-choice, atheist, gay-friendly Republicans, > primarily because the Republicans only rarely step on the toes of these > quasi-libertarian folks and vice-versa. Why do you think it is that > drug legalization has occurred primarily in western Republican states > rather than Democrat ones? The different factions have different > proportional strengths in different parts of the country. Your view of > Republicans is a highly biased caricature. > > > > And - horror of horrors - do you *really* want to see what a > > conservative > > Supreme Court? > > > Right now, I would settle for a non-activist court. The liberal courts > have an egregious record in this regard (in evidence in the circuit > courts and some State supreme courts), and to a greater extent than > conservative courts generally. This is something I follow pretty > closely, and the track records are not even close to similar in this > respect. Knowing nothing else, I would choose a conservative court > over a liberal court, only because conservative courts have a better > track record of interpreting various constitutions in a reasonable and > consistent fashion. That would be playing the odds. > > The push for more conservative courts and constitutional amendments > rather than legislation is a backlash against what is rightly perceived > as excessive and extra-constitutional legislation from liberal activist > courts. I only hope that the conservative courts do not escalate the > situation by responding in kind. > > cheers, > > j. andrew rogers > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 5 14:44:12 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:44:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship Message-ID: >> Of course I'd prefer to commune at a place that left all aspects of >> fairy-tale belief out of the fellowship. If I could find a place as >> inviting, loving, entertaining and dedicated to meeting the needs of >> the local and global community as they are at Agape, but felt no need >> to encumber that sense of community with fairy tales, that would be my >> idea of a perfect place of secular fellowship. Samantha: >What kind of fairy tales exactly? How about our own fairy tales >full of grasping for what we and our "mind-children" will become and >what will be necessary to get there? Not fairy tales necessarily but >good working mythology and other tools of envisioning and living into >being. Zero: Maybe there is something here that is helpful: Mythology for Transhumans http://www.transhumanism.org/index.php/th/more/318/ 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 etcs.ret at verizon.net Fri Nov 5 15:10:30 2004 From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:10:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <200411050455.iA54tm009207@tick.javien.com> References: <200411050455.iA54tm009207@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <3l4no01cg15kqabjpqoqili4k93gnoos2p@4ax.com> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:07:36 -0500 in extropy-chat Digest, Vol 14, Issue 11 nsjacobus wrote > [ ... ] > If we (whoever) were to build a society from the bottom up (on the >moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the ocean, etc), ie: from >scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc should such a society have >(if any) for "Marriage"? > One possibility is to build into the legal kernel a provision for Registered Entities composed of aggregates of two or more individuals. The RE's could have the fictive person status of today's joint stock corporations. "Individuals," in time, would include persons with little or no human genetic material. Society, through the organ of government, would be able to provide the RE with such benefits as respect for its possessions, validation of its contracts, and other guarantees of right that now are awarded to individuals, sometimes. Most Registered Entities doubtless would be indistinguishable from today's marriages and corporations, but extended families ("dynasties"), development groups, crews, and gangs also could be expected to achieve and bear the rights and responsibilities of personhood. Hm. Sounds like 18th Century Italy. stencil sends From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 5 15:23:12 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:23:12 -0800 Subject: Fw: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville Message-ID: <00aa01c4c34b$5dab7de0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Sorry, my fingers got gimpy on me and I sent off my reply before I meant to. This is the complete version. From: "J. Andrew Rogers" > > > On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:06 AM, Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Let's just start with ... er, Republicans (all generally speaking here) > > support a woman's right to choose? > > Yes. It has been dropped as a real platform for a reason -- there was > no consensus within the party. I do not personally know any > Republicans that are not pro-choice, and I know quite a few > Republicans. Well, Bush carefully walked around the issue and only dealt with "partial birth abortion." And the whole matter with stem cells has something to do with the so-called "pro-life" stance, too. Remember how I kept emphasizing "generally speaking"? You may not personally know any Republicans that are not pro-choice, but you have to admit there are many more Republicans (than Democrats) who are anti-choice out there. And, get this - *anesthetizing fetuses*? What will they think of next?: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/politics/campaign/04conserve.html?pagewanted=print&position Ahh, Ashcroft (may he soon retire so he will have more time to handle snakes and sing in his gospel choir) - remember the brouhaha over the statue with exposed breasts? (he was against it - or, them - and put a drape over the statue before he would speak in front of it). Censorship is a problem with *conservatives,* more so than with the liberals, wouldn't you say? > > Republicans led the marches for civil > > rights, gay rights and women's rights? > You may want to read some history. The Democrats were on the wrong > side of a great many civil rights issues. They've only claimed many of > them after the fact. The Deep South has been pretty much 100% Democrat > for more than a century up until the last few years and one of its core > constituencies. Any faults regarding civil rights you see evident in > or would paint on the Southern culture throughout history you'll have > to paint on the Democratic party. Which includes race, gender, and > sexual orientation discrimination. Baby, I didn't just read history - I *participated* in it. Civil rights was a *liberal* cause and victory. Southern Democrats notwithstanding (and note, many "Southerners" have shifted parties since), the civil rights that have been won for people (not just "racial" civil rights) over the decades has been far-and-away largely due to Democrats. > > Republicans want to support stem > > cell research? Republicans want the separation of church and state? > Yes, and yes. Your analysis has been shallow. ... The Republicans are a coalition of two major factions, a libertarian faction and a religious conservative faction. Yes, I am aware of the two major factions. Remember how I kept emphasizing "generally speaking?" Olga From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 15:44:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:44:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041105014443.94292.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105154424.4540.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > Okay...so how do you prevent managers from cashing > > > out the company between reports and leaving > > > shareholders with an empty bag? > > > > If the managers obtain their stock via employee > > purchase or options > > programs, they would be required to only buy or sell > > stock in the month > > or two AFTER the annual or bi-annual report is > > released. > > Which requires government regulation to enforce. Not necessarily. Stockholders could simply vote to mandate it as company policy, insurance providers could mandate it, etc.. > > > Anyone who > > purchases stock on the open market could buy and > > sell whenever they > > want. > > What of managers who more literally "cash out" the > company by rigging their compensation, then resigning > just before the report to the board is due, but never > own (or don't care about) shares in the company? Managers compensation is approved by the company board of directors. If management is rigging the board, then the stockholders are asleep at the wheel. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 15:47:41 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:47:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <418ADD89.9070901@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <20041105154741.6240.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Moss wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >Still not getting it. The most common refrain that pollsters found > >was that people were saying "I'm not against gays, I just don't want > >them rubbing my face in it." > > > >It would take a pretty extravagant wedding ring to amount to "rubbing > their face in it," wouldn't it? Or wedding party. Expect to see a movie titled "My Big Fat Gay Wedding" in the not too distant future. Gay wedding reality shows. It may be stereotypical, but its still true: nobody does flamboyant like gays. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 15:58:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 07:58:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage (WAS: No Joy in Mudville) In-Reply-To: <015e01c4c2de$bd14c600$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105155853.5539.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I keep seeing these statements going back and forth. I think > something is missing here. I would like to start this over. > > Mike Lorrey and I have both proposed that rather than allowing gay > marriage, the government should get out of the marriage business > altogether. Some who have responded have acted as if Mike and I > are bigots, homophobes, etc. I can;t speak for Mike, but I assure > you I am not. Neither am I, and there are gay members of this list who know me and know that I am not. My being against government marriage is of the same philosophy that makes me against government stem cell research. As anybody here who knows me (and that is a significant number) I am the absolutely LAST person anyone would accuse of being against stem cell research in general (or any kind of research or technological development) and I EXTREMELY resent that a few here with statist agendas would try to claim otherwise. Just as I am not anti-research, I am also not anti-gay. Get it through your thick, addled, welfare addicted heads: I hate that you want to parasitize on government and the taxpayer. I certainly don't hate you or your gayness, or you or your stem-cell research. Do you people get it yet? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Fri Nov 5 14:57:48 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:57:48 +0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nietzsche on Religion Incorporated In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041104091112.01b66ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041105173916.00b584b0@pop.cris.net> At 09:23 AM 11/4/04 -0600, you wrote: >At 07:00 AM 11/4/2004 -0800, the Spikester wrote: >>Isn't it shocking? Religion Incorporated seems >>to be making a raging comeback in our modern world. Damien Broderick replied: >In all sorts of brands and guises. It's bitterly ironic (to me, anyway) that avowedly hi-tech widely educated societies such as the USA and Russia have so many citizens reaching for the god pill, while their antagonists are swigging madly from the god bottle, all factions boiling away with contrived and almost arbitrary iconologies of bigotry. The key phrase: >It starts to look as if people really *do* find secular scientific cultures too `cold' and `impersonal' and even `inhaman' to sustain the glow of life. >True, there are parts of Europe and Australasia where Religion Incorporated has been sidelined for a few generations, but I'll bet it comes ripping back in the clutches. Time for humanism and transhumanism to start thinking seriously once again (as Bertrand Russell and Wells and others did nearly a century ago, without getting anywhere) about some sort of secular equivalent of worship (ugh; whatever) and mutually supportive emotionally enriched fellowship. But I don't imagine it will emerge from any bunch of INTJs like this list... >Damien Broderick From Human, All Too Human, Section V, Signs of Higher and Lower Culture, 251 http://www.underthesun.cc/Nietzsche/Human/Human259.html Future of science. To the man who works and searches in it, science gives much pleasure; to the man who learns its results, very little. But since all important scientific truths must eventually become everyday and commonplace, even this small amount of pleasure ceases; just as we have long ago ceased to enjoy learning the admirable multiplication tables. Now, if science produces ever less joy in itself and takes ever greater joy in casting suspicion on the comforts of metaphysics, religion, and art, then the greatest source of pleasure, to which mankind owes almost its whole humanity, is impoverished. Therefore a higher culture must give man a double brain, two brain chambers, as it were, one to experience science, and one to experience nonscience. Lying next to one another, without confusion, separable, self-contained: our health demands this. In the one domain lies the source of strength, in the other the regulator. Illusions, biases, passions must give heat; with the help of scientific knowledge, the pernicious and dangerous consequences of overheating must be prevented. If this demand made by higher culture is not satisfied, we can almost certainly predict the further course of human development: interest in truth will cease, the less it gives pleasure; illusion, error, and fantasies, because they are linked with pleasure, will reconquer their former territory step by step; the ruin of the sciences and relapse into barbarism follow next. Mankind will have to begin to weave its cloth from the beginning again, after having, like Penelope, destroyed it in the night. But who will guarantee that we will keep finding the strength to do so? ==== Best! Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 16:24:04 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:24:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage (WAS: No Joy in Mudville) In-Reply-To: <20041105155853.5539.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105162404.54221.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> An apology is in order, this is a site concerning extropianism, not sexual politics, and i started the thread. Both of you are not bigots or homophobes, however everyone is a hypocrite; denying such only magnifies the validity of the statement. > > Mike Lorrey and I have both proposed that rather > than allowing gay > > marriage, the government should get out of the > marriage business > > altogether. Some who have responded have acted as > if Mike and I > > are bigots, homophobes, etc. I can;t speak for > Mike, but I assure > > you I am not. > > Neither am I, and there are gay members of this list > who know me and > know that I am not. My being against government > marriage is of the same > philosophy that makes me against government stem > cell research. As > anybody here who knows me (and that is a significant > number) I am the > absolutely LAST person anyone would accuse of being > against stem cell > research in general (or any kind of research or > technological > development) and I EXTREMELY resent that a few here > with statist > agendas would try to claim otherwise. Just as I am > not anti-research, I > am also not anti-gay. Get it through your thick, > addled, welfare > addicted heads: I hate that you want to parasitize > on government and > the taxpayer. I certainly don't hate you or your > gayness, or you or > your stem-cell research. Do you people get it yet? > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 16:34:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:34:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Prop 71: The New Gold Rush In-Reply-To: <7a321705041104203914873a77@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041105163458.16473.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> once more the loony bin banana republic of Kalifornia, so shortly on the heels of repeated power and revinue crises, is quick to rob the productive and stick in the hypodermic needle full of social smack. Not surprised. Help a Californicator get his credit life straightened out, the first thing they do is go back out and max out the cards. Keep spending that money, Cali, you're just bringin on the revolution that much quicker. --- Zero Powers wrote: > Some choose to deride my beloved State of Taxifornia, but after this > election I love my country a little bit less and my state a little > bit > more. > > I wonder if it's too late for California to get on the secession > bandwagon? Those southern rebels may have been on to something after > all. Heck, maybe we could persuade New York to join in with us for a > bi-coastal confederacy. That way we'd have the buggers surrounded! > > The coasts shall rise again!!! > > Zero > > > On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:57:18 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 > wrote: > > Wired: Scientists around the country who study embryonic stem cells > > may be mourning four more years of President Bush's restrictive > > funding policy, but California scientists are throwing a party, and > > top researchers in less-funded states are hoping for invitations. > > In the Golden State, stem cell researchers will see a windfall of > $3 > > billion over the next 10 years, averaging about $300 million a > year, > > thanks to the passage of Proposition 71, the California Stem Cell > > Research and Cures Initiative. It shouldn't be difficult to entice > the > > best minds in the country to move to a place where their work is > fully > > supported by a state known for its mild climate. > > California has found a way to supplant federal money with its stem > > cell initiative, and it's the envy of the rest of the country's > stem > > cell researchers. > > > http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,65588,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1 > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 16:46:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:46:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041105164653.15793.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > I am not complaining that you elected a Republican president. There > have been many good Republican presidents. I am complaining that you > elected a president who wants to turn the US into a fundamentalist > theocracy in the purest taliban style. This is a bit much. I am sure this is what your european media is telling you, while your own nations are capitulating to muslim immigrant populations left and right. Trying to claim Bush is the most religious president is ludicrous. Carter easily beats him in the devotional department, while being more of a sentiment of preferring to let America be devoured by lions in the arena in pacifistic bliss (which is why the Romans must love him so). ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 16:53:32 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:53:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041105165332.19656.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > You know, I was thinking about this very thing today ... this "great > divide" that is pulling Americans apart is about freedom and control. > Loosely speaking (yet seriously speaking) Republicans in office today > want *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. This is so wrong I nearly don't know where to start. Democratic Governor-elect John Lynch here bused up teamsters to beat up republican campaigners, they vandalized campaign signs all over the state, and border jumped on election day to steal the election here. Before taking office he's announced he'll ban expansion of the Mount Sunapee resort to appease the tree huggers. He's proposed $800 million in new spending with no way to pay for it. He'll have to double tax rates to pay for it. Some 'freedom'. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 17:19:16 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:19:16 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041105165332.19656.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004701c4c35b$9495c4e0$a51e4842@kevin> The thing that bugs me the most about the democratic party is their willingness to play the race card and their divide and conquer philosophy. They will say and do anything to get elected. Many here like John Kerry even though he pulled the God word out of his a** at every opportunity. He went to Michigan and talked about all the SUVs he owned, then went to an environmental group and when asked about it said they weren;t exactly "his". No, they are in his wife's name. He went on about "Benedict Arnold" companies that move jobs overseas, meanwhile, his wife's company moved thousands of jobs overseas. They are hypocrites worse than any republican. At least the Republican part, for the most part, acts in accordance with what they say. They tell blacks that republicans are racist when some of the most racist people I have met were Democrat Union Labor Rednecks. Dems want to ban smoking, write laws to control cell phone talk in cars, write laws to control hate speech, etc etc. They are the part of writing new laws. They want the cameras everywhere while repubs fight off the use of such devices. Dems will do and say anything to get elected. They say that repubs are for dirty air, for dirty water, for wealthy people, against poor people, against blacks,. against gays, against old people, and anything else thay can do to drive fear into the hearts of americans and this is simply not the case. People who do this are clearly more intersted in power than truth. I am not saying that Repubs are great or anything. But to claim that repubs want control more than dems is nuts. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > > > > You know, I was thinking about this very thing today ... this "great > > divide" that is pulling Americans apart is about freedom and control. > > > Loosely speaking (yet seriously speaking) Republicans in office today > > want *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. > > This is so wrong I nearly don't know where to start. Democratic > Governor-elect John Lynch here bused up teamsters to beat up republican > campaigners, they vandalized campaign signs all over the state, and > border jumped on election day to steal the election here. > > Before taking office he's announced he'll ban expansion of the Mount > Sunapee resort to appease the tree huggers. He's proposed $800 million > in new spending with no way to pay for it. He'll have to double tax > rates to pay for it. Some 'freedom'. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 17:22:04 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:22:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <004701c4c35b$9495c4e0$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105172204.79035.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Fair enough. But this is what Madison wanted. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > The thing that bugs me the most about the democratic > party is their > willingness to play the race card and their divide > and conquer philosophy. > They will say and do anything to get elected. Many > here like John Kerry even > though he pulled the God word out of his a** at > every opportunity. He went > to Michigan and talked about all the SUVs he owned, > then went to an > environmental group and when asked about it said > they weren;t exactly "his". > No, they are in his wife's name. He went on about > "Benedict Arnold" > companies that move jobs overseas, meanwhile, his > wife's company moved > thousands of jobs overseas. They are hypocrites > worse than any republican. > At least the Republican part, for the most part, > acts in accordance with > what they say. They tell blacks that republicans are > racist when some of the > most racist people I have met were Democrat Union > Labor Rednecks. Dems want > to ban smoking, write laws to control cell phone > talk in cars, write laws to > control hate speech, etc etc. They are the part of > writing new laws. They > want the cameras everywhere while repubs fight off > the use of such devices. > > Dems will do and say anything to get elected. They > say that repubs are for > dirty air, for dirty water, for wealthy people, > against poor people, against > blacks,. against gays, against old people, and > anything else thay can do to > drive fear into the hearts of americans and this is > simply not the case. > People who do this are clearly more intersted in > power than truth. > > I am not saying that Repubs are great or anything. > But to claim that repubs > want control more than dems is nuts. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Lorrey" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > > > > > > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > > > > > > > You know, I was thinking about this very thing > today ... this "great > > > divide" that is pulling Americans apart is about > freedom and control. > > > > > Loosely speaking (yet seriously speaking) > Republicans in office today > > > want *control* over people, and Democracts want > more *freedom*. > > > > This is so wrong I nearly don't know where to > start. Democratic > > Governor-elect John Lynch here bused up teamsters > to beat up republican > > campaigners, they vandalized campaign signs all > over the state, and > > border jumped on election day to steal the > election here. > > > > Before taking office he's announced he'll ban > expansion of the Mount > > Sunapee resort to appease the tree huggers. He's > proposed $800 million > > in new spending with no way to pay for it. He'll > have to double tax > > rates to pay for it. Some 'freedom'. > > > > ===== > > Mike Lorrey > > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > > "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!? > > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > > www.yahoo.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Fri Nov 5 17:43:02 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:43:02 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105172204.79035.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041105172204.79035.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <24677044-2F52-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Wow. Huge amount of verbiage on this issue. I think people are talking past each other. As I see it there are too propositions: 1. Government should not be involved in marriage. 2. All people should be given equal rights in eyes of the law. Most people who support gay marriage are trying to fix No. 2, and may or may not think No. 1 is either a problem or perhaps changeable. Mike and others believe that its better to any more involvement with the government even if this means that certain people will not have the same rights as others. I comes down to what you think are more important. Personally, I can't see the US getting out the marriage business anytime soon, and I find it offensive that certain people are currently legally discriminated against. best, patrick From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Fri Nov 5 17:55:57 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:55:57 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com> References: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com> Message-ID: On 4 Nov 2004, at 19:15, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > I am a non-party voter, and at the moment, I do not have much to say on > this. But to answer your questino, I suppose one way of looking at it > is > that President Bush would be more aggressive toward protecting the > U.S. and > its citizens against terrorism. But surely its obvious that's he's failed? The whole situation is Iraq is in a terrible state don't you agree? Don't you think that the invasion of a country that had neither any involvement in 9/11 OR had any weapons of mass destruction (i.e., had neither attacked the US or the means to do so) has simply lead to date to +1100 US deaths, 10x US causalities, 100x Iraq deaths, 1000x Iraqi casualties and much less safety for America. In no way has Bush protected America. So how is this possibly Extropian? > He also says he wants to reform taxation. If he was cutting spending perhaps this would be true. But I recently read that the US today has $100 billion less revenue and $400 billion more expenditure than when Bush took on office. Tax reform without limiting spending is just stupid. So I am still no closer to finding out why anyone calling themselves and Extropian would vote for Bush. best, patrick From pharos at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 18:05:26 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:05:26 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <24677044-2F52-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> References: <20041105172204.79035.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> <24677044-2F52-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:43:02 +0100, Patrick Wilken wrote: > Wow. Huge amount of verbiage on this issue. I think people are talking > past each other. As I see it there are too propositions: > > 1. Government should not be involved in marriage. > 2. All people should be given equal rights in eyes of the law. > > Most people who support gay marriage are trying to fix No. 2, and may > or may not think No. 1 is either a problem or perhaps changeable. Mike > and others believe that its better to any more involvement with the > government even if this means that certain people will not have the > same rights as others. > I can't believe it! The US has just voted for four more years of Bush and Rumsfeld Republicanism and the extropian list is going bananas about less government and gay marriage. There is no chance of any of that for at least four years. Come back to the real world sometime. Has the list been infected with the Don Quixote virus??? BillK From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 18:05:52 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:05:52 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105164653.15793.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> <20041105164653.15793.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204110510055e78f44@mail.gmail.com> No, I do read European media, but I also read American media. Like today's NYT article attached below which, I believe, is quite relevant to this discussion. Now about muslim immigrant population: I shouldn't have to tell this to a Libertarian, but if they come, it is because there are jobs for them. If there are jobs for them, it is because there are jobs which need being done and no local wants to do. They come due to the free market of offer and demand, and we just bow and let them come. Should we introduce some even more protectionist policies to keep them out? Wouldn't you call this a massive intervention of the state in the economy? I think I am lost, I really thought I understood Libertarianism. Or perhaps we are talking of "racial purity"? Well, I will have to say that I just don?t care about the survival of the Italian, or British, or French, or German, or whatever "race". What I do care about, and a lot, is the survival of the human race. And I think our very survival is in danger because of racial conflicts. Isn't it better to be all coffee-with-milk posthumans? NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/opinion/04wills.html?ex=1100592981&ei=1&en=806f25bb8addc950 The Day the Enlightenment Went Out By GARRY WILLS Published: November 4, 2004 This election confirms the brilliance of Karl Rove as a political strategist. He calculated that the religious conservatives, if they could be turned out, would be the deciding factor. The success of the plan was registered not only in the presidential results but also in all 11 of the state votes to ban same-sex marriage. Mr. Rove understands what surveys have shown, that many more Americans believe in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin's theory of evolution. This might be called Bryan's revenge for the Scopes trial of 1925, in which William Jennings Bryan's fundamentalist assault on the concept of evolution was discredited. Disillusionment with that decision led many evangelicals to withdraw from direct engagement in politics. But they came roaring back into the arena out of anger at other court decisions - on prayer in school, abortion, protection of the flag and, now, gay marriage. Mr. Rove felt that the appeal to this large bloc was worth getting President Bush to endorse a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage (though he had opposed it earlier). The results bring to mind a visit the Dalai Lama made to Chicago not long ago. I was one of the people deputized to ask him questions on the stage at the Field Museum. He met with the interrogators beforehand and asked us to give him challenging questions, since he is too often greeted with deference or flattery. The only one I could think of was: "If you could return to your country, what would you do to change it?" He said that he would disestablish his religion, since "America is the proper model." I later asked him if a pluralist society were possible without the Enlightenment. "Ah," he said. "That's the problem." He seemed to envy America its Enlightenment heritage. Which raises the question: Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened nation? America, the first real democracy in history, was a product of Enlightenment values - critical intelligence, tolerance, respect for evidence, a regard for the secular sciences. Though the founders differed on many things, they shared these values of what was then modernity. They addressed "a candid world," as they wrote in the Declaration of Independence, out of "a decent respect for the opinions of mankind." Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more, when a poll taken just before the elections showed that 75 percent of Mr. Bush's supporters believe Iraq either worked closely with Al Qaeda or was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11. The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble those nations less than we do our putative enemies. Where else do we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity? Not in France or Britain or Germany or Italy or Spain. We find it in the Muslim world, in Al Qaeda, in Saddam Hussein's Sunni loyalists. Americans wonder that the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous, so single-minded, so impervious to international appeals. They fear jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed. It is often observed that enemies come to resemble each other. We torture the torturers, we call our God better than theirs - as one American general put it, in words that the president has not repudiated. President Bush promised in 2000 that he would lead a humble country, be a uniter not a divider, that he would make conservatism compassionate. He did not need to make such false promises this time. He was re-elected precisely by being a divider, pitting the reddest aspects of the red states against the blue nearly half of the nation. In this, he is very far from Ronald Reagan, who was amiably and ecumenically pious. He could address more secular audiences, here and abroad, with real respect. In his victory speech yesterday, President Bush indicated that he would "reach out to the whole nation," including those who voted for John Kerry. But even if he wanted to be more conciliatory now, the constituency to which he owes his victory is not a yielding one. He must give them what they want on things like judicial appointments. His helpers are also his keepers. The moral zealots will, I predict, give some cause for dismay even to nonfundamentalist Republicans. Jihads are scary things. It is not too early to start yearning back toward the Enlightenment. Garry Wills, an adjunct professor of history at Northwestern University, is the author of "St. Augustine's Conversion." On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 08:46:53 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > > I am not complaining that you elected a Republican president. There > > have been many good Republican presidents. I am complaining that you > > elected a president who wants to turn the US into a fundamentalist > > theocracy in the purest taliban style. > > This is a bit much. I am sure this is what your european media is > telling you, while your own nations are capitulating to muslim > immigrant populations left and right. Trying to claim Bush is the most > religious president is ludicrous. Carter easily beats him in the > devotional department, while being more of a sentiment of preferring to > let America be devoured by lions in the arena in pacifistic bliss > (which is why the Romans must love him so). From jonkc at att.net Fri Nov 5 18:20:37 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 13:20:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <290150-220041144181514880@M2W099.mail2web.com><710b78fc041104190414afda8c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041104211236.01dadf88@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <013901c4c364$2d1bd080$9dff4d0c@hal2001> "Damien Broderick" . > don't you understand? They hate us because > we're *good*. The President said so. Close but not quite. We have done one thing that is absolutely unforgivable, we were successful; while Islam has not produced a good original idea since the invention of the zero, and that was 700 years ago, and even then was probably stolen from India. That is why they hate us more than they love life, not because we interfered with the election of some Iranian Prime minister 50 years ago that most people today, even in Iran, could not name. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 18:45:27 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:45:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nietzsche on Religion Incorporated In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041105173916.00b584b0@pop.cris.net> References: <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <20041104075415.33809.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> <005f01c4c27f$0b1e3260$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <4.3.2.7.2.20041105173916.00b584b0@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041105104104.029368f0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Talk about a person totally consumed by his own prejudice and beliefs! I take great pleasure in science, science fiction and speculations that come from them. I have my own prejudice, I find most 'humanities' insufferably dull rehashing the sameo sameo of dusty classical millenial mental fertilizer which has not had time to decay enough for the plants to use it. Stuffy old Russell..... :< > From Human, All Too Human, Section V, >Signs of Higher and Lower Culture, 251 >http://www.underthesun.cc/Nietzsche/Human/Human259.html > >Future of science. To the man who works and searches in it, science gives >much pleasure; to the man who learns its results, very little. >Gennady >Simferopol Crimea Ukraine ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 18:43:38 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:43:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <319263EB-2F0A-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> References: <68A34DC0-2EDE-11D9-A692-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> <006201c4c308$f4460240$6600a8c0@brainiac> <15D8DE06-2EFF-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> <00e801c4c30e$6b1b82a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <319263EB-2F0A-11D9-8895-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041105104355643bce@mail.gmail.com> Thanks for this explanation Andrew, and I will just hope that "The libertarian faction has long kept the religious faction in check with respect to the separation of church and state" will continue. G. On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 01:08:01 -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > The Republicans are a coalition of two major factions, a libertarian > faction and a religious conservative faction. They have competing > motivations but they've learned to get along. They originally formed a > coalition to deal with the Democratic party back when they were a > juggernaut for most of the 20th century. > > The religious conservative faction objects to stem cell research on > moral grounds. The libertarian faction likes the research but objects > to the Federal government funding it, particularly since there is no > real shortage of private funding for it. The obvious policy compromise > is to reduce or eliminate Federal funding of the research. The > libertarian faction has long kept the religious faction in check with > respect to the separation of church and state. I am not a Republican > but I am an atheist, and I've never felt threatened by the bogeyman of > the "religious right" in a legal sense. The Republican party has no > designs toward establishing a state religion nor would the libertarian > faction allow anything vaguely resembling that. And if the militant > atheists in some Democrat factions would stop going out of their way to > antagonize the religious Republicans (and yes, this does happen), this > would largely dissipate as an issue. > > You need to learn to look at Republican policy from this perspective. > Little gets done that does not pass the filter of both the libertarians > and religious conservatives. This means that compromises usually only > include things that both factions can agree on from an ideological > standpoint. A few bones get thrown and occasionally there are very > heated discussions within the party, but nothing really gets out of > control. > > There are many, many pro-choice, atheist, gay-friendly Republicans, > primarily because the Republicans only rarely step on the toes of these > quasi-libertarian folks and vice-versa. Why do you think it is that > drug legalization has occurred primarily in western Republican states > rather than Democrat ones? The different factions have different > proportional strengths in different parts of the country. Your view of > Republicans is a highly biased caricature. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 18:51:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:51:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy In-Reply-To: <20041105162404.54221.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041105185100.39643.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > An apology is in order, this is a site concerning > extropianism, not sexual politics, and i started the > thread. > Both of you are not bigots or homophobes, however > everyone is a hypocrite; denying such only magnifies > the validity of the statement. That is just it, Al. I'm NOT a hypocrite. I am bluntly and sometimes rudely honest, direct, and consistent in my philosophy, principles, and politics. Your liberal smear may work on republicans, but it doesn't work on me. My integrity stands like a monument, and it has only one side to it. Hypocrisy is two facedness. I only have one face. You may not like that face, but you can't accuse it of hypocrisy. You may hate that face, but that only makes YOU the hypocrite. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 18:54:17 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:54:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <004701c4c35b$9495c4e0$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041105185417.38813.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > I am not saying that Repubs are great or anything. But to claim that > repubs want control more than dems is nuts. Getting back to our fav topic of stem cells, read on... [badnarik2004] YOU Libertarians are stupid!, by Ron Alridge All, I find this apalling. Up for a challenge? This was just posted by a Yale edumacated tv critic - it was just included in John Stossels weekly newsletter - Stossel is asking for responses Please e-mail him at johnstossel at abcnews.com : --- "Dear John: I am a former TV critic ("Chicago Tribune", "Charlotte Observer") and former publisher/editorial director of a leading TV industry trade ("Electronic Media") and I therefore consider myself to be a somewhat astute observer of television journalism. With that said, your recent rant against state funding for stem cell research in California was pandering, ideologically driven journalism at its worst...you just kept whining (you DO whine, you know) about the horror of using "taxpayer" money to fund stem cell research ... It was an embarrassing display of shallowness and stupidity at a high level of American journalism. John, let's give you a little Civics 101 lesson. See, government, by necessity, often takes on projects that are costly and that serve the greater public interest. That's more or less why we have government, in fact. Just because a whiny, middle-aged network journalist would rather buy another pair of Gucci loafers with "his" tax money doesn't give him the right to opt out of projects that he personally doesn't like...I don't like war, but I don't advocate allowing us antiwar types to prevent the government from spending tax dollars to maintain an army ... Such thinking represents a myopic, woefully ignorant view of the workings of a democracy. Much as it makes you so mad that you could spit and stomp, you can't always have your way in a democracy, John. It's not all about you or your Yuppie neighbor or the Bush Davidians with the Republican sign in their yard down the street. Your view or my view doesn't always prevail. The overarching point is that all of us must abide, more often than not, by the will of the majority. For you to suggest that any such example of majority rule can become "tyranny of the majority" is absurd ... John, allow me to let you in on a little secret about "your" tax dollars. Pssst, they aren't YOUR tax dollars. They never were. From the minute you punched in on the job, those dollars were the property of whatever governing body was entitled to them by law. You never EARNED that money. It was the price you paid for the privilege of working. It's just that the government gave you a break by not collecting in advance...You made yourself and your network look bad with your Friday night rant. It was childish, shallow and ignorant... Didn't they teach you anything at Princeton? I'm beginning to suspect that my late, Yale-educated friend and colleague, Gene Siskel, wasn't joking when he called Princeton a college "for kids with money and no brains." OK, that was ugly. But I enjoyed writing it. The truth is that the private sector is often a woefully inferior alternative to government, your libertarian ideology notwithstanding." -- Ron Alridge JOHN STOSSELS RESPONSE: Ron Alridge is actually one of the BETTER TV writers. His sneering hostility gives you a sense of what I'm up against in my biz. Regarding his argument about tyranny of the majority: Yes, in a democracy the minority must pay for wars they may not like, but war (like enforcing contracts and setting environment rules) is something that only government can do. I invite you to e-mail responses to his claim that we never "earned" our income, that it's government's property and "government gave you a break by not collecting in advance"! ---- Please send your comments and "Give Me a Break" suggestions to JohnStossel at abcnews.com. If you don't want your e-mail quoted, say you wish to remain anonymous. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 19:00:51 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:00:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <24677044-2F52-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041105190051.39970.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken proves that even he can write past others in saying: > Wow. Huge amount of verbiage on this issue. I think people are > talking past each other. As I see it there are too propositions: > > 1. Government should not be involved in marriage. > 2. All people should be given equal rights in eyes of the law. > > Most people who support gay marriage are trying to fix No. 2, and may > or may not think No. 1 is either a problem or perhaps changeable. > Mike and others believe that its better to any more involvement with > the government even if this means that certain people will not have > the same rights as others. No, once more, stop saying things that are not true. I, and others, believe that everyone will have the same rights as everyone else once we get government once and for all out of regulating, controlling, or otherwise providing benefits to marriage. Solving (1) solves (2). You can solve (2) either buy doing (1) or by increasing the tyranny of government even more than it already is tyrannical. Those who support the tyrannical route are statists, whether they are gay or not. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From sahynepu at concentric.net Fri Nov 5 18:07:51 2004 From: sahynepu at concentric.net (Sahyinepu) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 12:07:51 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041105154741.6240.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9B73B3F6-2F55-11D9-BAD4-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> Don't like it, don't see it in the theaters, change the television station, don't accept the invitation to the wedding. I am celibate and absolutely hate it when people all but have outright sex in public...you know the but grabbing, french kissing, PG13 crap they pull anywhere and everywhere..I don't want to ban human breeders though. But I must admit, setting up live traps to catch humans in bars and churches and then sterilizing them is a humorous idea of mine. Point is, there are aspects in society that most anyone would find offensive...most of us are mature enough to look the other way. The exception to that would be when one group wants to limit the ability of one group to express itself, even when such expression does not directly harm them. Like say, religious folks trying to ban gay marriage. Gays marrying does not harm them directly at all. Any more than horny as hell straight couples al but breeding in front of me harms me directly. It just pisses me off. Sah On Friday, November 5, 2004, at 09:47 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Bryan Moss wrote: > >> Mike Lorrey wrote: >> >>> Still not getting it. The most common refrain that pollsters found >>> was that people were saying "I'm not against gays, I just don't want >>> them rubbing my face in it." >>> >>> It would take a pretty extravagant wedding ring to amount to > "rubbing >> their face in it," wouldn't it? > > Or wedding party. Expect to see a movie titled "My Big Fat Gay Wedding" > in the not too distant future. Gay wedding reality shows. It may be > stereotypical, but its still true: nobody does flamboyant like gays. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 19:30:17 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 11:30:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <3l4no01cg15kqabjpqoqili4k93gnoos2p@4ax.com> Message-ID: <20041105193017.41915.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> The idea of having to register ANY entity is what is anathema. --- stencil wrote: > On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:07:36 -0500 > in extropy-chat Digest, Vol 14, Issue 11 > nsjacobus wrote > > > [ ... ] > > If we (whoever) were to build a society from the bottom up (on the > > >moon, in orbit, in the asteroid belt, under the ocean, etc), ie: > from > >scratch, what sort of support/allowance, etc should such a society > have > >(if any) for "Marriage"? > > > One possibility is to build into the legal kernel a provision for > Registered > Entities composed of aggregates of two or more individuals. The RE's > could > have the fictive person status of today's joint stock corporations. > "Individuals," in time, would include persons with little or no human > genetic > material. Society, through the organ of government, would be able to > provide > the RE with such benefits as respect for its possessions, validation > of its > contracts, and other guarantees of right that now are awarded to > individuals, > sometimes. > Most Registered Entities doubtless would be indistinguishable from > today's > marriages and corporations, but extended families ("dynasties"), > development > groups, crews, and gangs also could be expected to achieve and bear > the rights > and responsibilities of personhood. > Hm. Sounds like 18th Century Italy. > > stencil sends > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Nov 5 20:54:01 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:54:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard Message-ID: <257720-22004115520541732@M2W094.mail2web.com> From: Patrick Wilken "But surely its obvious that's he's failed? The whole situation is Iraq is in a terrible state don't you agree? Don't you think that the invasion of a country that had neither any involvement in 9/11 OR had any weapons of mass destruction (i.e., had neither attacked the US or the means to do so) has simply lead to date to +1100 US deaths, 10x US causalities, 100x Iraq deaths, 1000x Iraqi casualties and much less safety for America." No, it is not obvious that he failed. I am not defending him, I am being objective. History does not come in seconds, or moments. We may not know for some time in what ways Bush failed, or how severely he failed for some time. Regardless, judging whether or not he failed needs to be looked at from more than one perspective because there are many different areas in which he could have succeeded or failed, not just one. It is clear, however, that he failed in the eyes of many Americans, and the world. But, again, what constitutes winning or failing at this type of war game - I do not know. "In no way has Bush protected America. So how is this possibly Extropian?" I did not say he would be more protective or that he is Extropian. I did say that he was more aggressive than Kerry and more willing to do whatever it takes. One thing I suppose you could say is that he is following his own course, which relates to his level of individuality, and from that angle. > He also says he wants to reform taxation. "If he was cutting spending perhaps this would be true. But I recently read that the US today has $100 billion less revenue and $400 billion more expenditure than when Bush took on office. Tax reform without limiting spending is just stupid." I don't know about that, but it seems to be weak-minded. I heard on the news this morning that he wants to privatize social security. What do you think about that? "So I am still no closer to finding out why anyone calling themselves and Extropian would vote for Bush." I don't think you will get any closer my dear. -:) By the way, I don't think anyone needs to justify who and what they vote for, and I don't think it is open minded to judge people so loosely. One think I know for sure is that people are complex creatures and trying to fit them all in a fenced yard never works. Unlike chattel, people do not like to be herded and labeled. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 5 22:07:14 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:07:14 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] 70 teraflops Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041105160023.01ab0760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.fcw.com/print.asp Blue Gene pulls ahead in supercomputer race BY Aliya Sternstein Published on Nov. 5, 2004 For the fourth time in less than two months, a supercomputer speed record has been claimed. Energy Department officials said Nov. 4 that the agency's Blue Gene/L machine developed by IBM Corp. has hit processing speeds of 70.72 teraflops using the Linpack industry benchmark. That's almost double the speed Blue Gene achieved in late September, when the supercomputer broke the 2-year-old record held by NEC Computer Inc.'s Earth Simulator. ============= (When I was updating THE SPIKE in 2000, the record was about two teraflops, but IBM were claiming that by 2004 Blue Gene would achieve a petaflop. Still, 70 teraflops isn't dawdling--it's still been doubling once a year or so.) Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 22:55:01 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 14:55:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 70 teraflops In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041105160023.01ab0760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041105225501.75440.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > For the fourth time in less than two months, a supercomputer speed > record has been claimed. > > Energy Department officials said Nov. 4 that the agency's Blue Gene/L > machine developed by IBM Corp. has hit processing speeds of 70.72 > teraflops using the Linpack Silicon Graphics CEO responds, "To quote IBM, 'you can't be number one forever.'" ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 5 20:04:08 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:04:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush appointment Message-ID: <1099685047.20563.439.camel@localhost> There is an email starting to make the rounds about Bush appointing some kook to a federal agency dealing with women's health issues. I saw it on a private Objectivist oriented list and I expect it will pop up here soon. The version I saw implied that it was recent. So before that email hits here I thought I would provide a pointer to an online page about it and hopefully keep the descussion from getting too far out of hand. You may want to read the entry at snopes for their take on it: http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/hager.htm The questions "is Hagar a kook" and "is Bush a prevaricating menace" I will leave for another post. Fred From pharos at gmail.com Fri Nov 5 23:14:32 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 23:14:32 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] 70 teraflops In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041105160023.01ab0760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041105160023.01ab0760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:07:14 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > > Blue Gene pulls ahead in supercomputer race > > Energy Department officials said Nov. 4 that the agency's Blue Gene/L > machine developed by IBM Corp. has hit processing speeds of 70.72 teraflops > using the Linpack industry benchmark. That's almost double the speed Blue > Gene achieved in late September, when the supercomputer broke the > 2-year-old record held by NEC Computer Inc.'s Earth Simulator. > And by next year - "Blue Gene L, which will deliver between 180 teraflops and 360 teraflops, will cost between $50 million and $100 million to complete, or about $200,000 per teraflop, Seager said." Perhaps more significant is the MareNostrum blade server. "Dubbed MareNostrum, the supercomputer employs a cluster of 2,520 eServer BladeCenter JS20 systems running the Linux operating system. IBM expects it to be the first supercomputer to attain a top 10 ranking using blade server technology. IBM expects the computer's peak performance to reach 40TFLOPS (trillion floating-point operations per second). At its current configuration, the computer already reached a sustained performance of 20.53TFLOPS, with peak performance of 31.36TFLOPS, IBM said." This machine uses blade servers which can be assembled at a fraction of the cost of the specialized processors of Blue Gene. More like supercomputing for the man in the street. BillK From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 5 20:17:28 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:17:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: <1099685848.20563.452.camel@localhost> I saw this on a newsgroup and thought I would pass it on. While I doubt anyone would agree with it in its entirety I think it expresses some ideas in a way that I have not seen in the discussion of the past few days. > From: XXXXXXXXXXXXX.com (XXX XXXXXX) > Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom > Subject: NY Times: The Day the Enlightenment Died > Date: 4 Nov 2004 07:41:41 -0800 > > I read this in today's NY Times and found it depressing but worth > sharing. I can't believe how depressed I am over this election. > > The Day the Enlightenment Went Out > By GARRY WILLS > > > Wills, Garry > > Evanston, Ill. > > This election confirms the brilliance of Karl Rove as a political > strategist. He calculated that the religious conservatives, if they > could be turned out, would be the deciding factor. The success of the > plan was registered not only in the presidential results but also in > all 11 of the state votes to ban same-sex marriage. Mr. Rove > understands what surveys have shown, that many more Americans believe > in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin's theory of evolution. > > This might be called Bryan's revenge for the Scopes trial of 1925, in > which William Jennings Bryan's fundamentalist assault on the concept > of evolution was discredited. Disillusionment with that decision led > many evangelicals to withdraw from direct engagement in politics. But > they came roaring back into the arena out of anger at other court > decisions - on prayer in school, abortion, protection of the flag and, > now, gay marriage. Mr. Rove felt that the appeal to this large bloc > was worth getting President Bush to endorse a constitutional amendment > banning gay marriage (though he had opposed it earlier). > > The results bring to mind a visit the Dalai Lama made to Chicago not > long ago. I was one of the people deputized to ask him questions on > the stage at the Field Museum. He met with the interrogators > beforehand and asked us to give him challenging questions, since he is > too often greeted with deference or flattery. > > The only one I could think of was: "If you could return to your > country, what would you do to change it?" He said that he would > disestablish his religion, since "America is the proper model." I > later asked him if a pluralist society were possible without the > Enlightenment. "Ah," he said. "That's the problem." He seemed to envy > America its Enlightenment heritage. > > Which raises the question: Can a people that believes more fervently > in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened > nation? > > America, the first real democracy in history, was a product of > Enlightenment values - critical intelligence, tolerance, respect for > evidence, a regard for the secular sciences. Though the founders > differed on many things, they shared these values of what was then > modernity. They addressed "a candid world," as they wrote in the > Declaration of Independence, out of "a decent respect for the opinions > of mankind." Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more, when > a poll taken just before the elections showed that 75 percent of Mr. > Bush's supporters believe Iraq either worked closely with Al Qaeda or > was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11. > > The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the > fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had > experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble > those nations less than we do our putative enemies. > > Where else do we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, > religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity? Not in France > or Britain or Germany or Italy or Spain. We find it in the Muslim > world, in Al Qaeda, in Saddam Hussein's Sunni loyalists. Americans > wonder that the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous, so > single-minded, so impervious to international appeals. They fear > jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed. > > It is often observed that enemies come to resemble each other. We > torture the torturers, we call our God better than theirs - as one > American general put it, in words that the president has not > repudiated. > > President Bush promised in 2000 that he would lead a humble country, > be a uniter not a divider, that he would make conservatism > compassionate. He did not need to make such false promises this time. > He was re-elected precisely by being a divider, pitting the reddest > aspects of the red states against the blue nearly half of the nation. > In this, he is very far from Ronald Reagan, who was amiably and > ecumenically pious. He could address more secular audiences, here and > abroad, with real respect. > > In his victory speech yesterday, President Bush indicated that he > would "reach out to the whole nation," including those who voted for > John Kerry. But even if he wanted to be more conciliatory now, the > constituency to which he owes his victory is not a yielding one. He > must give them what they want on things like judicial appointments. > His helpers are also his keepers. > > The moral zealots will, I predict, give some cause for dismay even to > nonfundamentalist Republicans. Jihads are scary things. It is not too > early to start yearning back toward the Enlightenment. > > > Garry Wills, an adjunct professor of history at Northwestern > University, is the author of "St. Augustine's Conversion." From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Nov 6 00:07:50 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:07:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Rephrase the "Marriage" question... In-Reply-To: <20041105193017.41915.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041106000750.47103.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > The idea of having to register ANY entity is what is > anathema. How so, if the entity is purely a government construct used to signal non-default behaviors in certain circumstances, such as ability to designate health care options (including cryonics) if the person being cared for is no longer able to? The government has to know that it has been asked not to behave in its usual manner - and if yet another different step is desired, one can sign a contract and make sure the government becomes aware of it if needed (for which registration is one of the options with the best chance of success). If a "marriage" is not supposed to alter the government's behavior towards the married couple, for instance if it is a purely religious matter and both partners will continue filing their own tax returns and have written wills et al, then don't register it. (Or for a corporate version: current law where I live says that if you want to start a private business - one which you own entirely, with no shares or board or anything like that - and it isn't of a category the government has a special reason to regulate - like restaurants (government health inspectors mostly make it unnecessary for private citizens to pay for their own inspectors) - then so long as your business's name indicates who owns it (to avoid certain classes of scams we've faced before), you can just start up and go without registration. Once you've made money, you have to report it for income taxes, but even then you don't have to report much more than that you made X amount of money through some form of self-employment.) From amara.graps at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 00:09:27 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 01:09:27 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] the other half Message-ID: http://www.sorryeverybody.com/ (Sorry Everybody. How can we make it up to you?) From gregburch at gregburch.net Sat Nov 6 00:56:01 2004 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:56:01 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <1099685848.20563.452.camel@localhost> Message-ID: I've kept my mouth shut here (but certainly not elsewhere -- on my blog, for instance) since the election. I've seen that the Europeans and the Americans who voted for Bush need to vent: They're tired and scared. But I can't go on without registering that things like this article are part of the problem. It's hysterical nonsense from people who live entirely encased in a cultural bubble that includes zero contact with anyone with whom they disagree. Frankly, all the preaching about tolerance and diversity from people who live in such bubbles seems ironic at least and outright hypocritical at worst. How many times have I read and heard in the last few days that people in New York and San Francisco and Seattle and London and Brussels can't understand how America elected Bush? They can't understand because they have no intercourse with the people who voted for Bush. Their conception of huge swaths of American culture is a shallow caricature that would be funny if it wasn't so sad. I'm an atheist. I'm a libertarian. I don't suffer from a lack of literacy or even education; I know that humans evolved over a period of billions of years -- imagine that! I didn't have to vote for Bush because I live in the capital of Red State America, Houston, Texas, so I had the luxury of voting symbolically for the libertarians. But if I'd lived in Florida or Ohio, I'd have voted for Bush. My liberty to be irreligious and follow Enlightenment values has not been curtailed and, contrary to what one would think from reading the New York Times, the LA Times, watching all but one of the major American news networks or reading basically all of the press in Europe, my liberty to be irreligious is not in immediate danger. GB http://gregburch.net/burchismo.html > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Fred C. > Moulton > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 2:17 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > > > > I saw this on a newsgroup and thought I would pass it on. While I doubt > anyone would agree with it in its entirety I think it expresses some > ideas in a way that I have not seen in the discussion of the past few > days. > > > From: XXXXXXXXXXXXX.com (XXX XXXXXX) > > Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom > > Subject: NY Times: The Day the Enlightenment Died > > Date: 4 Nov 2004 07:41:41 -0800 > > > > I read this in today's NY Times and found it depressing but worth > > sharing. I can't believe how depressed I am over this election. > > > > The Day the Enlightenment Went Out > > By GARRY WILLS > > > > > > Wills, Garry > > > > Evanston, Ill. > > > > This election confirms the brilliance of Karl Rove as a political > > strategist. He calculated that the religious conservatives, if they > > could be turned out, would be the deciding factor. The success of the > > plan was registered not only in the presidential results but also in > > all 11 of the state votes to ban same-sex marriage. Mr. Rove > > understands what surveys have shown, that many more Americans believe > > in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin's theory of evolution. > > > > This might be called Bryan's revenge for the Scopes trial of 1925, in > > which William Jennings Bryan's fundamentalist assault on the concept > > of evolution was discredited. Disillusionment with that decision led > > many evangelicals to withdraw from direct engagement in politics. But > > they came roaring back into the arena out of anger at other court > > decisions - on prayer in school, abortion, protection of the flag and, > > now, gay marriage. Mr. Rove felt that the appeal to this large bloc > > was worth getting President Bush to endorse a constitutional amendment > > banning gay marriage (though he had opposed it earlier). > > > > The results bring to mind a visit the Dalai Lama made to Chicago not > > long ago. I was one of the people deputized to ask him questions on > > the stage at the Field Museum. He met with the interrogators > > beforehand and asked us to give him challenging questions, since he is > > too often greeted with deference or flattery. > > > > The only one I could think of was: "If you could return to your > > country, what would you do to change it?" He said that he would > > disestablish his religion, since "America is the proper model." I > > later asked him if a pluralist society were possible without the > > Enlightenment. "Ah," he said. "That's the problem." He seemed to envy > > America its Enlightenment heritage. > > > > Which raises the question: Can a people that believes more fervently > > in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened > > nation? > > > > America, the first real democracy in history, was a product of > > Enlightenment values - critical intelligence, tolerance, respect for > > evidence, a regard for the secular sciences. Though the founders > > differed on many things, they shared these values of what was then > > modernity. They addressed "a candid world," as they wrote in the > > Declaration of Independence, out of "a decent respect for the opinions > > of mankind." Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more, when > > a poll taken just before the elections showed that 75 percent of Mr. > > Bush's supporters believe Iraq either worked closely with Al Qaeda or > > was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11. > > > > The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the > > fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had > > experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble > > those nations less than we do our putative enemies. > > > > Where else do we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, > > religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity? Not in France > > or Britain or Germany or Italy or Spain. We find it in the Muslim > > world, in Al Qaeda, in Saddam Hussein's Sunni loyalists. Americans > > wonder that the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous, so > > single-minded, so impervious to international appeals. They fear > > jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed. > > > > It is often observed that enemies come to resemble each other. We > > torture the torturers, we call our God better than theirs - as one > > American general put it, in words that the president has not > > repudiated. > > > > President Bush promised in 2000 that he would lead a humble country, > > be a uniter not a divider, that he would make conservatism > > compassionate. He did not need to make such false promises this time. > > He was re-elected precisely by being a divider, pitting the reddest > > aspects of the red states against the blue nearly half of the nation. > > In this, he is very far from Ronald Reagan, who was amiably and > > ecumenically pious. He could address more secular audiences, here and > > abroad, with real respect. > > > > In his victory speech yesterday, President Bush indicated that he > > would "reach out to the whole nation," including those who voted for > > John Kerry. But even if he wanted to be more conciliatory now, the > > constituency to which he owes his victory is not a yielding one. He > > must give them what they want on things like judicial appointments. > > His helpers are also his keepers. > > > > The moral zealots will, I predict, give some cause for dismay even to > > nonfundamentalist Republicans. Jihads are scary things. It is not too > > early to start yearning back toward the Enlightenment. > > > > > > Garry Wills, an adjunct professor of history at Northwestern > > University, is the author of "St. Augustine's Conversion." > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 01:45:09 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 12:15:09 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: <1099685848.20563.452.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411051745392a46d4@mail.gmail.com> Greg, I know it's rude to ask someone to explain their vote, so mea culpa, and it's only a request, feel free to ignore it. However, if you are ok with it, could you please explain why you would vote for Bush in the circumstances you outlined below? Quite seriously, I can't understand why an extropian would make that choice, but also I am uninformed when it comes to US domestic politics, and maybe there's something I can learn from your position. In the spirit of reciprocity, I voted in the recent Aussie elections for the Australian Labor Party, in some way similar to the Democrats in the US (our equivalent of the GOP is the Coalition, made up of the Liberal and National parties, with the Libs being the major partner). Like your election, the Aussie election brought another term for the conservatives, but unlike yours, which was pretty close, ours was a total wipeout for Labor. As to why I voted the way I did, I've been unhappy with the conservatives since they gained power. I think they play to the fears and predjudices of our people, and have contributed to a cultural shift toward mean spiritedness. That's only my opinion, but that's the major part of my quibble. Another issue I do have with our government is that they strongly support the war in Iraq, which I most certainly do not, so there's another reason to go against them to my mind. On the economy, while I think our hospitals and public schools are underfunded, a lot of this is pretty minor stuff; mostly I think both parties are pretty similar there (as they are in most of the Western world these days I think). Both parties are into big spending, just in slightly different places, but the conservatives like to pretend that they are all about fiscal responsibility. So I guess as far as running the country internally, I don't see much to divide the two major parties here. If anything, Labor was more interested in talking about bigger public spending, which I didn't necessarily see as a good thing, but on the other hand the Liberals were happy to go on a major vote buying spree which amounted to the same thing. What I object to in the conservatives is that I see them as primarily responsible for what I think of as a continuing political/social lack of confidence on the part of the people of the country, which I would now call a world wide depression. It leads to support for these policies of warring overseas, closing the borders, viewing foreigners and each other with suspicion, and a generally bleak view of the state of the world. Blanket pessimism. It's the opposite to what I'd like to see as an extropian, because extropianism *requires* optimism. So, as a transhumanist and extropian, that's my reasoning for voting Labor on this side of the world. Reading back over what I wrote above, it's negative reasoning, isn't it? I voted against the conservatives, not for the "progressives". Labor these days to me feels like a party without much personality. Emlyn On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:56:01 -0600, Greg Burch wrote: > I've kept my mouth shut here (but certainly not elsewhere -- on my blog, for instance) since the election. I've seen that the Europeans and the Americans who voted for Bush need to vent: They're tired and scared. But I can't go on without registering that things like this article are part of the problem. It's hysterical nonsense from people who live entirely encased in a cultural bubble that includes zero contact with anyone with whom they disagree. Frankly, all the preaching about tolerance and diversity from people who live in such bubbles seems ironic at least and outright hypocritical at worst. How many times have I read and heard in the last few days that people in New York and San Francisco and Seattle and London and Brussels can't understand how America elected Bush? They can't understand because they have no intercourse with the people who voted for Bush. Their conception of huge swaths of American culture is a shallow caricature that would be funny if it wasn! > 't so sad. > > I'm an atheist. I'm a libertarian. I don't suffer from a lack of literacy or even education; I know that humans evolved over a period of billions of years -- imagine that! I didn't have to vote for Bush because I live in the capital of Red State America, Houston, Texas, so I had the luxury of voting symbolically for the libertarians. But if I'd lived in Florida or Ohio, I'd have voted for Bush. My liberty to be irreligious and follow Enlightenment values has not been curtailed and, contrary to what one would think from reading the New York Times, the LA Times, watching all but one of the major American news networks or reading basically all of the press in Europe, my liberty to be irreligious is not in immediate danger. > > GB > http://gregburch.net/burchismo.html > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Fred C. > > Moulton > > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 2:17 PM > > To: ExI chat list > > Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > > > > > > > > I saw this on a newsgroup and thought I would pass it on. While I doubt > > anyone would agree with it in its entirety I think it expresses some > > ideas in a way that I have not seen in the discussion of the past few > > days. > > > > > From: XXXXXXXXXXXXX.com (XXX XXXXXX) > > > Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.fandom > > > Subject: NY Times: The Day the Enlightenment Died > > > Date: 4 Nov 2004 07:41:41 -0800 > > > > > > I read this in today's NY Times and found it depressing but worth > > > sharing. I can't believe how depressed I am over this election. > > > > > > The Day the Enlightenment Went Out > > > By GARRY WILLS > > > > > > > > > Wills, Garry > > > > > > Evanston, Ill. > > > > > > This election confirms the brilliance of Karl Rove as a political > > > strategist. He calculated that the religious conservatives, if they > > > could be turned out, would be the deciding factor. The success of the > > > plan was registered not only in the presidential results but also in > > > all 11 of the state votes to ban same-sex marriage. Mr. Rove > > > understands what surveys have shown, that many more Americans believe > > > in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin's theory of evolution. > > > > > > This might be called Bryan's revenge for the Scopes trial of 1925, in > > > which William Jennings Bryan's fundamentalist assault on the concept > > > of evolution was discredited. Disillusionment with that decision led > > > many evangelicals to withdraw from direct engagement in politics. But > > > they came roaring back into the arena out of anger at other court > > > decisions - on prayer in school, abortion, protection of the flag and, > > > now, gay marriage. Mr. Rove felt that the appeal to this large bloc > > > was worth getting President Bush to endorse a constitutional amendment > > > banning gay marriage (though he had opposed it earlier). > > > > > > The results bring to mind a visit the Dalai Lama made to Chicago not > > > long ago. I was one of the people deputized to ask him questions on > > > the stage at the Field Museum. He met with the interrogators > > > beforehand and asked us to give him challenging questions, since he is > > > too often greeted with deference or flattery. > > > > > > The only one I could think of was: "If you could return to your > > > country, what would you do to change it?" He said that he would > > > disestablish his religion, since "America is the proper model." I > > > later asked him if a pluralist society were possible without the > > > Enlightenment. "Ah," he said. "That's the problem." He seemed to envy > > > America its Enlightenment heritage. > > > > > > Which raises the question: Can a people that believes more fervently > > > in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened > > > nation? > > > > > > America, the first real democracy in history, was a product of > > > Enlightenment values - critical intelligence, tolerance, respect for > > > evidence, a regard for the secular sciences. Though the founders > > > differed on many things, they shared these values of what was then > > > modernity. They addressed "a candid world," as they wrote in the > > > Declaration of Independence, out of "a decent respect for the opinions > > > of mankind." Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more, when > > > a poll taken just before the elections showed that 75 percent of Mr. > > > Bush's supporters believe Iraq either worked closely with Al Qaeda or > > > was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11. > > > > > > The secular states of modern Europe do not understand the > > > fundamentalism of the American electorate. It is not what they had > > > experienced from this country in the past. In fact, we now resemble > > > those nations less than we do our putative enemies. > > > > > > Where else do we find fundamentalist zeal, a rage at secularity, > > > religious intolerance, fear of and hatred for modernity? Not in France > > > or Britain or Germany or Italy or Spain. We find it in the Muslim > > > world, in Al Qaeda, in Saddam Hussein's Sunni loyalists. Americans > > > wonder that the rest of the world thinks us so dangerous, so > > > single-minded, so impervious to international appeals. They fear > > > jihad, no matter whose zeal is being expressed. > > > > > > It is often observed that enemies come to resemble each other. We > > > torture the torturers, we call our God better than theirs - as one > > > American general put it, in words that the president has not > > > repudiated. > > > > > > President Bush promised in 2000 that he would lead a humble country, > > > be a uniter not a divider, that he would make conservatism > > > compassionate. He did not need to make such false promises this time. > > > He was re-elected precisely by being a divider, pitting the reddest > > > aspects of the red states against the blue nearly half of the nation. > > > In this, he is very far from Ronald Reagan, who was amiably and > > > ecumenically pious. He could address more secular audiences, here and > > > abroad, with real respect. > > > > > > In his victory speech yesterday, President Bush indicated that he > > > would "reach out to the whole nation," including those who voted for > > > John Kerry. But even if he wanted to be more conciliatory now, the > > > constituency to which he owes his victory is not a yielding one. He > > > must give them what they want on things like judicial appointments. > > > His helpers are also his keepers. > > > > > > The moral zealots will, I predict, give some cause for dismay even to > > > nonfundamentalist Republicans. Jihads are scary things. It is not too > > > early to start yearning back toward the Enlightenment. > > > > > > > > > Garry Wills, an adjunct professor of history at Northwestern > > > University, is the author of "St. Augustine's Conversion." > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From gregburch at gregburch.net Sat Nov 6 02:20:03 2004 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 20:20:03 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411051745392a46d4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Emlyn > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 7:45 PM > > Greg, I know it's rude to ask someone to explain their vote, so mea > culpa, and it's only a request, feel free to ignore it. > > However, if you are ok with it, could you please explain why you would > vote for Bush in the circumstances you outlined below? Quite > seriously, I can't understand why an extropian would make that choice, > but also I am uninformed when it comes to US domestic politics, and > maybe there's something I can learn from your position. > > In the spirit of reciprocity, I voted in the recent Aussie elections > for the Australian Labor Party, in some way similar to the Democrats > in the US (our equivalent of the GOP is the Coalition, made up of the > Liberal and National parties, with the Libs being the major partner). snip -- an explanation of your vote for Labor in the recent Australian elections. > What I object to in the conservatives is that I see them as primarily > responsible for what I think of as a continuing political/social lack > of confidence on the part of the people of the country, which I would > now call a world wide depression. It leads to support for these > policies of warring overseas, closing the borders, viewing foreigners > and each other with suspicion, and a generally bleak view of the state > of the world. Blanket pessimism. It's the opposite to what I'd like to > see as an extropian, because extropianism *requires* optimism. > > So, as a transhumanist and extropian, that's my reasoning for voting > Labor on this side of the world. Reading back over what I wrote above, > it's negative reasoning, isn't it? I voted against the conservatives, > not for the "progressives". Labor these days to me feels like a party > without much personality. Emlyn, I appreciate the sincerity of your question and I'll try to answer it as clearly and succinctly as I can. What I won't do is get into a debate; feelings are too high and this really isn't a forum for such discussions in my personal opinion. The primary positive reason I supported Bush is his administration's foreign policy. Based on the fairly in-depth study of Islam and Arab history I have made over the last three years, I believe nothing short of harsh military action on a broad geographic and temporal scale will stop the rising tide of Islamofascism and Arabic violence. I am a strong supporter of Rice, Wolfowitz and the other "neocons." I have faced sharp criticism for this -- allegations that my libertarian opposition to the "Nanny State" has given way to support for a strong "Daddy State." I reject that criticism, but I acknowledge the kernel of truth upon which it is based. I'm a minarchist who reluctantly supports state action in defense of liberal civilization. Ironically, that is what the "conservative" Republican party stands for now in America. A blogger humorously pointed out that a Kerry victory in the 2004 election would have pushed the end of the war from 2020 to 2022 -- the two years it took the Kerry Administration to figure out that, although unpopular in Europe and on the left, the only strategy short of surrender is the one being pursued by the neocons. I know this will be a shocking sentiment to many who have been posting here for the last few days. To them all I will say is, "Tell it to Theo van Gogh." I believe Western feminists should be organizing the "Susan B. Anthony Brigade" of volunteers to fight in the Middle East. The primary negative reason I opposed Kerry is what I see as the class-based and race-based divisiveness of the Democratic Party. I believe the DP promotes a "victimology" that cripples American racial, ethnic and sexual minorities. The fundamental ideology of the American Democratic Party is one based on group identity, something I reject soundly. That's it in a nutshell. Obviously, my thinking goes far beyond this but I won't engage in an extended discussion of this matter in this forum: The noise level from such a discussion would be too high for my taste. There are plenty of other fora for such discussions and if anyone is interested in dropping comments into my blog, they're free to do so; I'm not shy about expressing my views there. GB http://gregburch.net/burchismo.html From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 6 02:27:47 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:27:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: <20041106022747.2177A57E2A@finney.org> I agree with Greg that much of the rhetoric in response to the election is exaggerated. The fact is that the vote was 51 to 48 percent. A tiny shift would have allowed the Democrats to win. Majority vote elections amplify small differences in the vote when parties are nearly balanced in their numbers. This was not an enormous turn to the right by the U.S. It was a small change, part of a slight rightward trend in the country. In fact, it may not have been a change at all, but rather the result of a much more vigorous get-out-the-vote campaign by the Republicans, who were determined to match Democratic grass-root organizational efforts this year. I suspect that there are institutional factors which tend to push parties close to the 50-50 split in two-party systems. A party which had a much lower percentage would soften its views in order to become more appealing and start playing a role in the process. A party with a larger percentage doesn't need so many supporters and so can afford to become more ideological. Because of such factors, the American system will always tend to be around 50-50, and so slight changes in the popular opinion can produce dramatic differences in election outcomes. Democracy is an OK system of government, but it does have some major flaws as an institution. There is little motivation for the average person to vote wisely. Normally his vote makes no difference in national elections, and in the extremely remote chance that it does turn out to matter, most of the benefits of a wise vote accrue to other people than the voter. We discussed that study here a couple of weeks ago where they showed how deluded Bush supporters were about various facts relating to Iraq. That is exactly what would be expected given our propensity for self- deception and the fact that politics is a social activity. The only potentially misleading part of the study was the implication that supporters of other ideological positions don't have their own blind spots. We all tend to be deluded about politics, because there is no incentive to be correct. This is where Robin Hanson's Futarchy concept seems to have great potential, http://hanson.gmu.edu/futarchy.html . In Futarchy, people are directly rewarded for informing themselves about the facts. They can predict the future more accurately and win more money. I'd like to see us start to use a system like this in some specific policy areas. The increasing attention to betting markets in the recent election could set the stage for this next step. Hal From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sat Nov 6 02:30:28 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 10:30:28 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411051745392a46d4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041106023030.9737BC452@vscan02.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Greg, I know it's rude to ask someone to explain their vote, so mea culpa, and it's only a request, feel free to ignore it. However, if you are ok with it, could you please explain why you would vote for Bush in the circumstances you outlined below? Quite seriously, I can't understand why an extropian would make that choice, but also I am uninformed when it comes to US domestic politics, and maybe there's something I can learn from your position. ---------------------------- Emlyn, You havent grasped the peculiar brand of "fundamentalism" adopted by US Libertarianism. There is zero chance of Greg's vote (whether libertarian or Bush) making sense to you....and there is less than zero chance of them seeing things from a perspective of someone outside the US. They live within the prism of The Death Star and have no empathy for anyone who gets in the way of their beloved Mothership, as long as someone else is doing the dirty work which runs against their US Libertarian values. They really mean "Libertarians for America, f&^k everyone else". It's quite amazing to see the private emails I get each time I post something critical of the US Libertarians on this email list, from people who have long ago despaired of having a useful discussion with them. They still lurk, being extropian, but no longer participate. I have reached that point also, in a very short space of time. After lurking here for a year, I started posting, then realised I could not hope to discuss the issues I hope bio and nano will address without being shot to pieces by the US Libertarians. Trying to argue almost anything with a US Libertarian strikes me as being similar to trying to argue about Israeli policy with the Bush Administration ("you are anti-semetic") or the nature of God with a fundamentalist religion devotee. The US Libertarians are only here because they personally want to live forever... And on that note, I'm outa here. I will no longer post. No doubt a few "good riddances" will be in order... But, a final parting shot across the bow: when I suggested on this list that the Rapture Ready mob are a major component of Bush's constituency, I was basically ridiculed. Yeah, right....spot on, folks. Don't see any of you retracting your stubborn "blindsides" now.... Sean From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Sat Nov 6 04:00:34 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 15:00:34 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <257720-22004115520541732@M2W094.mail2web.com> References: <257720-22004115520541732@M2W094.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <418C4C62.60109@optusnet.com.au> natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > I heard on the > news this morning that he [Bush] wants to privatize social security. What do you > think about that? I understood that the social security system can be considered a huge obligation on the part of the USA government towards those citizens who have paid into it over the years. If it is privatised how will the government fund the amount that they would have to pay private companies to take on that obligation? More taxes, or renege on the debt that is currently owed and start over privately? Either way their long term habit of spending rather than investing what were suppposed to be insurance premiums is going to come back and bite them on the arse. -David From zero.powers at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 05:44:55 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 21:44:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Secular worship In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7a321705041105214427de123a@mail.gmail.com> Thanks Amara. Very well written and thought provoking. I do realize that myths-as-metaphors-for-life can be useful, instructive and comforting. In fact I'm currently reading the Iliad, which strikes me as being as relevant to human nature and affairs now as when it was written. In fact it even seems to very nicely fit the bill as transhuman mythology, given the superhuman abilities of such demigods as Achilles. On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 15:44:12 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > > >> Of course I'd prefer to commune at a place that left all aspects of > >> fairy-tale belief out of the fellowship. If I could find a place as > >> inviting, loving, entertaining and dedicated to meeting the needs of > >> the local and global community as they are at Agape, but felt no need > >> to encumber that sense of community with fairy tales, that would be my > >> idea of a perfect place of secular fellowship. > > Samantha: > >What kind of fairy tales exactly? How about our own fairy tales > >full of grasping for what we and our "mind-children" will become and > >what will be necessary to get there? Not fairy tales necessarily but > >good working mythology and other tools of envisioning and living into > >being. > > Zero: Maybe there is something here that is helpful: > > Mythology for Transhumans > http://www.transhumanism.org/index.php/th/more/318/ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From amara.graps at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 06:17:30 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 07:17:30 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Iliad (was: Secular Worship) Message-ID: Zero: I think that the The Iliad is a good extropian book too. I don't know how to access the older database to give you a link, so I'll repost my old message here. Amara -------------November 21, 2001----------------------------------- To: extropians at extropy.org From: Amara Graps Subject: Homerian epics (was: French culture and extropianism) Daniel: Thank you very much for your feedback regarding my question about Jacqueline De Romilly and Jean-Pierre Vernant. Regarding your words about Odysseus: From: "Technotranscendence" , Thu, 15 Nov 2001: >For instance, with Odysseus, it may be true that he is different >from many other Greek heroes, BUT he is there nonetheless and in one >of their most celebrated and influential poems. Therefore, I don't >see him as less examplary. I see him, in fact, as a sort of break >with earlier heroes. The Greeks were still mired in the old, too, >but they also had this new type of hero -- a hero of the mind. >(Notably, Odysseus' strong suit -- in terms of character; it's >obvious he was no whimp and also had some gods on his side -- is his >>ability to think through just any situation.) So, I don't dismiss >him from the pantheon of Greek heroes, though he's very different >from most of the rest. I agree that he is an impressive character, and heroes _are_ important, however, he might be a little too 'clear-cut'.... As a story, _The Odyssey, is more approachable than _The Iliad_: it's a little like the adventure films we know with clear-cut characters. Odysseus struggles against external villains, seductresses, cannibals, his own mutinous men, the suitors in his home. In the process of returning home, he undergoes an 'internal pilgrimage' as well. I think that the complex character Achilles in _the Iliad_, has a large value to transhumanists because his situations are more similar to what we are now, and what we will face in the near future. Achilles' struggles are primarily reflections of his fight with the *beast within*. It's a confrontation with the tensions within human nature that lurk in us underneath our civilation's veneer. Achilles withdraws from his community, a ruinous existence, then wrestles his beast in a more ruinous way via his vengeance. The reader then see what happens when vengeance goes too far. When he becomes angry, his anger does not allow him to accept changes or shifts in attitude, and he embarks upon a murderous rampage. Yet he undergoes a startling transformation. After he is wronged and becomes angry, he withdraws from his environment, and, while alone, realizes that the entire martial system of honor is bankrupt and based on a lie. Achilles' heroism at his end is quite different than Odysseus' too: Odysseus regains his kin through the sheer strength of his spirit and the power of his genius; Achilles loses what family he had, to claim some new sense of honor well beyond a world that he wants no part of. As in most of the Greek classics, the following important ideas are presented: learning comes through effort, men are social creatures, human life is tragically short and therefore comes with obligations, character is a matter of matching words with deeds, religion is separate from and subordinate to politics, private property should be immune from government coercion, the truth only emerges through dissent and open criticism, the most dangerous animal is the beast within us, leaders ignore the will of the assembly at their peril. In the Iliad, these ideas are again presented, but more honestly than the other epic, and without apology and elaboration. Have a good Thanksgiving, and rest of December and New Years. Amara From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 6 07:06:25 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 23:06:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage Message-ID: <20041106070625.E205357E2A@finney.org> Saw an interesting posting today on www.dailykos.com, a well known left wing blog, endorsing the same idea that Mike Lorrey and Kevin Freels have been discussing, of getting the government out of the marriage business and letting it be a church matter. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/5/123023/403 Kos quotes, "Marriage should be a faith-based institution and we should turn it over to the churches. If someone doesn't want to be married in a church, then the Federal government can offer them a legal civil contract (this is a better name for it than civil union)... The Federal government could offer gays the same civil contract status as it offers straight people who want to shack up legally but without the sanction of a church," and adds, "Simple, and common sensical." I doubt that Mike Lorrey and Kos agree on much, but it's interesting that on at least this point they are on the same wavelength. Hal From zero.powers at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 07:12:54 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 23:12:54 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Iliad (was: Secular Worship) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7a3217050411052312a840e9d@mail.gmail.com> Fascinating. Those are quite similar to thoughts I've been having as I make my way (all too slowly) through the book. Zero On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 07:17:30 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > Zero: > I think that the The Iliad is a good extropian book too. > I don't know how to access the older database to give > you a link, so I'll repost my old message here. > Amara > > -------------November 21, 2001----------------------------------- > > To: extropians at extropy.org > From: Amara Graps > Subject: Homerian epics (was: French culture and extropianism) > > Daniel: > > Thank you very much for your feedback regarding my question about > Jacqueline De Romilly and Jean-Pierre Vernant. > > Regarding your words about Odysseus: > > From: "Technotranscendence" , Thu, 15 Nov 2001: > >For instance, with Odysseus, it may be true that he is different > >from many other Greek heroes, BUT he is there nonetheless and in one > >of their most celebrated and influential poems. Therefore, I don't > >see him as less examplary. I see him, in fact, as a sort of break > >with earlier heroes. The Greeks were still mired in the old, too, > >but they also had this new type of hero -- a hero of the mind. > >(Notably, Odysseus' strong suit -- in terms of character; it's > >obvious he was no whimp and also had some gods on his side -- is his > >>ability to think through just any situation.) So, I don't dismiss > >him from the pantheon of Greek heroes, though he's very different > >from most of the rest. > > I agree that he is an impressive character, and heroes _are_ > important, however, he might be a little too 'clear-cut'.... > > As a story, _The Odyssey, is more approachable than _The Iliad_: > it's a little like the adventure films we know with clear-cut > characters. Odysseus struggles against external villains, > seductresses, cannibals, his own mutinous men, the suitors in his > home. In the process of returning home, he undergoes an 'internal > pilgrimage' as well. > > I think that the complex character Achilles in _the Iliad_, has a > large value to transhumanists because his situations are more > similar to what we are now, and what we will face in the near > future. Achilles' struggles are primarily reflections of his fight > with the *beast within*. It's a confrontation with the tensions > within human nature that lurk in us underneath our civilation's > veneer. Achilles withdraws from his community, a ruinous existence, > then wrestles his beast in a more ruinous way via his vengeance. The > reader then see what happens when vengeance goes too far. When he > becomes angry, his anger does not allow him to accept changes or > shifts in attitude, and he embarks upon a murderous rampage. Yet he > undergoes a startling transformation. After he is wronged and > becomes angry, he withdraws from his environment, and, while alone, > realizes that the entire martial system of honor is bankrupt and > based on a lie. Achilles' heroism at his end is quite different than > Odysseus' too: Odysseus regains his kin through the sheer strength > of his spirit and the power of his genius; Achilles loses what > family he had, to claim some new sense of honor well beyond a world > that he wants no part of. > > As in most of the Greek classics, the following important ideas are > presented: learning comes through effort, men are social creatures, > human life is tragically short and therefore comes with obligations, > character is a matter of matching words with deeds, religion is > separate from and subordinate to politics, private property should > be immune from government coercion, the truth only emerges through > dissent and open criticism, the most dangerous animal is the beast > within us, leaders ignore the will of the assembly at their peril. > In the Iliad, these ideas are again presented, but more honestly than > the other epic, and without apology and elaboration. > > Have a good Thanksgiving, and rest of December and New Years. > > Amara > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From zero.powers at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 07:35:03 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 23:35:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? Message-ID: <7a321705041105233524ca677@mail.gmail.com> OK, I was obviously disappointed by the election results, and I admit I may have made a fleeting and half-hearted remark or two along the way (something about loving my country a little bit less, as I recall). But according to this story on NPR this morning there are some Americans who are actually thinking of emmigrating! Yeah, Europe is nice and New Zealand is beautiful. I've never been down under, but I hear it has its draws too. But actually emmigrating from the U.S. just because a dolt is in power? That seems to be taking things a little too far. http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=4145998 From moulton at moulton.com Sat Nov 6 04:42:39 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 23:42:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1099716158.20563.511.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 19:56, Greg Burch wrote: >But I can't go on without registering that things like this article >are part of the problem. It's hysterical nonsense from people who >live entirely encased in a cultural bubble that includes zero contact >with anyone with whom they disagree. As I said in my original post I doubted if anyone would agree with the article in its entirety so lets look at some specific items in the article: Item: "Mr. Rove understands what surveys have shown, that many more Americans believe in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin's theory of evolution." There seem to be several polls around that ask different parts of this question but part of the basis of this seems to be the 1998 Harris poll: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=167 which shows 83% of adult Americans believe in the virgin birth. There is also the Catholic World News online article http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=8294 which refers to the work of a University of Cincinnati professor that has "theistic" evolution at 40% and pure Darwinian evolution at 10%. See also the CNN column by Nicholas D. Kristof http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/15/nyt.kristof/ So based on the information I have found Garry Wills was not spouting hysterical nonsense but on the contrary seems to be correct. Next item: "But they came roaring back into the arena out of anger at other court decisions - on prayer in school, abortion, protection of the flag and, now, gay marriage." If you do a Google search for "+political +activism +conservative +christian +cause" In the first 20 links you get an article referring to the 30 year career of Donald E. Wildmon. http://www.theocracywatch.org/rallying_cry_times.htm And this political resource guide for the religious right http://www.peterlaitres.net/politics.htm I could provide more links but this is I think sufficient to demonstrate that the statement by Wills is not hysterical nonsense. Next item: "Respect for evidence seems not to pertain any more, when a poll taken just before the elections showed that 75 percent of Mr. Bush's supporters believe Iraq either worked closely with Al Qaeda or was directly involved in the attacks of 9/11." I could not find a poll that had exactly the same numbers as Wills sited. What I found was Oct 21, 2004 Harris Poll http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=508 which lists Bush supporters as believing: - Saddam Husein had strong links with Al Qaeda 84% - Saddam Hussein helped plan and support the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001 52% - Several of the hijackers who attacked the U.S. on September 11 were Iraqis 40% So based on this I would say that the numbers sited by Wills are at least in the ball park and not hysterical nonsense. So on the specifics I have examined Wills does not seems to be spouting hysterical nonsense. If you wish to restate your comment to say that only part of what Garry Wills wrote was hysterical nonsense then you may do so. However if you do claim that only part of the article Wills wrote is hysterical nonsense please provide specific citations and supporting references. Fred From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 6 07:54:27 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 23:54:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? References: <7a321705041105233524ca677@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000c01c4c3d5$d780cf50$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Zero Powers" > But according to this story on NPR this morning there are > some Americans who are actually thinking of emmigrating! > ... actually emmigrating from the U.S. just because a dolt is in power? That seems to be > taking things a little too far. > > http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=4145998 Yes, exactly. And Mark Morford's column today was responding to this very issue: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/11/05/notes110504.DTL&type=printable Olga From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 07:58:27 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 08:58:27 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: <1099685848.20563.452.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <470a3c5204110523586bec8dd0@mail.gmail.com> I think the keyword here is "immediate". Wait and see. G. On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:56:01 -0600, Greg Burch wrote: My liberty to be irreligious and follow Enlightenment values has not been curtailed and, contrary to what one would think from reading the New York Times, the LA Times, watching all but one of the major American news networks or reading basically all of the press in Europe, my liberty to be irreligious is not in immediate danger. From moulton at moulton.com Sat Nov 6 05:03:15 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:03:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041106023030.9737BC452@vscan02.westnet.com.au> References: <20041106023030.9737BC452@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <1099717395.20573.559.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2004-11-05 at 21:30, Sean Diggins wrote: ... > Emlyn, > > You havent grasped the peculiar brand of "fundamentalism" adopted by US > Libertarianism. > There is zero chance of Greg's vote (whether libertarian or Bush) making > sense to you....and there is less than zero chance of them seeing things > from a perspective of someone outside the US. Sean I think you may be painting with too broad of a brush. For example most of the folks behind www.antiwar.com are long time libertarian activists. Just on the topic of supporting Bush there are persons who call themselves libertarians with opinions ranging from: "Electing Bush is necessary for the survival of our way of life" to "Claiming to be a libertarian and supporting Bush is like claiming to be a vegetarian in the middle of eating a steak dinner" There are different subgroups of libertarians and many of these groups do not have much contact. So far outright hostility is at a minimum. Compare for example the opinions expressed by US Libertarian party and the anti-party opinions expressed on the http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LeftLibertarian/ And there is still debate by Georgists and others. It is not hard for someone to call themselves a libertarian and spout off. The more difficult task is to sort out what makes sense and what does not. Fred > They live within the prism of The Death Star and have no empathy for anyone > who gets in the way of their beloved Mothership, as long as someone else is > doing the dirty work which runs against their US Libertarian values. They > really mean "Libertarians for America, f&^k everyone else". > > It's quite amazing to see the private emails I get each time I post > something critical of the US Libertarians on this email list, from people > who have long ago despaired of having a useful discussion with them. They > still lurk, being extropian, but no longer participate. I have reached that > point also, in a very short space of time. After lurking here for a year, I > started posting, then realised I could not hope to discuss the issues I hope > bio and nano will address without being shot to pieces by the US > Libertarians. Trying to argue almost anything with a US Libertarian strikes > me as being similar to trying to argue about Israeli policy with the Bush > Administration ("you are anti-semetic") or the nature of God with a > fundamentalist religion devotee. The US Libertarians are only here because > they personally want to live forever... > > And on that note, I'm outa here. I will no longer post. No doubt a few "good > riddances" will be in order... > > But, a final parting shot across the bow: when I suggested on this list that > the Rapture Ready mob are a major component of Bush's constituency, I was > basically ridiculed. Yeah, right....spot on, folks. Don't see any of you > retracting your stubborn "blindsides" now.... > > Sean > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From amara.graps at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 08:11:13 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:11:13 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: Emlyn: >What I object to in the conservatives is that I see them as primarily >responsible for what I think of as a continuing political/social lack >of confidence on the part of the people of the country, which I would >now call a world wide depression. It leads to support for these >policies of warring overseas, closing the borders, viewing foreigners >and each other with suspicion, and a generally bleak view of the state >of the world. Blanket pessimism. It's the opposite to what I'd like to >see as an extropian, because extropianism *requires* optimism. (I agree) >From what you wrote above, let's consider one aspect of human optimistic endevour: NASA, which was put under the Department of Homeland Security in recent years. It's hard to make scientific work in such a environment. In general, my colleagues on this side of the Atlantic work together "as usual", the scientists I know work with each other fairly well. The only blockage I've seen and experienced is not political (at least not more than the usual), but is the low funds from their respective space agencies (ESA, ASI, DLR, CNES for example). So, therefore, when we work with each other, and exchange information, we don't need people in the corner checking documents to delete anything that is not compliant with ITAR (International Trade Regulations, i.e. US Defense Department). On the other hand, with NASA, there always is such a person or persons, and this is just a small example of what working with NASA entails. Documents, visits and face-to-face meetings at NASA centers and their contractors are full of rules, checks, prohibitions, massive delays, cancellations, suspicion, suspicion. Our NASA colleagues, and the US scientists elsewhere who work with them, are very tired of it all, but this is the new way under Department of Homeland Security, and they do their best to follow the new rules handed down from above. I've heard serious words in the last few years of people planning to jump ship and more serious words in the last few days. NASA was always bloated, slow, with a massive bureaucracy, but you could always count on the enthusiasm of the scientists to circumvent the small annoyances and do great things. I don't sense that enthusiasm very much now. In the last year, everyone watched the new focus at NASA under the direction of the Bush Administration to be "Moon and Mars," (NASA's "Vision of Exploration"... err, rename and, in practice, implement something different). What does not fit this niche is put on hold or cancelled. Think about the cosmologists. The acceleration of the expansion of the Universe is the biggest thing to discover in cosmology in many decades, and the cosmologists' funds are reduced or dropped. For space scientists, there is no longer a firewall between human space flight and space scientists, so the cost overruns from the ISS and the shuttle are experienced by the space researchers. No longer is it clear what scientific purposes are acceptable under the new "Vision." The Hubble servicing mission is affected by the reallocation of funds too. Do you think that NASA space science and astrophysics research can survive under another four years of the Bush Administration? Some don't think that it can. Amara P.S. I don't think I'm living in an insulated environment, I cross different groups of people, cultures, my close friends and family in the US, friends and colleagues scattered in the rest of the world, including in the (Middle) East. I ask a lot of questions, and I listen and observe alot with my own ears and eyes, going to the different places, when I can. My own political situation is exposed to the world governemnts: the Italian government put me through the same political procedure (fingerprinting, handprinting, palmprinting in addtion to the other papers, medical checks and so on) that they put citizens of dozens of other countries. When I complained of this to an Italian man I know who works at the European Space Agency headquarters, he said: "have you heard the expression tit-for-tat? Foreigners are routinely treated in the worst suspicious way by the US governement, so don't be surprised if other governments do the same to US citizens in response." I have no idea of it is true in Italy's case. I know I do experience a fair amount in my daily life of the effects of the Bush administration on the rest of the world. -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From amara.graps at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 08:55:36 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:55:36 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: the other half Message-ID: >http://www.sorryeverybody.com/ Strano.. the web site disappeared during the last ~9 hours and something completely different is in its place now. Google didn't cache it, unfortunately. I wonder if some malicious persons trashed the site. In case you missed it, the site was mostly a page of photographs -- young people holding up various signs apologizing, sometimes in colorful ways, for the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. I found it sweet and touching and funny. Amara From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Sat Nov 6 10:25:02 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:25:02 +0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] An odd discrepancy in exit polls in touch-screen electronic voting states In-Reply-To: <7a32170504110500065c447241@mail.gmail.com> References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> From: The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy By Thom Hartmann CommonDreams.org Thusday 4 November 2004 The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit polls that showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other states) weren't erroneous at all - it was the numbers produced by paperless voting machines that were wrong, and Kerry actually won. As more and more analysis is done of what may (or may not) be the most massive election fraud in the history of the world... Maybe Florida went for Kerry, maybe for Bush. Over time - and through the efforts of some very motivated investigative reporters - we may well find out (Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.org just filed what may be the largest Freedom of Information Act [FOIA} filing in history), and bloggers and investigative reporters are discovering an odd discrepancy in exit polls being largely accurate in paper-ballot states and oddly inaccurate in touch-screen electronic voting states. Even raw voter analyses are showing extreme oddities in touch-screen-run Florida, and eagle-eyed bloggers are finding that news organizations are retroactively altering their exit polls to coincide with what the machines ultimately said. The full text is at http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110604Z.shtml ==== And: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE http://www.legitgov.org/pressrelease_stolen_election_2004_110404.html CITIZENS FOR LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT (www.legitgov.org) Launches Investigation Into Discrepancies of 2004 'Election' Pittsburgh, PA: November 4, 2004 CONTACT: Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D. and Lori Price, clg_news at legitgov.org CLG Founder and Chair, Michael D. Rectenwald, Ph.D., calls for a thorough investigation into the discrepancies of the 2004 election. At the conclusion of its investigation, CLG may call for specified action(s) against the system that has provided for the theft of the 2000 and 2004 elections. CLG may demand prosecution of those that have laid the groundwork for the 2004 election, if such an investigation points to the conclusion that a second coup d'etat took place on November 2, 2004. (...) http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news Ohio Stolen (blog entry, gnn.tv) 2004-11-03 16:26:30 "Greg Palast and Randi Rhodes reported today that the state of Ohio was stolen by the Republicans in election 2004. Ohio was the critical state that tipped the balance, giving the presidency to Bush. Turns out one County in Ohio, equipped with Diebold electronic voting machines, reported NEGATIVE 25,000 votes. Wha?!? That's what at least one election official in Ohio said. The votes from that County are lost. Not counted. GONE!" ================= Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 14:53:38 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 06:53:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy In-Reply-To: <20041105185100.39643.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041106145338.38193.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Mike, i like your posts because you are direct, unfortunately directness does not mean lack of hypocrisy, if it did we would not be human, we'd be something much more virtuous. Now, keep in mind there is a difference between an intellectually dishonest person and a hypocritical person. The latter is universal; the former is less prevalent. Stating "I'm NOT a hypocrite" is tantamount to saying, "I have never done anything wrong in my life". Mike, however integrated you are, you are still human; if we are human, we are hypocritical. This discussion makes me feel like I'm back in Sunday School, 1964. > That is just it, Al. I'm NOT a hypocrite. I am > bluntly and sometimes > rudely honest, direct, and consistent in my > philosophy, principles, and > politics. Your liberal smear may work on > republicans, but it doesn't > work on me. My integrity stands like a monument, and > it has only one > side to it. Hypocrisy is two facedness. I only have > one face. You may > not like that face, but you can't accuse it of > hypocrisy. You may hate > that face, but that only makes YOU the hypocrite. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 15:04:24 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 07:04:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Nietzsche on Religion Incorporated In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041105104104.029368f0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041106150424.80184.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Thanks for the link, it's worth saving. BTW didn't Nietzsche once call common humanity 'fertilizer'? What is always in the back (and often up front) of my mind is Nietzsche's writing on the "will to power". When you think of how there are people in the world who would destroy the entire biosphere in a nuclear war, for the sake of pursuing power (though not necessarily power for themselves personally) it is enough to make you want to build a fallout shelter in the basement. >rehashing the sameo sameo of dusty classical > millenial mental > fertilizer which has not had time to decay enough > for the plants to use it. > Stuffy old Russell..... :< ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From megao at sasktel.net Sat Nov 6 15:14:52 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 09:14:52 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: the other half In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <418CEA6C.80908@sasktel.net> Amara Graps wrote: >>http://www.sorryeverybody.com/ >> >> > >Strano.. the web site disappeared during the last ~9 hours and something >completely different is in its place now. Google didn't cache it, >unfortunately. I wonder if some malicious persons trashed the site. > >In case you missed it, the site was mostly a page of photographs -- >young people holding up various signs apologizing, sometimes in colorful >ways, for the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. I found it >sweet and touching and funny. > >Amara >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > Seems like its back up , one selected picure at a time. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 15:36:58 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:36:58 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] An odd discrepancy in exit polls in touch-screen electronic voting states References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net><470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <001801c4c416$74bf1160$a51e4842@kevin> Of course. Every time and electin is won and it was fairly close, someone claims fraud. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gennady Ra" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 4:25 AM Subject: [extropy-chat] An odd discrepancy in exit polls in touch-screen electronic voting states > From: > > The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy > By Thom Hartmann > CommonDreams.org > > Thusday 4 November 2004 > > The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit polls that showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other states) weren't erroneous at all - it was the numbers produced by paperless voting machines that were wrong, and Kerry actually won. As more and more analysis is done of what may (or may not) be the most massive election fraud in the history of the world... > > Maybe Florida went for Kerry, maybe for Bush. Over time - and through the efforts of some very motivated investigative reporters - we may well find out (Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.org just filed what may be the largest Freedom of Information Act [FOIA} filing in history), and bloggers and investigative reporters are discovering an odd discrepancy in exit polls being largely accurate in paper-ballot states and oddly inaccurate in touch-screen electronic voting states. Even raw voter analyses are showing extreme oddities in touch-screen-run Florida, and eagle-eyed bloggers are finding that news organizations are retroactively altering their exit polls to coincide with what the machines ultimately said. > > The full text is at > http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110604Z.shtml > ==== > And: > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > > http://www.legitgov.org/pressrelease_stolen_election_2004_110404.html > > > CITIZENS FOR LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT (www.legitgov.org) Launches Investigation Into Discrepancies of 2004 'Election' > Pittsburgh, PA: November 4, 2004 > CONTACT: Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D. and Lori Price, clg_news at legitgov.org > CLG Founder and Chair, Michael D. Rectenwald, Ph.D., calls for a thorough investigation into the discrepancies of the 2004 election. At the conclusion of its investigation, CLG may call for specified action(s) against the system that has provided for the theft of the 2000 and 2004 elections. CLG may demand prosecution of those that have laid the groundwork for the 2004 election, if such an investigation points to the conclusion that a second coup d'etat took place on November 2, 2004. > (...) > > http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news > > > Ohio Stolen (blog entry, gnn.tv) 2004-11-03 16:26:30 "Greg Palast and > Randi Rhodes reported today that the state of Ohio was stolen by the > Republicans in election 2004. Ohio was the critical state that tipped > the balance, giving the presidency to Bush. Turns out one County in > Ohio, equipped with Diebold electronic voting machines, reported > NEGATIVE 25,000 votes. Wha?!? That's what at least one election > official in Ohio said. The votes from that County are lost. Not > counted. GONE!" > ================= > > Gennady > Simferopol Crimea Ukraine > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 15:50:48 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 16:50:48 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] China cooks up a genetically engineered rice storm Message-ID: <470a3c5204110607501ceb5cf2@mail.gmail.com> China, India and the Philippines are holding field trials after investing a lot of resources in genetically engineered rice. According to a Reuters report, Chinese agricultural scientists have said China - the world's top producer and consumer of rice - could release GM rice by next year, with pressure mounting on Beijing to boost domestic grain production and farmer income. But the same report also cited officials at the Philippines-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) as saying that the first commercial growing of GM rice crop could be at least three years away. The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Application, on the other hand, says most of the GM rice in the research pipeline will only be available for commercial use in five to eight years. Researchers in the field of biotechnology insist the aim of GM organisms is not to create monopolies or to introduce new farming techniques, but to try to improve nutrition and health in developing countries. http://www.checkbiotech.org/root/index.cfm?fuseaction=news&doc_id=9022&start=1&control=232&page_start=1&page_nr=101&pg=1 From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 15:54:48 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 16:54:48 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Biotech tide turns Message-ID: <470a3c5204110607547362fd6e@mail.gmail.com> California farmers woke up Wednesday to a possible high-tech future - and more battles ahead over genetically engineered crops. Voters in Butte, San Luis Obispo and Humboldt counties rejected bans on biotech crops, a serious setback for a national movement that wants to stop genetic engineering over safety and social concerns. Only Marin County adopted a ban in Tuesday's election. Using biotechnology, scientists can cut and paste DNA in ways not possible in nature. They can engineer plants to withstand weedkillers or to grow medicinal compounds. Proponents say genetic engineering reduces reliance on toxic chemicals and makes farming easier. "(Tuesday's results) certainly suggest that ag biotechnology is not really threatened in the United States," said Gregory Conko, director of food safety policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Libertarian-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C. http://www.checkbiotech.org/root/index.cfm?fuseaction=news&doc_id=9021&start=1&control=231&page_start=1&page_nr=101&pg=1 From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 16:03:05 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 08:03:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] cultural link Message-ID: <20041106160305.98631.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Piero Scaruffi has a site on many topics. What i like are his conservative (e.g. little grade inflation) music critiques. http://www.scaruffi.com ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 16:06:38 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 10:06:38 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage References: <20041106070625.E205357E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <002c01c4c41a$995fe950$a51e4842@kevin> Yeah, it's neat how that works. It's the same with many Libertarians. You get some agreement on both ends, dems and repubs. I don't agree with Bush on a lot of things, but we agree on a few things as well. I forget if it was Amara or Olga, but someone was trying to understand how and Extropian could vote for Bush and this is the reason. Those things that I disagree with Bush on, are largely out of his control. He may be against gay marriage, but I don;t see him dealing with the issue over the next 4 years. He may invoke God in his rhetoric, but Kerry does as well. I support stem cell research, but not the government funding of it - and I don;t see where he will be signing anything into law banning it in the next 4 years. Then there is the terrorism issue. The whole 9/11 thing started it's planning stages during the Clinton administration, so you can;'t say it is Bush's policies that cause this. Heck, remember the Iran hostages during the Carter admin? I think the terrorism issue is the single most important issue out there right now. Everything else is on th eback burner. I don;t see anything else major happening over the next 4 years, and I don;t expect any silly flag-burning amendments, anti-gay legislation, etc to be happening. So the only question I am concerned with right now as far as president is the terrorism issue. The question is whether we attack these bastards where they are, or if we sit and wait until they attack us here. As far as I know, Kerry supported the Bush stance until he ran for president. That's when he became the anti-war president. I assure you that I am anti-war, but you can;t just bury your head in the sand and pretend that these bastards are not out there wantingus to die. Nor can you prpetend you are anti-war when you really only changed your stance to get elected. One of my favorite lines from this campaign was Kerry when asked why he had talked of supporting the additional $85 billion to get flak jackets and other supplies for the troops yet voted against it, he responded "I voted for the $85 billion before I voted against it". Now what does that mean? No matter how anti-war you are, these bastards will gladly cut your head off and make a video of it. They hate me because I am American, and they hated me a long time before Bush and would continue trying to kill me if Kerry were elected. There is a right way to accomplish your goals and a wring way. The terrorists running around the world are doing it the wrong way. They are not doing it in an extropian way, so you can't oppose them in an extropian way. They have chosen a violent path, so we have no choice but to either bow down to them, or fight their way. I am truly sorry for those individuals that have died in Iraq, but it would have all been avoided if Saddam had simply went along with the UN resolutions and opened up as required by the inspectors. This was not a violation of his soverighnty either. He ruined that when he chose to attack Kuwait. Saddam acted like a criminal. He acted like he had WMDs. If he didn;t have them, which is still debateable, he sure went out of his way to act like he did have them. And if you remember, Kerry supported all of this until he became the anti-Bush president. I figure most opposition to Bush on this list is in regards to Bush's stance on the war, and on religious issues such as stem-cell research, gay marriage and abortion. If nothing will happen in the next 4 years on those issues, and if Kerry is really pro-war and lying about it, and Bush gives tax breaks to large corporation who just happen to be the same people we need to invest in new technologies, then how could someone vote for Kerry? I hope this helps those who really want to understand my POV. If someone is looking for a huge debate, IO won;t take the bait. I just know the question was asked here by someone who seemed to really want to understand, so I thought I would try to explain it in the few minutes I had.....Now it's time to go do that American thing.....shopping :-) Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: ""Hal Finney"" To: Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 1:06 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage > Saw an interesting posting today on www.dailykos.com, a well known left > wing blog, endorsing the same idea that Mike Lorrey and Kevin Freels have > been discussing, of getting the government out of the marriage business > and letting it be a church matter. > > http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/5/123023/403 > > Kos quotes, "Marriage should be a faith-based institution and we should > turn it over to the churches. If someone doesn't want to be married > in a church, then the Federal government can offer them a legal civil > contract (this is a better name for it than civil union)... The Federal > government could offer gays the same civil contract status as it offers > straight people who want to shack up legally but without the sanction > of a church," and adds, "Simple, and common sensical." > > I doubt that Mike Lorrey and Kos agree on much, but it's interesting > that on at least this point they are on the same wavelength. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 16:58:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 08:58:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <7a321705041105233524ca677@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041106165810.30784.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Zero Powers wrote: > OK, I was obviously disappointed by the election results, and I admit > I may have made a fleeting and half-hearted remark or two along the > way (something about loving my country a little bit less, as I > recall). But according to this story on NPR this morning there are > some Americans who are actually thinking of emmigrating! > > Yeah, Europe is nice and New Zealand is beautiful. I've never been > down under, but I hear it has its draws too. But actually > emmigrating > from the U.S. just because a dolt is in power? That seems to be > taking things a little too far. > > http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=4145998 Earlier this year, I heard a story about a family that moved from NH to Vermont because of the Free State Project. They didn't want to live in a Free State. So it does happen. In 2001, before I met Jason Sorens online, I was seriously considering whether to move to New Zealand or Alaska, and stocking up on equipment I'd need for homesteading in the wilderness. Living under Clinton had become that intolerable. I am entirely supportive of the idea that people should move to places where they can live in the political/cultural/economic system they are most amenable to. That is your natural right of expatriation, your right to travel, at work. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 17:07:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:07:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy In-Reply-To: <20041106145338.38193.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041106170716.15873.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > Mike, i like your posts because you are direct, > unfortunately directness does not mean lack of > hypocrisy, if it did we would not be human, we'd be > something much more virtuous. Now, keep in mind there > is a difference between an intellectually dishonest > person and a hypocritical person. The latter is > universal; the former is less prevalent. Stating "I'm > NOT a hypocrite" is tantamount to saying, "I have > never done anything wrong in my life". Mike, however > integrated you are, you are still human; if we are > human, we are hypocritical. > This discussion makes me feel like I'm back in Sunday > School, 1964. Sorry, I don't say one thing and do another (what hypocrisy is). Doing wrong is not hypocrisy if you believe what you did was not wrong, or if you feel that wrongness is okay. Since becoming a mature adult person, and becoming aware of my philosophical outlook, I have always (to my knowledge) done what I think is right, and I do what I say and say what I do, so long as I am not being coerced by the state or another person into doing or saying otherwise (in which case I am held harmless). That IS what integrity is. Being human does not mandate hypocriticality. You do have the ability to have integrity. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 6 17:10:34 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:10:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy Message-ID: <20041106171034.1550057E2A@finney.org> Al Brooks writes: > Mike, i like your posts because you are direct, unfortunately directness > does not mean lack of hypocrisy, if it did we would not be human, we'd > be something much more virtuous. Now, keep in mind there is a difference > between an intellectually dishonest person and a hypocritical person. The > latter is universal; the former is less prevalent. Stating "I'm NOT a > hypocrite" is tantamount to saying, "I have never done anything wrong > in my life". Mike, however integrated you are, you are still human; > if we are human, we are hypocritical. This discussion makes me feel > like I'm back in Sunday School, 1964. A hypocrite is someone who professes beliefs and values that he does not actually hold. So I don't know where you get the idea that claiming not to be a hypocrite means claiming never to have done wrong. I've been reading some articles on self-deception lately, though, and one of them claimed that often what looks like hypocrisy from outside may actually be self-deception. In other words, the hypocrite conveniently forgets or makes himself unaware of the fact that his actions don't match his words. Being a conscious hypocrite is uncomfortable and difficult for most people. It requires careful monitoring of one's words to make sure that true feelings don't leak out accidentally. This is stressful and requires considerable concentration and effort. Under those circumstances, it is natural for the mind to adopt the least-effort solution, which is to bury awareness of the incompatibility betweeen thought and action. In fact, this article suggested that it would be rather unusual for a hypocrite *not* to become self-deceived as a result of long-term practice of his hypocrisy. We generally condemn hypocrisy while being more forgiving of self- deception. We laugh when we read that 90% of people surveyed think they are above average at something; but we become angry when we learn that uber-moralist Bill Bennett has a gambling addiction. Yet it's possible that Bennett's moralizing was utterly sincere, and that he managed to forget or ignore his secret gambling problem when he talked about the importance of righteous behavior. Even in an extreme case, like a religious leader who solicits money for charity but spends it on his own expensive cars and clothes, he may have in his own mind a convoluted justification for how these expenditures are appropriate and will somehow help others in the long run. Self-deception is a mysterious and paradoxical phenomenon that is far more widespread than we commonly realize. This behavior pattern could go a long way towards explaining the apparent near-universality of hypocrisy. Hal From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 6 17:12:22 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:12:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] An odd discrepancy in exit polls in touch-screen electronic voting states In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <0623F703-3017-11D9-9C59-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 6, 2004, at 2:25 AM, Gennady Ra wrote: > The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit > polls that showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other states) > weren't erroneous at all - it was the numbers produced by paperless > voting machines that were wrong, and Kerry actually won. As more and > more analysis is done of what may (or may not) be the most massive > election fraud in the history of the world... Tinfoil hat nonsense and propaganda. As has been hashed out in slightly more technical forums, the polling methodology and internals on those early exit polls were badly broken. The supposed "Kerry lead" turns into a slight Bush lead when the internals are normalized, something that was pointed out by other bloggers in less than an hour of those exit polls being released. Not only were those exit polls very questionable in terms of sample population, no attempt was made to normalize the results of the skewed polling data to provide a more accurate picture. But more generally, that still doesn't explain how Bush managed to get significantly more votes than 2000 in many precincts run and controlled by the Democrat Party and where Diebold was nowhere in sight. Did the Democrats rig their own machines against themselves? Any voter fraud that went on this year clearly falls below the noise floor. It is not constructive to assume that Democrats automatically should win every election, and that if they don't it simply must be due to Republican fraud. j. andrew rogers From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 17:15:20 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:15:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] An odd discrepancy in exit polls in touch-screen electronic voting states In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <20041106171520.17585.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> This may be true. However, I want to state that at the Amherst, NH polls, where I held signs for my libertarian candidate from 6 am to 1pm, there was a NYT exit pollster who I was incredibly unimpressed with. In my opinion, his results could be no more counted on than an internet poll. If pollsters in general acted like him, it is no wonder results were off (oh, and NH is a paper ballot state, btw, with widespread reports of vote fraud from people jumping the border and falsely registering). This fellow gave his poll to two sorts of people: a) people who specifically came up to him that wanted to take the poll, and b) a handpicked few persons who I observed to be overwhelmingly what I would call 'obvious liberals', based on clothing, facial hair, etc. --- Gennady Ra wrote: > From: > > The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy > By Thom Hartmann > CommonDreams.org > > Thusday 4 November 2004 > > The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit > polls that showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other > states) weren't erroneous at all - it was the numbers produced by > paperless voting machines that were wrong, and Kerry actually won. As > more and more analysis is done of what may (or may not) be the most > massive election fraud in the history of the world... > > Maybe Florida went for Kerry, maybe for Bush. Over time - and > through the efforts of some very motivated investigative reporters - > we may well find out (Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.org just filed > what may be the largest Freedom of Information Act [FOIA} filing in > history), and bloggers and investigative reporters are discovering an > odd discrepancy in exit polls being largely accurate in paper-ballot > states and oddly inaccurate in touch-screen electronic voting states. > Even raw voter analyses are showing extreme oddities in > touch-screen-run Florida, and eagle-eyed bloggers are finding that > news organizations are retroactively altering their exit polls to > coincide with what the machines ultimately said. > > The full text is at > http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110604Z.shtml > ==== > And: > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > > http://www.legitgov.org/pressrelease_stolen_election_2004_110404.html > > > CITIZENS FOR LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT (www.legitgov.org) Launches > Investigation Into Discrepancies of 2004 'Election' > Pittsburgh, PA: November 4, 2004 > CONTACT: Michael Rectenwald, Ph.D. and Lori Price, > clg_news at legitgov.org > CLG Founder and Chair, Michael D. Rectenwald, Ph.D., calls for a > thorough investigation into the discrepancies of the 2004 election. > At the conclusion of its investigation, CLG may call for specified > action(s) against the system that has provided for the theft of the > 2000 and 2004 elections. CLG may demand prosecution of those that > have laid the groundwork for the 2004 election, if such an > investigation points to the conclusion that a second coup d'etat took > place on November 2, 2004. > (...) > > http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news > > > Ohio Stolen (blog entry, gnn.tv) 2004-11-03 16:26:30 "Greg Palast and > Randi Rhodes reported today that the state of Ohio was stolen by the > Republicans in election 2004. Ohio was the critical state that tipped > the balance, giving the presidency to Bush. Turns out one County in > Ohio, equipped with Diebold electronic voting machines, reported > NEGATIVE 25,000 votes. Wha?!? That's what at least one election > official in Ohio said. The votes from that County are lost. Not > counted. GONE!" > ================= > > Gennady > Simferopol Crimea Ukraine > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 6 17:32:37 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:32:37 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <418C4C62.60109@optusnet.com.au> References: <257720-22004115520541732@M2W094.mail2web.com> <418C4C62.60109@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: On Nov 5, 2004, at 8:00 PM, David wrote: > I understood that the social security system can be considered > a huge obligation on the part of the USA government towards those > citizens who have paid into it over the years. There are a couple problems: 1) The government and politicians like to promise things they have no means of delivering. And they are reticent to take something off the table once they've promised it. It is an odd "obligation" when one promises something one cannot possibly deliver. 2) The citizens want far more out of the system than they ever paid into it. TANSTAAFL. That the government is not exactly an efficient manager of such things means that the money runs out that much faster. So the problem with social security is really one of attitude and unrealistic expectations. People are demanding that the government make promises that can never be delivered on, and many politicians are willing to make such promises. And then there is the problem that it is completely broken in economic sense as currently implemented, and no one who has ever tried to cheat economics has won. Doing nothing guarantees failure and the longer nothing is done the more painful the change will be, but it takes a lot of political will to go against popular attitude and unrealistic expectations. Kerry was dead wrong on this issue, though it is unlikely Bush will do enough to really save the system. j. andrew rogers From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 6 17:43:00 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 12:43:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] An odd discrepancy in exit polls in touch-screenelectronic voting states References: <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net><470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com><4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> <001801c4c416$74bf1160$a51e4842@kevin> Message-ID: <004a01c4c428$22884b70$7bff4d0c@hal2001> I don't think there is anything odd in the exit polls getting it wrong and predicting a big Kerry victory. Because of either mendacity or stupidity the sample the pollsters used was 59 percent female, and women tend to vote more for Kerry than Bush; for men the opposite is true. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From jonkc at att.net Sat Nov 6 18:12:04 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 13:12:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy References: <20041106145338.38193.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008d01c4c42c$292963c0$7bff4d0c@hal2001> "Al Brooks" > unfortunately directness does not > mean lack of hypocrisy With talk like that you could almost give hypocrisy a bad name. If by hypocritical you mean having beliefs that are inconsistent then yes, we are all hypocrites; but by the same token, in 1930 Godel showed that even arithmetic was hypocritical. I don't want to brag but I think most of the time most of my beliefs are usually more consistent than not. Who could ask for anything more? John K Clark jonkc at att.net From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 18:12:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 10:12:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- "J. Andrew Rogers" wrote: > On Nov 5, 2004, at 8:00 PM, David wrote: > > I understood that the social security system can be considered > > a huge obligation on the part of the USA government towards those > > citizens who have paid into it over the years. > > There are a couple problems: > > 1) The government and politicians like to promise things they have > no means of delivering. And they are reticent to take something off > the table once they've promised it. It is an odd "obligation" when > one promises something one cannot possibly deliver. There is absolutely NO obligation involved. Supreme Court rulings have shown that Social Security is specifically a legalized ponzi scheme, run by the government, where your contributions are only considered 'gifts', which are distributed to the current recipients. The government is under no obligation to give you any money back when you retire. They could end it right now if they wanted to and not owe anybody a cent. The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its current form. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 18:40:13 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 12:40:13 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy References: <20041106145338.38193.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <008d01c4c42c$292963c0$7bff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <002a01c4c430$0e06af90$a51e4842@kevin> John is right here. I am often at odds with several people here, but they are generally very consistent. I would never accuse Olga, Amara, Mike, Hal, or even Samantha (whom I am very often at odds with politically) of hypocricy. Samantha and I disagree at fundamental levels, but she is still consistent, and that I can respect. Kerry on the other hand changed his position every time he was in a different crowd and I can;t respect that behavior for a president no matter what their positions. Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "John K Clark" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy > "Al Brooks" > > > unfortunately directness does not > > mean lack of hypocrisy > > With talk like that you could almost give hypocrisy a bad name. If by > hypocritical you mean having beliefs that are inconsistent then yes, we are > all hypocrites; but by the same token, in 1930 Godel showed that even > arithmetic was hypocritical. I don't want to brag but I think most of the > time most of my beliefs are usually more consistent than not. Who could ask > for anything more? > > John K Clark jonkc at att.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 19:02:18 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:02:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy In-Reply-To: <008d01c4c42c$292963c0$7bff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <20041106190218.2959.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Well, then more's the pity! From what Mike has written in the time I've subscribed to this list, it appears he is less hypocritical than most people. Mike is to be taken seriously, he's quite informed, but I don't take his version of libertarianism seriously- i'm not an impressionable adolescent who gets excited when someone pitches an exotic religion or an unfamiliar political philosophy. On purely economic grounds libertarianism is correct, the free market is most efficient. But so what. Humans aren't generally wired for the free market; were slowly becoming more liberty-oriented, yet the expansion of liberty is moving at a snail's pace compared to a human lifetime as we have known it. >In 1930 Godel showed that even > arithmetic was hypocritical. ===== Nixon in '08 -?he's tanned rested and ready __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 6 19:05:17 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:05:17 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:12 AM 11/6/2004 -0800, Mike wrote: >The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is >that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system >beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its >current form. As usual, I must be missing something here. If `social security' is shorthand for collective funding of pensions for the ill, the incapacitated and those made feeble by old-age, plus collective funding of some or all medical expenses, then `practical immortality' largely does away with the need for such a system. It could increase the need for spending on continuing education, say, assuming any jobs remain for humans, and that any humans remain in the first place. But I can't see why keeping everyone healthy and youthful would `bankrupt the social security system'. On the contrary, I think this is one of the great benefits of any negligible senescence treatment, and a major motive for governments to invest heavily in its development *before* the shit hits the fan. Damien Broderick From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Nov 6 19:23:39 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 14:23:39 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: IIUC, social security is supposed to start paying out at a certain age, no matter if you're healthy, sick, employed, retired, etc. Therefore, unless the age to start payouts is radically changed, social security will go bust very shortly after a large number of folks stay alive (thus collecting) longer than expected. In fact, I think this is already a good part of the problem. Note that congress has already been known to change the age at which one can begin to receive benefits... Regards, MB On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:12 AM 11/6/2004 -0800, Mike wrote: > > >The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is > >that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system > >beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its > >current form. > > As usual, I must be missing something here. If `social security' is > shorthand for collective funding of pensions for the ill, the incapacitated > and those made feeble by old-age, plus collective funding of some or all > medical expenses, then `practical immortality' largely does away with the > need for such a system. It could increase the need for spending on > continuing education, say, assuming any jobs remain for humans, and that > any humans remain in the first place. But I can't see why keeping everyone > healthy and youthful would `bankrupt the social security system'. On the > contrary, I think this is one of the great benefits of any negligible > senescence treatment, and a major motive for governments to invest heavily > in its development *before* the shit hits the fan. > > Damien Broderick > From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 6 19:24:26 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:24:26 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <78CC25C6-3029-11D9-9C59-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 6, 2004, at 11:05 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > If `social security' is shorthand for collective funding of pensions > for the ill, the incapacitated and those made feeble by old-age, plus > collective funding of some or all medical expenses, then `practical > immortality' largely does away with the need for such a system. Unfortunately, "social security" is a pension for anyone over a fixed age. Problematic, since it is funded by taxes and a greater and greater percentage of the population qualifies for longer and longer periods as life span increases. Most of the economic problem is in this definition. We are rapidly approaching the point where people receive the pension for more years than they worked to pay into it. To put it another way, imagine if everyone in the population was put on the dole for a third of their life, and that the fraction of their life the average person was on the dole was increasing every year. It is a very serious problem, economically. j. andrew rogers From reason at longevitymeme.org Sat Nov 6 19:31:11 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:31:11 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: --> Damien Broderick > At 10:12 AM 11/6/2004 -0800, Mike wrote: > > >The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is > >that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system > >beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its > >current form. > > As usual, I must be missing something here. If `social security' is > shorthand for collective funding of pensions for the ill, the > incapacitated > and those made feeble by old-age, plus collective funding of some or all > medical expenses, then `practical immortality' largely does away with the > need for such a system. It could increase the need for spending on > continuing education, say, assuming any jobs remain for humans, and that > any humans remain in the first place. But I can't see why keeping > everyone > healthy and youthful would `bankrupt the social security system'. On the > contrary, I think this is one of the great benefits of any negligible > senescence treatment, and a major motive for governments to > invest heavily in its development *before* the shit hits the fan. In a moderately sane system (libertarian ethics of wealth transfer to one side for the moment - personally I see insurance and savings as perfectly adequate the the task at hand in the absence of a medical and fiscal commons and suppression of freedom in these matters), where payments are keyed to level of disability, then yes, your points above are valid. Most current systems key payments to a given chronological age, however. Human nature makes it a fight to take an entitlement away from those entitled, whether they need (slippery word) it or not and regardless of long term damage to themselves and others. See: http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000088.php http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000103.php http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000151.php http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000057.php Reason Founder, Longevity Meme From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 19:33:18 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 11:33:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] link In-Reply-To: <20041106192308.7949.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041106193318.10270.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> scrolling about 7/8 down, this article discusses constraints on "pure" libertarianism. There's also a previous section on self deception. http://www.nationalreview.com/22dec97/mcginnis122297.html ===== headline: "Beheadings On Rise Around The World" __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 6 19:43:24 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:43:24 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106134058.01a12480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:23 PM 11/6/2004 -0500, MB wrote: >IIUC, social security is supposed to start paying out at a certain >age, no matter if you're healthy, sick, employed, retired, etc. >Therefore, unless the age to start payouts is radically changed As they surely will be, if the healthy old are plainly able to work, and eager to do so. It's not a natural law like the speed of light. >congress has already been known to change the age at which one can >begin to receivebenefits... Exactly. It's been creeping upward, and rightly so. Damien Broderick From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 20:06:46 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:06:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Delusions of Hypocrisy In-Reply-To: <008d01c4c42c$292963c0$7bff4d0c@hal2001> References: <20041106145338.38193.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> <008d01c4c42c$292963c0$7bff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041106120238.02948400@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Sorry. Inconsistency, Incompleteness and Hypocrisy are separate and definite terms. The world of human discourse is Inconsistent, permitting contradictory statements. Hypocrisy is about an inconsistency between what one says to others and one's personal beliefs. There is also the implication that being hupocritical proides some gain to the uttereer, sliding into the world of spin and deception. This is human motive, not a part of formal mathematical systems. At 10:12 AM 11/6/2004, you wrote: >"Al Brooks" > >>unfortunately directness does not >>mean lack of hypocrisy > >With talk like that you could almost give hypocrisy a bad name. If by >hypocritical you mean having beliefs that are inconsistent then yes, we are >all hypocrites; but by the same token, in 1930 Godel showed that even >arithmetic was hypocritical. I don't want to brag but I think most of the >time most of my beliefs are usually more consistent than not. Who could ask >for anything more? > >John K Clark jonkc at att.net > > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 20:09:38 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:09:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041106120732.029506b0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Remember that practical immortality will ensure that one will be able and willing to provide one's own means of income, and that the nanotechnical changes may well make most physical essentials of life negiblibly cheap. So SSI will vanish, a kind of Reverse Marxism if you will.... >The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is >that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system >beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its >current form. > >===== >Mike Lorrey ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From hibbert at mydruthers.com Sat Nov 6 20:07:02 2004 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:07:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] longevity and social security (was Extropian Scorecard) In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <418D2EE6.1010303@mydruthers.com> > At 10:12 AM 11/6/2004 -0800, Mike wrote: >> The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is >> that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security >> system beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any >> semblance of its current form. And Damien replied: > As usual, I must be missing something here. If `social security' is > shorthand for collective funding of pensions for the ill, the > incapacitated and those made feeble by old-age, plus collective > funding of some or all medical expenses, then `practical immortality' > largely does away with the need for such a system. Is it possible that that's the nature of social security in Australia? In the US, Social Security is an entitlement for older people. Doesn't matter how much money they have, whether they are employed or not, how fit or ill they are. It would be wonderful if I could believe that a small thing like increased longevity and improved health would cause the rules for Social Security to change, but the AARP (the old-folks lobby here) is one of the strongest in Washington, and they don't see any reason to allow any reductions in payments. Chris -- It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com http://mydruthers.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 19:57:30 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:57:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nietzsche on Religion Incorporated In-Reply-To: <20041106150424.80184.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041105104104.029368f0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <20041106150424.80184.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041106115519.02942550@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Yaah, but what I REALLY want is that my cryonics dewar be in an old missile silo or a deep underground air raid shelter someplace nice like Switzerland..... And for Nixon, don't forget embalmed.... At 07:04 AM 11/6/2004, you wrote: >Thanks for the link, it's worth saving. BTW didn't >Nietzsche once call common humanity 'fertilizer'? >What is always in the back (and often up front) of my >mind is Nietzsche's writing on the "will to power". >When you think of how there are people in the world >who would destroy the entire biosphere in a nuclear >war, for the sake of pursuing power (though not >necessarily power for themselves personally) it is >enough to make you want to build a fallout shelter in >the basement. > > > >rehashing the sameo sameo of dusty classical > > millenial mental > > fertilizer which has not had time to decay enough > > for the plants to use it. > > Stuffy old Russell..... :< > > >===== >Nixon in '08 - he's tanned rested and ready > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 6 20:13:36 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 12:13:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106134058.01a12480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106134058.01a12480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <5792A32C-3030-11D9-9C59-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 6, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: >> congress has already been known to change the age at which one can >> begin to receivebenefits... > > Exactly. It's been creeping upward, and rightly so. Not fast enough. The payroll tax that covers this is already around 15%, and that is independent of the normal income tax people pay on wages. And the Social Security tax as a percentage of income has been steadily increasing over the years to cover the increasing shortfalls. To keep this solvent, the minimum age does not need to be creeping upward, it needs to leap up to something like 75-78, and creep upward from there at a good pace. Otherwise, even with the upward creep, the social security tax will have to move into the 20-30% range just to keep it solvent. The problem is that no one wants to give up any social security benefits or increase the age they get theirs, except maybe younger people because they already know they won't be getting any. This isn't a problem for people already at retirement age, but it is economically devastating for younger people. The cumulative tax load keeps increasing to cover current entitlements such that younger generations find it increasingly difficult to accumulate savings. At the same time, the system will not be solvent when they get to their nominal retirement age. In essence, the current and soon-to-be retired generations are double dipping and leaving the younger generations with no social security and limited means to save for retirement on their own. And younger people, especially Gen-X and younger, are keenly aware of this situation. If it is not aggressively dealt with soon, this could turn into a kind of ugly inter-generational warfare thing. Older generations do not want to stop the gravy train and do everything politically possible to actually increase it where they can, and younger generations know they are being very badly screwed on this. j. andrew rogers From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 6 20:31:41 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 14:31:41 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] longevity and social security (was Extropian Scorecard) In-Reply-To: <418D2EE6.1010303@mydruthers.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <418D2EE6.1010303@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106141804.01c5c450@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:07 PM 11/6/2004 -0800, Chris wrote: >Is it possible that that's the nature of social security in Australia? Yes. `The Australian retirement income system still differs radically from that in most other countries, in relying heavily on a means-tested income maintenance system, rather than on social insurance.' http://www.natsem.canberra.edu.au/pubs/cp99/1999_006/cp1999_006.html >In the US, Social Security is an entitlement for older people. Doesn't >matter how much money they have, whether they are employed or not, how fit >or ill they are. I guess this had never fully registered with me (I understand that a lot of well-heeled Americans regard it as beneath their dignity to accept the pension). But I did notice that the pension entitlement age has been creeping upward in the USA, Australia and elsewhere, although meeting resistance. `A few countries, such as Sweden, have taken early steps to cover the cost of health care and retirement for their aging population. They have retooled retirement plans, tying benefits to contributions, raised retirement ages... In Italy, for example, people can retire at 57 and collect full benefits, if they have worked 35 years. The Italian government is pushing to raise the retirement age but faces opposition from unions.... in the 1980s, when the U.K. linked benefits to inflation, rather than to wage growth. The overhaul, carried out under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, also gradually raised the age at which women could get pensions to 65 by 2010. The nation had already done that for men.' (http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/retirement/2004-10-04-debt_x.htm ) Do note that Mike Lorrey and I were not talking about small increments in sickly life extension. The topic was *practical immortality*, or, more realistically, negligible senescence, perhaps with rejuvenation. This is not likely any day soon, and maybe the US Social Security system will have to adjust its terms of operation drastically before negligible senescence starts to kick in (if it ever does). Damien Broderick From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Nov 6 20:48:18 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 15:48:18 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] longevity and social security (was Extropian Scorecard) In-Reply-To: <418D2EE6.1010303@mydruthers.com> References: <20041106181239.25721.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <418D2EE6.1010303@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: Sigh. Of course people want to get out at least what they put in. After all there was/is this implication that it's "a trust fund" and "an insurance" - which it plainly is NOT. :C I have not joined AARP because I cannot agree with their agenda... which seems often to be "take take take, we deserve it" at the expense of any and every one else. Geez. Save your pennies, folks, you're gonna need 'em. Regards, MB On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Chris Hibbert wrote: > In the US, Social Security is an entitlement for older people. Doesn't > matter how much money they have, whether they are employed or not, how > fit or ill they are. It would be wonderful if I could believe that a > small thing like increased longevity and improved health would cause the > rules for Social Security to change, but the AARP (the old-folks lobby > here) is one of the strongest in Washington, and they don't see any > reason to allow any reductions in payments. > From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 22:56:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 14:56:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041106225659.77565.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > But I can't see why keeping everyone healthy and youthful would > `bankrupt the social security system'. On the > contrary, I think this is one of the great benefits of any negligible > senescence treatment, and a major motive for governments to invest > heavily in its development *before* the shit hits the fan. You are extremely optimistic to think that a government is going to be that smart and will actually implement such an optimistic solution. No, they will find that people will be living to 120 with ease, you will have three retired people for every working person. The word 'taxpayer' will become synonymous with 'slave' in future society and will be looked down on ("I remember when I was a tax payer, worst 40 years of my life.") ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 23:03:51 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 15:03:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106134058.01a12480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041106230351.72025.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 02:23 PM 11/6/2004 -0500, MB wrote: > > >congress has already been known to change the age at which one can > >begin to receivebenefits... > > Exactly. It's been creeping upward, and rightly so. Not fast enough. When the system was instituted, the average life expectancy was 62 while full vestment was 65. Today life expectancy is in the upper 70's, and even Clintons slight incrementally stepped revision of retirement age upward to 67 is not keeping up with the times. Today's retirement age should be 70 at least, and going up one year per 5 years until practical immortality is acheived, then 1 year per 2 years thereafter. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From extropy at unreasonable.com Sun Nov 7 04:30:39 2004 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:30:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fall party Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20041106232018.14895b58@unreasonable.com> Just enough time to sneak in a party between electoral furor and Thanksgiving. If you are going to be in the Boston area, you're welcome to attend. There's crash-space here, if you need it. You may be able to get a ride from NYC or other parts south; use the exi-east list to coordinate. If you're not around but coming to town in the future, let us know. We can usually lure a quorum of Bostropians. Also, I expect another in late winter; once a quarter seems about right. My house. Hudson, New Hampshire. A couple miles from the MA border and the Nashua malls. Roughly 20 minutes north of Rt. 128. Next Saturday, November 13. 2 PM until the last person not me leaves. OK to arrive late if you have other commitments; most everyone will still be here. (If the 20th is better, let me know. I've moved the date other times to maximize who can attend.) Anyone on this list is specifically invited. If you have someone else in mind, run it by me. It will probably be okay. Additionally, I will invite a few friends-of-extropy, such as sf writer, nano, LP, MIT, Alcor types. Bring to augment existing: food, drink; musical instruments; interesting stuff to show people. We'll order Chinese food at some point. RSVP to me and the exi-east list. -- David Lubkin. lubkin at unreasonable.com From brentn at freeshell.org Sun Nov 7 05:30:31 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 00:30:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041106225659.77565.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/6/04 14:56) Mike Lorrey wrote: >You are extremely optimistic to think that a government is going to be >that smart and will actually implement such an optimistic solution. No, >they will find that people will be living to 120 with ease, you will >have three retired people for every working person. The word 'taxpayer' >will become synonymous with 'slave' in future society and will be >looked down on ("I remember when I was a tax payer, worst 40 years of >my life.") I think the real issue here is the concept of "young and healthy" folks in their 90's-100's. We live in a society where geriatric health issues begin cropping up in the late 50's - pushing biological youth out to twice that age would yield an incredible shift in culture. Its not inconceivable that a senescence treatment that kept someone youthful right up until their death would entirely remove the pressure for retirement welfare. Just a thought. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From zero.powers at gmail.com Sun Nov 7 06:16:14 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 22:16:14 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <20041106165810.30784.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <7a321705041105233524ca677@mail.gmail.com> <20041106165810.30784.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7a321705041106221634b4c1aa@mail.gmail.com> Mike I'm curious. What was it exactly that you found to be so intolerable about living in the U.S. during Clinton's presidency that made you consider emmigration? Zero On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 08:58:10 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > --- Zero Powers wrote: > > > OK, I was obviously disappointed by the election results, and I admit > > I may have made a fleeting and half-hearted remark or two along the > > way (something about loving my country a little bit less, as I > > recall). But according to this story on NPR this morning there are > > some Americans who are actually thinking of emmigrating! > > > > Yeah, Europe is nice and New Zealand is beautiful. I've never been > > down under, but I hear it has its draws too. But actually > > emmigrating > > from the U.S. just because a dolt is in power? That seems to be > > taking things a little too far. > > > > http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=4145998 > > Earlier this year, I heard a story about a family that moved from NH to > Vermont because of the Free State Project. They didn't want to live in > a Free State. > > So it does happen. In 2001, before I met Jason Sorens online, I was > seriously considering whether to move to New Zealand or Alaska, and > stocking up on equipment I'd need for homesteading in the wilderness. > Living under Clinton had become that intolerable. > > I am entirely supportive of the idea that people should move to places > where they can live in the political/cultural/economic system they are > most amenable to. That is your natural right of expatriation, your > right to travel, at work. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 14:36:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 06:36:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <7a321705041106221634b4c1aa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041107143658.77486.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Zero Powers wrote: > Mike > > I'm curious. What was it exactly that you found to be so intolerable > about living in the U.S. during Clinton's presidency that made you > consider emmigration? That congressmonsters like Henry Waxman wanted to pass a law declaring me a 'threat to national security' for owning a .50 caliber rifle (a muzzleloader deer rifle, in fact, but in violation of his law if it had passed). That people like Waxman, Feinstein, Schumer, Lautenberg, Kennedy, Kerry, et al wanted people like me (i.e. gun owners generally, and machine gun owners specifically) arrested, reeducated, and have our property confiscated and destroyed. That people like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al and Tipper Gore, Janet Reno, and others in the highest seats of government, agreed with them. That they wanted, and tried, to institute taxes of $200 on every bullet sold, ban semi-automatic firearms, particularly handguns, nationwide, institute 'gun free zones' so broad that a law abiding person could not avoid breaking the law multiple times in their normal course of driving around their own community in an average day. That they thorougly approved of the use of SWAT team tactics in invading homes based on the flimsiest of evidence (testimony of drug dealers looking for a deal and inventing addresses) shooting the occupants dead, and declaiming any liability or responsibility for the screw up. That they approved of taking a child from an American home, whose mother died so he could live free, and shipping him back into slavery in one of the most despotic nations on the planet. That they colluded to nationalize the entire health care system of this nation. That they instituted curricula in the public schools programming children with lies about environmental issues, American history, the US Constitution, the costs vs. benefits of technology, communist infiltration, among a host of other areas of propaganda. I was a bit heartened by Bush getting elected in 2000. He ranked as the second most libertarian candidate on the ballot, after Harry Browne. Ashcroft's announcement that the 2nd amendment was an individual right helped, though his insistence that the words "shall not be infringed" have no legal meaning in refusing to reject, nonenforce, or seek repeal of the 20,000 gun control laws on the books was discouraging. I didn't think, though, that Bush could accomplish a whole lot. The left only needed a patsy to off him with a gun to screw everything up if he actually made progress (like they did with Reagan), and of course, 9.11 happened. I think Bush is now distinctly aware of the threat posed not only by the islamofascist movement (as Greg Burch spoke of yesterday), but the international radical left, led by the 5th Communist International, which organized out of the ashes of the Soviet Union and eastern europe. It is my contention that the 5th, along with the Chinese, are using the islamofascists to blunt the strength and competetiveness of the US leading up to some attempt by China to retake Taiwan some time in the next decade, if not the next four years, coupled with attempts at new communist revolutions in a number of nations where opposition to 'globalization' is highest. The multiplication of threats and fronts is a definite strategy which should result in at least some victories for the left. The international left was counting on a passive Kerry in office, who would not come to the aid of allies, and would work to weaken American defenses and resolve ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 7 17:45:56 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:45:56 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <20041107143658.77486.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <7a321705041106221634b4c1aa@mail.gmail.com> <20041107143658.77486.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107114003.01a521e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:36 AM 11/7/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: >I didn't think, though, that Bush could accomplish a whole lot. The >left only needed a patsy to off him with a gun to screw everything up >if he actually made progress (like they did with Reagan), and of >course, 9.11 happened... > >It is my contention that the 5th, along with the Chinese, are >using the islamofascists to blunt the strength and competetiveness of >the US ... > >The international left was counting on a passive Kerry in office, who >would not come to the aid of allies, and would work to weaken American >defenses and resolve This analysis does not go far enough, however, since it omits the key role of the reptiloids and the International Lemurian Conspiracy in their insidious schemes with the feminazis. Damien Broderick From sjvans at ameritech.net Sun Nov 7 18:00:54 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 10:00:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <20041107143658.77486.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041107180054.18104.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > owning a .50 > caliber rifle *********** > i.e. gun owners > generally, and > machine gun owners specifically) arrested, *********** > taxes of > $200 on every bullet > sold, ban semi-automatic firearms, particularly > handguns, nationwide, > institute 'gun free zones' *********** > That they thorougly approved of the use of SWAT team > tactics in *********** > shipping him > back into slavery *********** >colluded to nationalize the entire health care system >of this nation. *********** > programming > children with lies about environmental issues, > American history, the US > Constitution, the costs vs. benefits of technology, Just out of curiosity, just where could you possibly emmigrate that would not be the same on these issues or likely worse? Or was this to just be a futile gesture of disapproval? At least there is some logic to lefties wanting to go to Canada, since it does seem more in line with what they want. I'm actually serious. Did you find a place that addressed your concerns (I share most of them)? I'd really like to know. There are other reasons I *don't* want to emmigrate, but if such a place existed I'd sure want to visit. Hmmmm, maybe a vacation home? steve From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 7 18:15:06 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 12:15:06 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <20041107180054.18104.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041107143658.77486.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <20041107180054.18104.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107121357.01cbc640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:00 AM 11/7/2004 -0800, Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: >--- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > owning a .50 > > caliber rifle > >*********** > > > i.e. gun owners > > generally, and > > machine gun owners specifically) arrested, > >*********** > > > taxes of > > $200 on every bullet > > sold, ban semi-automatic firearms, particularly > > handguns, nationwide, > > institute 'gun free zones' > >*********** > > > That they thorougly approved of the use of SWAT team > > tactics in > >*********** > > > shipping him > > back into slavery > >*********** > > >colluded to nationalize the entire health care system > >of this nation. > >*********** > > > programming > > children with lies about environmental issues, > > American history, the US > > Constitution, the costs vs. benefits of technology, > >Just out of curiosity, just where could you possibly >emmigrate that would not be the same on these issues >or likely worse? Somalia's good. Damien Broderick From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 7 18:24:43 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 18:24:43 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fleeing Bush's America?!? In-Reply-To: <20041107180054.18104.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041107143658.77486.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <20041107180054.18104.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 10:00:54 -0800 (PST), Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > > Just out of curiosity, just where could you possibly > emmigrate that would not be the same on these issues > or likely worse? Or was this to just be a futile > gesture of disapproval? At least there is some logic > to lefties wanting to go to Canada, since it does seem > more in line with what they want. > Well it is certainly not England. We are not even allowed to have a big stick as a weapon. And even just bad-mouthing someone can get you arrested. (Depending on exactly which words you used). Teachers are not allowed to touch pupils if they want to restrain them when they are behaving badly. And they definitely don't touch them in a friendly manner in case they are accused of inappropriate touching (implying paedophile tendencies). You are not permitted to chase youths that cause damage to your garden or car. All you can do is ask them to stop it, or call the police (who might well not bother to turn up as it is not serious enough). If you strike them to chase them away, you are the one who will be arrested for causing actual bodily harm. This is turning in to a rant. I'd better stop it now. :) BillK From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Nov 7 18:31:31 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:31:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Aubrey De Grey On A Cure For Aging Message-ID: <470a3c520411071031f6924de@mail.gmail.com> Via Longevity meme: From the Life Extension Foundation News: "Aubrey de Grey reckons 'we have a 50-50 chance of developing a human rejuvenation therapy that works.' His timetable calls for 10 years to prove the scheme works for mice, and another five years to apply the techniques to humans. From then on, 'radical life extension' will mean 'the indefinite postponement of aging.'" On the other side of the coin: "Olshansky believes it is misguided to regard aging as a 'disease' that can be 'fixed.' Instead, he sees it as the inevitable result of irreparable cellular damage that is a byproduct of living." Olshansky's views are widely regarded as indefensible - some cellular damage can already be repaired, and the research required to repair the rest is not a mystery. http://www.longevitymeme.org/news/view_news_item.cfm?news_id=1301 From jef at jefallbright.net Sun Nov 7 18:33:53 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 10:33:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creationism in Science Class -- What an opportunity! Message-ID: <418E6A91.2040303@jefallbright.net> An item in the LA Times today reports the following: Creationism in Science Class Angers Educators GRANTSBURG, Wis. ? The city's school board has revised its science curriculum to allow the teaching of creationism, prompting an outcry from more than 300 educators who urged that the decision be reversed. School board members decided that a state law governing the teaching of evolution was too restrictive. The science curriculum "should not be totally inclusive of just one scientific theory," said Joni Burgin, superintendent of the district of 1,000 students in northwest Wisconsin. As I read this I thought, "Here we go, further erosion of scientific teaching in our schools. Maybe gaining momentum with the recent political gains of the religious right." And then with growing realization, "What an opportunity!" What an opportunity to stimulate discussion and rational thinking via comparison in the classroom of evolutionary theory and creationist thinking! Those of us who are passionate about opportunities for open discussion of rational thinking and a scientific approach to knowledge should welcome this whole-heartedly and hope that it continues to spread widely and long enough to be effective. Why is this a good thing? * Greater awareness naturally tends to greater rationality. * Greater awareness among wider populations tends to accelerate the process of increasing rationality. It's natural selection, part of the evolutionary process at question here. Ironic, isn't it? Let's promote it, and let it grow. I'm not so naive as to disregard the concern of these teachers and administrators that this looks like a political step backward in the contest between science and fundamentalism. But in the bigger picture, it's a pragmatic plus. As to the concern expressed by teachers that this will increase confusion among some of the students, I hope they can see that true teaching embraces confusion as one of the early steps toward greater understanding. To withhold potentially confusing information in the process of education is to shirk one's duty as an educator, and to play the game of transmitting only the revealed truth of one side or the other. I'm also aware that many teachers suffer under limitations of time and resources and feel that this is just one more imposition on their time by an administration that doesn't understand their needs. But for those inspired teachers who look beyond their lesson plans and see their mission as one of planting seeds of knowledge to grow and flourish in the minds of our children, this is the time to perform a masterful judo move and direct the oncoming momentum in a very desirable direction. - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net/node/view/2921 --------------------------------------------------------------- Creationism in Science Class Angers Educators GRANTSBURG, Wis. ? The city's school board has revised its science curriculum to allow the teaching of creationism, prompting an outcry from more than 300 educators who urged that the decision be reversed. School board members decided that a state law governing the teaching of evolution was too restrictive. The science curriculum "should not be totally inclusive of just one scientific theory," said Joni Burgin, superintendent of the district of 1,000 students in northwest Wisconsin. Last month, when the board examined its science curriculum, language was added calling for "various models/theories" of origin to be incorporated. The decision provoked more than 300 biology and religious studies faculty members to write a letter last week urging the board to reverse the policy. It follows a letter from 43 deans at Wisconsin public universities. "Insisting that teachers teach alternative theories of origin in biology classes takes time away from real learning, confuses some students and is a misuse of limited class time and public funds," said Don Waller, a botanist at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Wisconsin law mandates that evolution be taught, but school districts are free to create their own curricular standards, said Joe Donovan of the state Department of Public Instruction. There have been scattered efforts for other boards to adopt similar measures. Last month the Dover Area School Board in Pennsylvania voted to require the teaching of alternative theories to evolution, including "intelligent design" ? the idea that life is too complex to have developed without a creator. In 1999, the state education board in Kansas deleted most references to evolution. The decision was reversed in 2001. In March, the Ohio Board of Education narrowly approved a lesson plan that some critics contended opens the door to teaching creationism. From scerir at libero.it Sun Nov 7 18:59:39 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:59:39 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] USAF & PQT References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041105160023.01ab0760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <005101c4c4fb$ef6781f0$deb61b97@administxl09yj> PQT = Psychic Quantum Teleportation (of course) AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CA 'Teleportation Physics Study' http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf (long 'review' paper, about 88 pages) by Eric W. Davis (Warp Drive Metrics, Las Vegas) http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20041106/living/28378.shtml (popularization) :s) "According to David Hume causality is based on nothing more than the observed constant conjunction of two or more kinds of events, say A and B. It is a mere habit we have to call the earlier of the occurrences, say A, the cause, and the later, B, the effect; no relation of necessity, nor even of likelihood, of a B's succeeding an A in the future can be deduced.' - D. Atkinson 'We would like to think of teleportation as the transmission of quantum information from A to B. If we accept the intuitively appealing tenet that a transfer of information from sender to receiver must always be mediated by a channel connecting the two participants, teleportation appears paradoxical: If only two classical bits were sent, how did the full quantum information pass from A to B? Looking at the standard space-time diagram of the teleportation process, we see that there is indeed a second (V-shaped) path connecting A to B, which is defined by the two world lines of the distributed EPR particle pair. This leads to an intriguing interpretation (first proposed by Bennett soon after the discovery of teleportation): In addition to the two bits, the remaining quantum information must have been propagated backward in time from A to the EPR source and thence forward in time to B. Indeed, if we insist that information transmission requires a physical channel, there appears to be no other possible interpretation of the teleportation process! It is remarkable that this interpretation is entirely consistent: The principles of quantum measurement theory imply that the information sent backward in time is random and independent of the teleported state, so long as the two classical bits remain unknown. Hence, the well-known classical causal paradoxes of backward-in-time information propagation are neatly circumvented. This analysis, inspired by our informational point of view, also reveals a new significance for entanglement in quantum theory (beyond the traditional issues of nonlocal correlations of measurement outcomes): Entanglement can be viewed as providing a channel for the transmission of quantum information.' - R. Jozsa From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 7 19:11:55 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:11:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041105165332.19656.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002201c4c4fd$a634baa0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > You know, I was thinking about this very thing today ... this "great > > divide" that is pulling Americans apart is about freedom and control. > > > Loosely speaking (yet seriously speaking) Republicans in office today > > want *control* over people, and Democracts want more *freedom*. > > This is so wrong I nearly don't know where to start. Democratic > Governor-elect John Lynch here bused up teamsters to beat up republican > campaigners, they vandalized campaign signs all over the state, and > border jumped on election day to steal the election here. > > Before taking office he's announced he'll ban expansion of the Mount > Sunapee resort to appease the tree huggers. He's proposed $800 million > in new spending with no way to pay for it. He'll have to double tax > rates to pay for it. Some 'freedom'. An anecdotal story does not constitute proof. Furthermore, I live in a forest of skyscrapers, and have no alliance with "tree huggers" (whoever they are). Somewhat like the technique Michael Moore uses (except for the "libertarian" side), you seem to like to puke out a litany of phrases that you attribute to *all* liberals, but that activity ends up signifying nothing. If you want to talk *spending* (everything from the sacred to the profane), observe: the $8,000 tax payers spent on draping the Statue of Justice's bare-naked breasts (this would be at the "sacred" end of the spectrum IMO - but then I am a First Amendment absolutist) - furthermore, in your opinion, is this "freedom" or is this an attempt to "control?": http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?artid=26&file=index&name=Sections&op=modload&req=printpage the obscene costs of the Iraq war (and the incalculable cost of all the lives lost): http://www.costofwar.com/ http://www.ips-dc.org/iraq/failedtransition/index.htm http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/ Even conservatively, $50,000,000,000 billion was the tab Wolfowitz predicted: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/iraqwar/2002063971_iraqaudit15.html While I sympathize with the Case of the Missing Campaign signs in your bailiwick, what do you have to say about the lives lost in the Iraq war, the costs of this war ... and the powerlessness of the dead? Olga From marudubshinki at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 19:55:21 2004 From: marudubshinki at yahoo.com (Maru) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:55:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nietzsche on Religion Incorporated In-Reply-To: <200411061900.iA6J09004686@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20041107195521.78938.qmail@web14713.mail.yahoo.com> Yeah, but did Nietzche mean fertilizer as in dung, or fertilizer as necessary ingredient, base of the pillar, which will help athe more beautiful stuff grow (which themselves will eventually ebcome fertilizer.)? ~Maru --- extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org wrote: > From: Al Brooks > Thanks for the link, it's worth saving. BTW didn't > Nietzsche once call common humanity 'fertilizer'? > What is always in the back (and often up front) of my > mind is Nietzsche's writing on the "will to power". > When you think of how there are people in the world > who would destroy the entire biosphere in a nuclear > war, for the sake of pursuing power (though not > necessarily power for themselves personally) it is > enough to make you want to build a fallout shelter in > the basement. > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From amara.graps at gmail.com Sun Nov 7 20:13:52 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 21:13:52 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Science Experiments for Kids Message-ID: Some possibly useful links. http://homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/explore/sci.htm Science Experiments For Kids Simple, easy, cheap experiments and science fair projects you can do at home using the scientic method. --------------- http://rivoli1.scuole.piemonte.it/linkscienze/LINK%20SCIENZE.htm Here's a metalinks page (in Italian) for science experiments and demonstrations for kids ----------------- I found these two delightful children's science experiments books (in Italian) at a garage sale: Divertiamoci con la Scienza 1 by Brenda Walpole, DeAgostini, 1994 Divertiamoci con la Scienza 2 by Tery Cash and Steve Parker, DeAgostini, 1994 Which were probably translated from these older books in English: Fun with Science by Walpole http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0862722411/ More Fun with Science by Parker et al http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/086272578X/ Enjoy... -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Sun Nov 7 21:36:08 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:36:08 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard Message-ID: <1099863368.708ec6a0namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Mike Lorrey wrote: "The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its current form." The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is not dying. :) -Nicq MacDonald From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Nov 7 21:46:48 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 13:46:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <1099863368.708ec6a0namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Message-ID: <000b01c4c513$49274f60$6600a8c0@brainiac> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicholas Anthony MacDonald" > Mike Lorrey wrote: > "The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is > that its primary impact will be to bankrupt the social security system > beyond the ability of any government to fix it in any semblance of its > current form." > > The one thing I'm looking forward to about practical immortality is not dying. :) What you said reminded me of what I just read in (the Sunday supplement) Parade magazine regarding the just-turned 90-year-old Jack LaLanne. LaLanne said he has to stay alive as, "Death would ruin my image." Olga From neptune at superlink.net Sun Nov 7 21:59:08 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:59:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <1099863368.708ec6a0namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Message-ID: <001701c4c515$0260cd20$39893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 07, 2004 4:36 PM Nicholas Anthony MacDonald namacdon at ole.augie.edu wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > "The one thing I'm looking forward to > about practical immortality is that its > primary impact will be to bankrupt the > social security system beyond the > ability of any government to fix it in > any semblance of its current form." > > The one thing I'm looking forward to > about practical immortality is not dying. :) I'm actually looking forward to _living_ even more.:) Regards, Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html "... the world we call. the modern world. The world that tries to be clever. The world of the intelligent, of the advanced, of those who know, who have nothing more to learn. The world of those who are not had on by fools. Like us. That is to say: the world of those who believe in nothing, not even in atheism, who devote themselves, who sacrifice themselves to nothing. More precisely the world of those without a mystique. And who boast of it." -- Charles P?guy From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 22:01:19 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:01:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nietzsche on Religion Incorporated In-Reply-To: <20041107195521.78938.qmail@web14713.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041107220120.84344.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Probably both. Nietzsche liked to cover all his bases. Maru wrote:Yeah, but did Nietzche mean fertilizer as in dung, or fertilizer as necessary ingredient, base of the pillar, which will help athe more beautiful stuff grow (which themselves will eventually ebcome fertilizer.)? ~Maru --- extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org wrote: > From: Al Brooks > Thanks for the link, it's worth saving. BTW didn't > Nietzsche once call common humanity 'fertilizer'? > What is always in the back (and often up front) of my > mind is Nietzsche's writing on the "will to power". > When you think of how there are people in the world > who would destroy the entire biosphere in a nuclear > war, for the sake of pursuing power (though not > necessarily power for themselves personally) it is > enough to make you want to build a fallout shelter in > the basement. > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat headline: "Beheadings On Rise Around The World" --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 7 22:11:34 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 16:11:34 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] places to live Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107160941.019cbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> [from CIA WorldFactbook] IVORY COAST: Age structure: 0-14 years: 45.1% (male 3,856,130; female 3,965,930) 15-64 years: 52.6% (male 4,651,921; female 4,468,085) 65 years and over: 2.2% (male 182,995; female 202,663) (2004 est.) Median age: total: 17 years male: 17.4 years female: 16.7 years (2004 est.) Population growth rate: 2.11% (2004 est.) USA Age structure: 0-14 years: 20.8% (male 31,122,974; female 29,713,748) 15-64 years: 66.9% (male 97,756,380; female 98,183,309) 65 years and over: 12.4% (male 15,078,204; female 21,172,956) (2004 est.) Median age: total: 36 years male: 34.7 years female: 37.4 years (2004 est.) Population growth rate: 0.92% (2004 est.) AUSTRALIA: Age structure: 0-14 years: 20.1% (male 2,044,449; female 1,948,574) 15-64 years: 67.2% (male 6,747,687; female 6,623,995) 65 years and over: 12.8% (male 1,121,522; female 1,426,917) (2004 est.) Median age: total: 36.3 years male: 35.5 years female: 37.1 years (2004 est.) Population growth rate: 0.9% (2004 est.) Age structure: 0-14 years: 14.3% (male 9,337,867; female 8,876,996) 15-64 years: 66.7% (male 42,697,264; female 42,196,835) 65 years and over: 19% (male 10,169,190; female 14,054,850) (2004 est.) Median age: total: 42.3 years male: 40.5 years female: 44.1 years (2004 est.) Population growth rate: 0.08% (2004 est.) From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 7 23:03:08 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 17:03:08 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] places to live In-Reply-To: <418EA235.40109@mydruthers.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107160941.019cbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <418EA235.40109@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107170200.01a08ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:31 PM 11/7/2004 -0800, Chris Hibbert wrote: >You left out the last place name in your list. The first three are Ivory >Coast, USA, and Australia, but the last data set is unlabeled. Let's see >Britain? Canada? Drat, sorry. Japan. Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 8 00:37:40 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:37:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > > As usual, I must be missing something here. If `social security' is > shorthand for collective funding of pensions for the ill, the > incapacitated > and those made feeble by old-age, plus collective funding of > some or all > medical expenses, then `practical immortality' largely does > away with the > need for such a system. It could increase the need for spending on > continuing education, say, assuming any jobs remain for > humans, and that > any humans remain in the first place. But I can't see why > keeping everyone > healthy and youthful would `bankrupt the social security > system'. On the > contrary, I think this is one of the great benefits of any negligible > senescence treatment, and a major motive for governments to > invest heavily > in its development *before* the shit hits the fan. > > Damien Broderick Ah I am glad we finally reached the point where differences in basic assumptions can be identified, so that meaningful dialog can take place. Social security was originally designed as an old-age pension, not necessarily for the ill or incapacitated. One becomes a pensioner at a certain age, absolutely regardless of one's medical or fiscal condition. Of course thegovennment quickly amassed a great fortune, and the temptation to use the fund for general welfare was overwhelming. So the difference in assumptions is whether the payout is based upon the pay-in, or upon actual need. I might agree that if we accomplished practical immortality, we might not need the current social security system. But we would still have it. The newly immortal would assume that the US government owes them a pension forever. They might be quite unwilling to relinquish that entitlement, even if they do not *need* the checks. Altho we are not getting physical immortality, human lifespans are increasing way faster than the social security system can sustain. We are in a social security trap. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 8 00:56:07 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 18:56:07 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107184411.019ebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 04:37 PM 11/7/2004 -0800, Spike wrote: >I might agree that if we accomplished practical >immortality, we might not need the current social >security system. But we would still have it. Yes, we've established that this is the case in the USA and many other nations. However, the fact that it *isn't* so in Australia is an existence proof that people don't run barking mad in the street at the news that an un-means-tested pension is *not* an `entitlement', just as slave-owning is no longer an `entitlement'. But you might have to creep up on them with this horrifying news. > The >newly immortal would assume that the US government >owes them a pension forever. They might be quite >unwilling to relinquish that entitlement, even if >they do not *need* the checks. People get over lots of changes. When inflation robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody revolution with bankers' heads on poles. >Altho we are not getting physical immortality, human >lifespans are increasing way faster than the social >security system can sustain. True, and to a large extent bringing increased debility, senility and suffering with it. This is a short-to-medium term problem, one must hope, unless medical research runs into huge problems or political obstacles. And as people on this list should be the first to acknowledge, plenty of jobs are gone for good already, and more will follow, but we can expect that improvements in manufacturing and other technologies will make it feasible for those without work, even the immortal young, to obtain the necessities cheaply or free. So the pension problem is a medium term issue, and really won't have much bearing (IMHO) on the era of `practical immortality'. Oh, and did I hear someone say `Singularity', with all that such an incalculable disruption implies to our expectations? Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 00:56:25 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:56:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] (no subject) Message-ID: <20041108005625.32801.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> We underestimate how potent the urge is to promote one's genetic posterity; and yet again Bush was under-estimated, Bush was depicted by his opponents in both the 2000 & 2004 elections as a dim frat-boy. Well, when you take into account that he is set for life and is provided with probably the best health care money can buy, then maybe we should all be dim frat boys (or dim sorority sisters). If Bush is 'dim' he is dim like a fox. So when Jeb Bush runs against Hillary in 2008 are we going to underestimate him, too? Jeb Bush pretty much declared in code he will run for the presidency in 2008. Fifteen days before the last election Jeb said he will definitely not attempt to be a presidential candidate in 2008, qualifying the statement with the explanation that he wants to finish his term as governor of Florida. However since his term as governor ends the beginning of 2006 he has plenty of time to run for president after he leaves the governor's mansion. Jeb added unhelpfully how he wants to keep his "options open". headline: "Beheadings On Rise Around The World" --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Nov 8 01:19:52 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 09:19:52 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] USAF & PQT Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EDEF@tpeex05> Will human beings become transhumans and even immortal when Teleportation is just a daily life? Maybe we just teleport the healthy parts of us into others. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 3:00 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [extropy-chat] USAF & PQT PQT = Psychic Quantum Teleportation (of course) AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CA 'Teleportation Physics Study' http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf (long 'review' paper, about 88 pages) by Eric W. Davis (Warp Drive Metrics, Las Vegas) http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20041106/living/28378.shtml (popularization) :s) "According to David Hume causality is based on nothing more than the observed constant conjunction of two or more kinds of events, say A and B. It is a mere habit we have to call the earlier of the occurrences, say A, the cause, and the later, B, the effect; no relation of necessity, nor even of likelihood, of a B's succeeding an A in the future can be deduced.' - D. Atkinson 'We would like to think of teleportation as the transmission of quantum information from A to B. If we accept the intuitively appealing tenet that a transfer of information from sender to receiver must always be mediated by a channel connecting the two participants, teleportation appears paradoxical: If only two classical bits were sent, how did the full quantum information pass from A to B? Looking at the standard space-time diagram of the teleportation process, we see that there is indeed a second (V-shaped) path connecting A to B, which is defined by the two world lines of the distributed EPR particle pair. This leads to an intriguing interpretation (first proposed by Bennett soon after the discovery of teleportation): In addition to the two bits, the remaining quantum information must have been propagated backward in time from A to the EPR source and thence forward in time to B. Indeed, if we insist that information transmission requires a physical channel, there appears to be no other possible interpretation of the teleportation process! It is remarkable that this interpretation is entirely consistent: The principles of quantum measurement theory imply that the information sent backward in time is random and independent of the teleported state, so long as the two classical bits remain unknown. Hence, the well-known classical causal paradoxes of backward-in-time information propagation are neatly circumvented. This analysis, inspired by our informational point of view, also reveals a new significance for entanglement in quantum theory (beyond the traditional issues of nonlocal correlations of measurement outcomes): Entanglement can be viewed as providing a channel for the transmission of quantum information.' - R. Jozsa _______________________________________________ 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: From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 8 02:18:39 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 21:18:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com><001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041107184411.019ebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003701c4c539$4361b0e0$b2893cd1@pavilion> On Sunday, November 07, 2004 7:56 PM Damien Broderick thespike at satx.rr.com wrote: > People get over lots of changes. When inflation > robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or > muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody > revolution with bankers' heads on poles. Though I'm not sure the bankers cause inflation -- maybe the central bankers do, but not bankers in general -- your gist is correct. People will get used to just about anything, especially if it comes in small doses at first. I'm reminded of a certain quaint phrase on the matter: "all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." Cheers! Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html "He who does not bellow out the truth when he knows the truth makes himself the accomplice of liars and forgers." -- Charles P?guy From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 8 02:58:21 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 20:58:21 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <003701c4c539$4361b0e0$b2893cd1@pavilion> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041107184411.019ebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <003701c4c539$4361b0e0$b2893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107205600.01ab1430@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:18 PM 11/7/2004 -0500, Technotranscendence wrote: > > When inflation > > robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or > > muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody > > revolution with bankers' heads on poles. > >Though I'm not sure the bankers cause inflation -- maybe the central >bankers do, but not bankers in general The mob mind is hardly ever as subtle in identifying culprits for retribution as is thine or mine, Dan. :) Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 8 03:04:55 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:04:55 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/08/njobs08.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/08/ixnewstop.html By Malcolm Moore, Economics Correspondent (Filed: 08/11/2004) There will be no jobs for unskilled workers in Britain within 10 years, the leading employers' organisation claims today. The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of the cost. Digby Jones, the director-general of the CBI, will tell his annual conference in Birmingham: "There will not be any work in Britain for unskilled people . . . within one scholastic generation." In a survey of 150 companies, which employ 750,000 people between them, 51 per cent said the pressure to move their jobs abroad had increased. [etc] "Protectionist voices who think they can stop this - that's cloud cuckoo land," he will tell the conference, which will be attended by Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, and Peter Mandelson, the European Trade Commissioner. "Ensuring people have the skills remains our problem. You have nothing to fear if you skill yourself." [etc etc] ================== The trouble with this `skilling yourself' theory, as far as I can tell, is the insidious and inevitable slide of remaining and new jobs toward the righthand side of the capability bell curve. Outsourcing doesn't just mean equally stupid people will work for less; it means extremely capable people will work for less. For a while, anyway. Damien Broderick From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 12 03:44:46 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:44:46 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com><001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY><6.1.1.1.0.20041107184411.019ebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <003701c4c539$4361b0e0$b2893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <002d01c4c869$f4abfd50$36b22643@kevin> > thespike at satx.rr.com wrote: > > People get over lots of changes. When inflation > > robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or > > muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody > > revolution with bankers' heads on poles. Perhaps that is because so few people have savings and so many have debt. One of the side benefits of inflation is that it destroys debt just as well as it destroys savings...provided it is installment debt with a fixed interest rate. Kevin Freels From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 12 03:51:00 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:51:00 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003401c4c86a$d3bc2d30$36b22643@kevin> Could this be because the minimum wage in Britain is 4.85 pounds (About $9.00 US)? That's a little less than twice our $5.15. Minimum wage laws are one of the very things that drives companies to send unskilled jobs overseas. Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2004 9:04 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/08/njobs08.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/08/ixnewstop.html > > > By Malcolm Moore, Economics Correspondent > (Filed: 08/11/2004) > > There will be no jobs for unskilled workers in Britain within 10 years, the > leading employers' organisation claims today. > > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and > sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of the cost. > > Digby Jones, the director-general of the CBI, will tell his annual > conference in Birmingham: "There will not be any work in Britain for > unskilled people . . . within one scholastic generation." > > In a survey of 150 companies, which employ 750,000 people between them, 51 > per cent said the pressure to move their jobs abroad had increased. > [etc] > > > "Protectionist voices who think they can stop this - that's cloud cuckoo > land," he will tell the conference, which will be attended by Gordon Brown, > the Chancellor, and Peter Mandelson, the European Trade Commissioner. > > "Ensuring people have the skills remains our problem. You have nothing to > fear if you skill yourself." > [etc etc] > > ================== > > The trouble with this `skilling yourself' theory, as far as I can tell, is > the insidious and inevitable slide of remaining and new jobs toward the > righthand side of the capability bell curve. Outsourcing doesn't just mean > equally stupid people will work for less; it means extremely capable people > will work for less. For a while, anyway. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 03:59:58 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:29:58 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: <710b78fc0411051745392a46d4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04110719594cbbd402@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 20:20:03 -0600, Greg Burch wrote: > Emlyn, I appreciate the sincerity of your question and I'll try to answer it > as clearly and succinctly as I can. What I won't do is get into a debate; > feelings are too high and this really isn't a forum for such discussions in my > personal opinion. Thanks Greg, and no, I don't want to drag you into an endless argument trying to justify your position; I'm just trying to gather information. Thanks for answering candidly, it's very unusual on such a polarised and emotional subject. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 04:09:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:09:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] places to live In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107170200.01a08ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041108040913.215.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 02:31 PM 11/7/2004 -0800, Chris Hibbert wrote: > > >You left out the last place name in your list. The first three are > Ivory > >Coast, USA, and Australia, but the last data set is unlabeled. Let's > see > >Britain? Canada? > > Drat, sorry. Japan. > And what was the point of these stats? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 04:11:22 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 20:11:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107205600.01ab1430@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041108041122.91595.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 09:18 PM 11/7/2004 -0500, Technotranscendence wrote: > > > > When inflation > > > robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or > > > muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody > > > revolution with bankers' heads on poles. > > > >Though I'm not sure the bankers cause inflation -- maybe the central > >bankers do, but not bankers in general > > The mob mind is hardly ever as subtle in identifying culprits for > retribution as is thine or mine, Dan. :) Ah, but its always the local banker who comes to take your house with the sheriff when HE makes the mistake of screwing up his reserve ratio and has to call in perfectly good loans. Sounds like a perfect time for some piking. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 05:42:15 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 06:42:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Teleportation Physics Study Message-ID: <470a3c52041107214226829daa@mail.gmail.com> It is interesting how in the US research programs based on "weird science" get actually funded by mainstream military bodies, and with the budgets quoted below. From the paper "Teleportation Physics Study", funded by the USAF: We will need a physics theory of consciousness and psychotronics, along with more experimental data, in order to test the hypothesis in Section 5.1.1 and discover the physical mechanisms that lay behind the psychotronic manipulation of matter. P-Teleportation, if verified, would represent a phenomenon that could offer potential high-payoff military, intelligence and commercial applications. This phenomenon could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result from a dramatic paradigm shift in science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts! Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 62 experimental program similar in fashion to the Remote Viewing program should be funded at $900,000 ? 1,000,000 per year in parallel with a theoretical program funded at $500,000 per year for an initial five-year duration. The role of quantum physics theory and related quantum phenomena (i.e., entanglement and teleportation) in p-Teleportation and psychotronics should be explored in this program (see for example, the Biological Quantum Teleportation recommendation in Section 3.3). An experiment definition study should be conducted first to identify and propose the best experiments for this program, which should be funded at $80,000 for one year. http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Mon Nov 8 08:00:39 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 19:00:39 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108041122.91595.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041108041122.91595.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <418F27A7.5090005@optusnet.com.au> Mike Lorrey wrote: > Ah, but its always the local banker who comes to take your house with > the sheriff when HE makes the mistake of screwing up his reserve ratio > and has to call in perfectly good loans. Sounds like a perfect time for > some piking. > If this was ever the case in Australia - that somebody was evicted by a bank calling in a loan that wasn't defaulted on - then there would be bankers heads on pikes. From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 09:06:04 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 01:06:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] molecular markers of aging In-Reply-To: <003401c4c86a$d3bc2d30$36b22643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041108090604.80294.qmail@web60008.mail.yahoo.com> In a study published in the Nov. 1 issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation, the researchers report that as cells and tissues age, the expression of two proteins called p16INK4a and ARF dramatically increases. This increase in expression, more than a hundredfold in some tissues, suggests a strong link between cellular aging and the upregulation, or increased production, of p16INK4a and ARF. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/uonc-ulr110404.php __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 09:20:57 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 09:20:57 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:04:55 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > > There will be no jobs for unskilled workers in Britain within 10 years, the > leading employers' organisation claims today. > > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and > sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of the cost. > The choice phrase used was "Britain will become a nation of hairdressers" :) But this report is from the CBI conference, intended to get more benefits for big companies from the government. They are both ignoring the thriving 'black-market' economy being created by the ever-increasing taxes and regulations from government. Officially, like 'unemployment', if it doesn't appear in their records, then it doesn't exist. BillK From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 09:41:55 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 09:41:55 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <418F27A7.5090005@optusnet.com.au> References: <20041108041122.91595.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> <418F27A7.5090005@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 19:00:39 +1100, David wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > Ah, but its always the local banker who comes to take your house with > > the sheriff when HE makes the mistake of screwing up his reserve ratio > > and has to call in perfectly good loans. Sounds like a perfect time for > > some piking. > > > > If this was ever the case in Australia - that somebody was evicted by a bank > calling in a loan that wasn't defaulted on - then there would be bankers > heads on pikes. > Anybody noticed the collapse in the USdollar exchange rate this year? And especially since Bush was re-elected. Last year we got about 1.6 USD for a pound. Now we get about 1.85 USD. If it continues (i.e. if the huge US deficit continues) we will all be able to pop over to the US and buy everything for loose change. Isn't economics wonderful? BillK From sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 10:33:03 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 02:33:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> Inline comments. Sorry they are late. On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:14:24 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Olga, I couldn't agree more on what you say here, but the fact is, he has won. He squeaked by. Unfortunately in this country it is winner (no matter by how slim a margin) take all. > Perhaps we will just have to acknowledge that for the time being his > message of fundamentalist jihad just resonates more than ours with the > average American (yes, American: a politician like Bush would never > get elected in Europe where the average citizen is a bit less > vulnerable to advertising and listens a bit more to what is actually > said). It is up to us to change that. I am very strongly anti-Bush but it is simply wrong to suppose that the average American voted for him due to fundamentalism. The average American imho is more likely to be totally brainwashed by the long harping on terror. They are voting from fear. Fear truly is "the mind killer". > I think our friend Mike has a very valid point when he calls for a > fact check: most people just disagree with us. Again, it is up to us > to change that. A way is not to limit ourselves to preaching to the > converted, but also engage in debate with those who disagree. > Debate? I am not sure that is an adequate antidote to fear. - samantha From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 10:42:12 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 02:42:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041108104212.56743.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> "the gift that kept on giving" This was Karl Rove's comment on Kerry's voting against funding the $87 billion war legislation in 2003. ===== headline: "Beheadings On Rise Around The World" __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 8 10:54:27 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 04:54:27 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041108045051.01b2d750@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:33 AM 11/8/2004 -0800, Samantha wrote: >On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:14:24 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > Olga, I couldn't agree more on what you say here, but the fact is, he > has won. > >He squeaked by. Unfortunately in this country it is winner (no matter >by how slim a margin) take all. When you're voting for President, what method would you prefer? Surely not *loser* take all? (That was 2000, same guy, right?) Surely not rotating chairs during the period of office? Or abolishing the office entirely in favor of a committee? Damien Broderick From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Mon Nov 8 10:05:13 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:05:13 +0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Election results and Leviathan In-Reply-To: <0623F703-3017-11D9-9C59-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> <1099597784.9987@whirlwind.he.net> <470a3c5204110422234f6d1d74@mail.gmail.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20041106130852.00ae11e0@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041108115608.00aa1f00@pop.cris.net> At 09:12 AM 11/6/04 -0800, you J. Andrew Rogers wrote: >On Nov 6, 2004, at 2:25 AM, Gennady Ra wrote: >> The hot story in the Blogosphere is that the "erroneous" exit polls that showed Kerry carrying Florida and Ohio (among other states) weren't erroneous at all - it was the numbers produced by paperless voting machines that were wrong, and Kerry actually won. As more and more analysis is done of what may (or may not) be the most massive election fraud in the history of the world... > >Tinfoil hat nonsense and propaganda. Well, probably I picked it out of despair. A drowning man will catch at a straw. As I wrote to another list participant in a private message: Somebody from Frankfurt school, perhaps Horkheimer, said that "totalitarian regimes of the 20th century cannot be destroyed from within." That is, their apparatus of suppression and control is so effective and perfect that inner dissenting forces will be unavoidably detected and neutralized. The Soviet Empire was destroyed from without, due to efforts (I simplify) of the Americans, Ronald Reagan and SDI bluff. It seemed a blessing but as it turned out the Americans did it just to clear their way to their own, ultimate totalitarian state, an invincible mixture of Middle Ages mind and modern technology. (And what is worse: hammer and sickle or cross?) This time there is nothing in the Universe from without left to come and save us The Americans do not have a hunch for totalitarianism, and complacency and placidity of some are truly astounding but we, experienced, here in former Soviet Union, watch in utter despair how the Beast has come and foresee that the Leviathan will grow and devour everything. And alas, I do not believe that free people in America love their freedom more than those who caught the power love the Power and are ready to fight for their liberty in the hot civil war. (And who can fight the ultimate Leviathan? It will contradict the Horkheimer's dictum.) Not very extropic and dynamically/practically optimistic message... Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 12:41:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 04:41:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108124135.74107.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > > > > Anybody noticed the collapse in the USdollar exchange rate this year? > And especially since Bush was re-elected. > Last year we got about 1.6 USD for a pound. Now we get about 1.85 > USD. If it continues (i.e. if the huge US deficit continues) we will > all be able to pop over to the US and buy everything for loose change. > > Isn't economics wonderful? To be expected with yesterdays announcement by IPG of a 60 day state of emergency. Bush will get done what needs to be done, they'll have elections in January, and things will get better. Meanwhile the international left will use its assets to leverage as much damage on the US financially as it can. Financial pressure is about all they can do, really. They don't have the military might or will to do anything. Switzerland could come up with a larger army in 24 hours than Germany could draft together in 6 months. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Nov 8 13:36:28 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:36:28 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108124135.74107.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041108124135.74107.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <3193CBC5-318B-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 8 Nov 2004, at 13:41, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Financial pressure is about all they can do, really. They don't have > the military might or will to do anything. Switzerland could come up > with a larger army in 24 hours than Germany could draft together in 6 > months. I am not sure how Germany's army has anything to with the weak dollar, perhaps I missed a post. Here in European the increasing strength of the Euro against the Dollar is starting to ring alarm bells. However, at the moment its not so high that people are widely panicing. At the moment its about 1.28, and I read over the weekend that it could reach 1.35 in the next few months at which point some sort of corrective measures are likely to be applied. According to the Economist the Euro and Dollar should have a rough parity, which if true shows how far out of whack things have become. One practical consequence of this is that its now about 10% cheaper to buy books from Amazon.com than Amazon.de, even when taking into account free shipping within Germany. best, patrick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 13:41:09 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 05:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Election results and Leviathan In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041108115608.00aa1f00@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <20041108134109.4071.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Get a hold of yourself, Gennady. At one time the cross was worse, but after the purges of 1936-39 the hammer & sickle outdid the cross at murder and mind control. You know that. > (And what is worse: hammer and > sickle or cross?) >Gennady __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 13:45:40 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 14:45:40 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious leaders prepare demands on White House Message-ID: <470a3c52041108054514514149@mail.gmail.com> This is quite disturbing, but was to be expected. Pioneer press: America's conservative religious leaders, credited with providing the margin of victory for President Bush's re-election, are ready to present the White House with a bill for services rendered. The list, they say, is a lengthy one, beginning with the nomination of U.S. Supreme Court justices who will overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade decision on abortion, increased support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and a larger role in policing decency for the Federal Communications Commission. The Rev. Steve Smith, spokesman for First Baptist Church of Orlando, Fla., said Bush's election and his support among conservative Christians show large portions of the electorate are "grounded in traditional family values." On abortion, for example, "there's no question" there will be pressure from Christian conservatives to appoint judges who "value the sanctity of human life," Smith said. Conservative groups will continue to push for an end to abortion or, at the very least, legislation "greatly limiting" the practice. http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/nation/10127751.htm?1c From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 14:20:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 06:20:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <3193CBC5-318B-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041108142059.82284.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > I am not sure how Germany's army has anything to with the weak > dollar, perhaps I missed a post. All the anti-us states can do is engage in financial warfare if they don't like US foreign policy enough to want to do something about it. > > at which point some sort of corrective measures are likely to be > applied. According to the Economist the Euro and Dollar should have a > rough parity, which if true shows how far out of whack things have > become. > > One practical consequence of this is that its now about 10% cheaper > to buy books from Amazon.com than Amazon.de, even when taking into > account free shipping within Germany. You are engaging in a 'corrective measure' by doing so, and helping to improve the US trade balance, which contributes to the exchange rate. We appreciate it, thanks. Markets can fix themselves, provided governments get out of the way. When you see a sustained disparity that is not being naturally corrected, some government(s) is/are responsible. Of course, one might claim that Bush is entirely supportive of terrible exchange rates: it punishes all those wine swilling, brie chewing liberals with high french wine and cheese prices, earns profits for oil stocks of his texas buddies, and provides market impetus to finally drill for oil in ANWAR. ANWAR is the big problem. The Euro is rising in value because of Russia's rise as an oil power as well as the shift by many states from backing their own currencies with the dollar to the euro. This creates a surplus of dollars and a dearth of euros as various Bumfukistan Central Banks dump their dollar reserves and buy up euro reserves. The US could reverse the influence of Russias oil on the euro by opening up ANWAR, which is why the european based tree-hugger groups are all dead set against it. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From brentn at freeshell.org Mon Nov 8 15:59:19 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:59:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108124135.74107.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/8/04 4:41) Mike Lorrey wrote: >Meanwhile the >international left will use its assets to leverage as much damage on >the US financially as it can. Do you really believe that the currencies markets are tools of the left wing? Does that mean that open markets are leftist too? Do tell. Inquiring minds want to know. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From brentn at freeshell.org Mon Nov 8 15:59:32 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:59:32 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108142059.82284.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/8/04 6:20) Mike Lorrey wrote: >ANWAR is the big problem. The Euro is rising in value because of >Russia's rise as an oil power as well as the shift by many states from >backing their own currencies with the dollar to the euro. This creates >a surplus of dollars and a dearth of euros as various Bumfukistan >Central Banks dump their dollar reserves and buy up euro reserves. > >The US could reverse the influence of Russias oil on the euro by >opening up ANWAR, which is why the european based tree-hugger groups >are all dead set against it. Hmm. Last I checked, Russia hadn't joined the EMU, and the Sierra Club and the Nature Conservancy were both based in the United States. Let me propose an alternate theory: smaller governments are noticing that not only is our Federal deficit rising, but there seems to be no serious effort to restrain it. Further, our goverment's policies seem to be engineered to undermine our manufacturing sector. Add that to the serious possibility of political instability as an extremely large portion of USians are concerned about the country's slide towards religious-based fascism, and suddenly Euroland, which also suffers large deficits but has made it clear that they are searching for a path to fiscal responsibility, seems like a better bet. Ah, how fickle the markets can be. Of course, there are plenty of plausible things that could swing the tide back - the election of a communist government in France or a breakdown of Euroland's "harmonized" tax regime as individual member countries start rebelling against policies set by France and Germany. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 8 16:44:01 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:44:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac><470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <006b01c4c5b2$3c107aa0$35f44d0c@hal2001> "Samantha Atkins" > The average American imho is more likely to > be totally brainwashed by the long harping > on terror. And that is one of two reasons I didn't vote for Kerry. Although he never expressed it quite as clearly as you just did I got the impression he wouldn't have been as aggressively anti terrorist as Bush and thought the reaction to 911 was overblown. I didn't think the reaction to 911 as overblown. It's true that Bush was horribly wrong about the WMD in Iraq business and that is unforgivable; or would be if Kerry, who was reading the same intelligence reports Bush was hadn't thought they were there too. And if our intelligence sucked I have no reason to think it would improve under a Kerry administration, he had after all been trying to slash its budget for the last 20 years. The other reason I didn't vote for Kerry was his idiotic economic policy; the keys to prosperity are not raising taxes and raising trade barriers. > They are voting from fear. Fear truly is > "the mind killer". Fear is a useful survival trait, if it were not evolution would not have ensured that every animal with a brain has it. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 17:16:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 09:16:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108171647.8899.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brent Neal wrote: > (11/8/04 4:41) Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >Meanwhile the > >international left will use its assets to leverage as much damage on > >the US financially as it can. > > Do you really believe that the currencies markets are tools of the > left wing? Does that mean that open markets are leftist too? Do > tell. Inquiring minds want to know. One word: Soros, eastern block 'defector' with suspiciously extensive intelligence connections throughout the soviet bloc, which helped him make his billions. One phrase: "The capitalist will sell you the rope you hang him with." Soros is now the largest contributor to left-wing political organizations throughout the US. The 5th ComIntern's wealth was from the looting of the USSR and its ongoing involvement with the Russian mafia and FARC in Columbia, as well as groups in Vietnam and North Korea. That so many developed and developing nations are run partly or wholly by socialist parties, where their banking influence has been key in the shift of currency linkages from the dollar to the euro, is indicative. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 17:20:30 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 09:20:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108172030.24699.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brent Neal wrote: > (11/8/04 6:20) Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >ANWAR is the big problem. The Euro is rising in value because of > >Russia's rise as an oil power as well as the shift by many states > from > >backing their own currencies with the dollar to the euro. This > creates > >a surplus of dollars and a dearth of euros as various Bumfukistan > >Central Banks dump their dollar reserves and buy up euro reserves. > > > >The US could reverse the influence of Russias oil on the euro by > >opening up ANWAR, which is why the european based tree-hugger groups > >are all dead set against it. > > > Hmm. Last I checked, Russia hadn't joined the EMU, and the Sierra > Club and the Nature Conservancy were both based in the United States. Cherry picking. World Wildlife Federation, Greenpeace, among others, are european based. The Nature Conservancy is based on Palmyra Island in the south pacific, which, while nominally US territory, the NC has some sort of pseudo-autonomous agreement with the Dept of the Interior which we have not be able to obtain any details about. Oh, and the Sierra Club was founded by the Bohemian Club members.... And Russia does all its oil banking in europe. > > Let me propose an alternate theory: smaller governments are noticing > that not only is our Federal deficit rising, but there seems to be no > serious effort to restrain it. Further, our goverment's policies seem > to be engineered to undermine our manufacturing sector. Add that to > the serious possibility of political instability as an extremely > large portion of USians are concerned about the country's slide > towards religious-based fascism, and suddenly Euroland, which also > suffers large deficits but has made it clear that they are searching > for a path to fiscal responsibility, seems like a better bet. Ah, how > fickle the markets can be. Of course, there are plenty of plausible > things that could swing the tide back - the election of a communist > government in France or a breakdown of Euroland's "harmonized" tax > regime as individual member countries start rebelling against > policies set by France and Germany. Oh, definitely contributory factors. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From megao at sasktel.net Mon Nov 8 18:08:23 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:08:23 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard - radical financial restructuring? In-Reply-To: <002d01c4c869$f4abfd50$36b22643@kevin> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041107184411.019ebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <003701c4c539$4361b0e0$b2893cd1@pavilion> <002d01c4c869$f4abfd50$36b22643@kevin> Message-ID: <418FB617.8040404@sasktel.net> Kevin Freels wrote: >>thespike at satx.rr.com wrote: >> >> >>>People get over lots of changes. When inflation >>>robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or >>>muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody >>>revolution with bankers' heads on poles. >>> >>> > >Perhaps that is because so few people have savings and so many have debt. >One of the side benefits of inflation is that it destroys debt just as well >as it destroys savings...provided it is installment debt with a fixed >interest rate. > >Kevin Freels > > > >_______________________________________________ >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: From megao at sasktel.net Mon Nov 8 18:14:40 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:14:40 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard - radical financial restructuring? In-Reply-To: <418FB617.8040404@sasktel.net> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041106125749.01a8f040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <001f01c4c52b$2dcd9590$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041107184411.019ebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <003701c4c539$4361b0e0$b2893cd1@pavilion> <002d01c4c869$f4abfd50$36b22643@kevin> <418FB617.8040404@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <418FB790.2070806@sasktel.net> Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote: How does the USA balance a possible future solution to old debt via massive inflation while keeping interest rates low in order to force old banked money out as risk capital? Change the Fed rate? Might this only work if production efficiency from nano-bio .... other... create a "Moore's derivative law" which allows for a balancing claw back to repair the fundamental economy's debt crisis? > > > Kevin Freels wrote: > >>>thespike at satx.rr.com wrote: >>> >>> >>>>People get over lots of changes. When inflation >>>>robs us of our savings, we sit there quietly or >>>>muttering; there's hardly ever a bloody >>>>revolution with bankers' heads on poles. >>>> >>>> >> >>Perhaps that is because so few people have savings and so many have debt. >>One of the side benefits of inflation is that it destroys debt just as well >>as it destroys savings...provided it is installment debt with a fixed >>interest rate. >> >>Kevin Freels >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>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 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 18:17:09 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 19:17:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Debate on improved humans, Dana Centre, London, 30 Nov Message-ID: <470a3c5204110810174c8aa8d2@mail.gmail.com> Dana Centre, London, November 30: Stem cell research, designer babies and genetic profiling. Discuss the latest issues in the world of genetics and other hot news stories with a panel including Professor Steve Jones of University College London. The Dana Centre is a stylish, purpose-built venue, complete with a cafebar, appealing to adults. It is a place for them to take part in exciting, informative and innovative debates about contemporary science, technology and culture. http://www.danacentre.org.uk/Default.aspx?DanaMenu=_EVENT&ArticleID={BF3C5404-6A3E-4920-BC04-D77EDDE05B40} From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 18:33:27 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:33:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108171647.8899.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041108183327.22788.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Brent Neal wrote: > > > (11/8/04 4:41) Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > >Meanwhile the > > >international left will use its assets to leverage as much damage > on > > >the US financially as it can. > > > > Do you really believe that the currencies markets are tools of the > > left wing? Does that mean that open markets are leftist too? Do > > tell. Inquiring minds want to know. > > One word: Soros, Second word: China: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/257979a6-30f4-11d9-a595-00000e2511c8.html Dollar expected to fall amid China's rumoured selling By Steve Johnson in London and Andrew Balls in Washington Published: November 7 2004 19:43 | Last updated: November 7 2004 19:43 The dollar could slide still further, in spite of hitting an all-time low against the euro last week in the wake of George W. Bush's re-election, currency traders have said. The dollar sell-off has resumed amid fears among traders that Mr Bush's victory will bring four more years of widening US budget and current account deficits, heightened geopolitical risks and a policy of "benign neglect" of the dollar. Many currency traders were taken aback on Friday when the greenback fell in spite of bullish data showing the US economy created 337,000 jobs in October. "If this can't cause the dollar to strengthen you have to tell me what will. This is a big green light to sell the dollar," said David Bloom, currency analyst at HSBC, as the greenback fell to a nine-year low in trade-weighted terms. The dollar's fall comes as the Federal Reserve is widely expected to raise US interest rates by a quarter point to 2 per cent when it meets on Wednesday and to signal that it will continue with a measured pace of rate increases. Speculative traders in Chicago last week racked up the highest number of long-euro, short-dollar contracts on record. Options traders have reported brisk business in euro calls - contracts to buy the euro at a pre-determined rate. However, the market has been rife with rumours that the latest wave of selling has been led by foreign governments seeking to cut their exposure to US assets. India and Russia have reportedly been selling US assets, as well as petrodollar-rich Middle Eastern investors. China, which has $515bn of reserves, was also said to be selling dollars and buying Asian currencies in readiness to switch the renminbi's dollar peg to a basket arrangement, something Chinese officials have increasingly hinted at. Any re-allocation could push the dollar sharply lower and Treasury yields markedly higher. ---end quote--- As I expected (and have predicted repeatedly on this list in the last two years), China will precede a move on Taiwan with a 'rearrangement' of its dollar reserves (the US Dollar is the backing of its entire money supply) to a mixed basket. Presented as ho-hum, this is intended to further devaluate the US dollar to push the US further into an oil crisis and make it difficult for the US to maintain its strategic oil reserves, which would be so necessary if a war between the US and China were to break out over Taiwan. China is seeing that US military forces are currently at their limits in the Iraq deployment and cannot handle a second regional or major war without a nationwide draft and significant lag time for training draftees. There is also significant domestic opposition to a draft in the US, and so long as China does not attack US targets, this opposition should remain high, and is likely being supported by left wing maoist groups that run anti-war organizations like ANSWER. China therefore thinks that this year is its opening, whether or not Bush or Kerry is in office. Bush can't bring new weapons systems online fast enough, or move overstressed military units into position in the western pacific. Depending on how rapidly China 'rearranges' its reserve mix of currencies and dumps dollars on the market will determine how soon Bush is forced to open the Strategic Oil Reserve for easing consumer prices. As consumer consumption draws down the reserve, Bush will be also using it up in bringing US forces home from Iraq as fast as possible and trying to ship as many of them to the west coast as possible. Some troop planes and ships may simply redeploy directly to Taiwan from Iraq, setting up a rear logistical and command area in Guam. Keep an eye out for THEL deployments to Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, or Guam. Guam especially will be vulnerable to ICBM attack from China and will likely be a proving ground for the THEL in dealing with strategic weapon trajectories as well. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 18:42:55 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 19:42:55 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cancer-free designer babies get approval Message-ID: <470a3c5204110810424f9cd834@mail.gmail.com> Every sane person should prefer cancer free designer babies to "natural" babies, whatever that means, genetically doomed to develop cancer, suffer and die. Not everybody is sane, but once again the UK is taking a step in the right direction. The Times: People with inherited forms of cancer have won the right to select embryos free from genes that might trigger the disease in future generations, The Times has learnt. The ruling by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority deepens the controversy over designer babies. It sets a precedent that will allow doctors to "cherry-pick" embryos for a much wider range of traits than at present. Applications to extend the procedure are expected within months. Such tests can potentially eradicate some disorders, enabling parents to be certain of having healthy children. But critics said that the decision will push Britain farther towards "designer babies" chosen for social reasons. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1339197,00.html From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 19:01:15 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 19:01:15 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108183327.22788.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041108171647.8899.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> <20041108183327.22788.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 10:33:27 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > The dollar sell-off has resumed amid fears among traders that Mr Bush's > victory will bring four more years of widening US budget and current > account deficits, heightened geopolitical risks and a policy of "benign > neglect" of the dollar. > > However, the market has been rife with rumours that the latest wave of > selling has been led by foreign governments seeking to cut their > exposure to US assets. > > India and Russia have reportedly been selling US assets, as well as > petrodollar-rich Middle Eastern investors. > Nothing personal, Mike. It's just free market trading. If you can sell your dollar assets now and move the money into euros, then you benefit from the euros rising in value against the dollar AND you can buy the US assets back in a few years time at half-price. Sounds like a really good deal to me. I just wish I had some US assets to sell. :) BillK From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Nov 8 19:25:59 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:25:59 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: References: <20041108171647.8899.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> <20041108183327.22788.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <05649674-31BC-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 8 Nov 2004, at 20:01, BillK wrote: > Sounds like a really good deal to me. I just wish I had some US assets > to sell. :) I have been very happily paying off my US credit card debt. Thanks GW! best, p. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 21:24:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 13:24:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <05649674-31BC-11D9-8080-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041108212452.64800.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > > On 8 Nov 2004, at 20:01, BillK wrote: > > Sounds like a really good deal to me. I just wish I had some US > assets > > to sell. :) > > I have been very happily paying off my US credit card debt. Thanks > GW! http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=530&ncid=530&e=9&u=/ap/20041108/ap_on_bi_ge/cuba_dollar Dollar Not Accepted at Cuban Businesses Business - AP By VANESSA ARRINGTON, Associated Press Writer HAVANA - After a decade as the dominant currency to buy everything from shampoo to canned food to furniture, the U.S. dollar is no longer accepted in Cuba as of Monday. Cubans as well as tourists visiting the island must now use a local currency tied to the dollar to buy goods at previously named "dollar-only stores" selling food and personal hygiene products. The dollar will also be rejected at restaurants, art markets, hotels and other businesses. Cuba's communist government announced the decision to eliminate the dollar from circulation Oct. 25, prompting thousands of Cubans to flood banks and exchange houses to turn in their dollars for Cuban convertible pesos. A 10 percent surcharge to convert the U.S. currency into pesos was also originally to be implemented Monday, but because of the huge demand to dispose of the U.S. bills, the Central Bank extended to Nov. 14 the period that people could exchange without paying the surcharge. The surcharge will not apply to other foreign currencies like the euro or the Canadian dollar, and there will be no surcharge to buy U.S. dollars. Cubans and tourists in Old Havana lined up outside exchange houses and swelled out of banks Monday to convert their dollars. People in the street were entertained by a dachshund named Pillo Chocolate who barked at currencies other than the convertible peso. "Before, Pillo would reject any currency that wasn't the dollar," said Roberto Gonzalez, the dog's trainer. "But in the last week I trained it to accept the convertible peso. It knows it has to adapt too." After sniffing a convertible peso, Pillo Chocolate swiped the bill with its paw in approval. Cubans also appear to have accepted the government measure with little complaint. "For me, it's the same, whether I use the dollar or the convertible peso," said Javier Fernandez, 50, a self-employed handyman. "All I need is the currency that will allow me to eat." Cubans will now use the convertible peso to purchase goods they have been buying with dollars since they were made legal tender in 1993 to help capture hard currency after the loss of Soviet aid and trade. Among such goods are groceries like cereal, yogurt and bottled water as well as most toiletries. Washing machines, furniture and gasoline have also been sold in dollars. The Cuban convertible peso, like that of many other smaller nations, has no value outside the country. There also exists another currency on the island ? the regular Cuban peso ? but it has little value inside the country and is used mainly to buy fruit and vegetables as well as gain admission to concerts, museums and movie theaters. In announcing the currency switch, President Fidel Castro (news - web sites) said widespread use of the money of his country's No. 1 enemy ? the United States ? would be halted to guarantee Cuba's economic independence. Castro said the move was necessary to protect the island nation from an increasing U.S. crackdown on the flow of American currency into Cuba. The United States has recently implemented severe limits on the amount Cuban exiles can send relatives on the island and Federal Reserve (news - web sites) fines imposed on international banks sending U.S. dollars here. Cubans can still hold the American currency. Some independent analysts believe many with savings will continue hoarding some of their dollars at home. "Nobody really knows how much U.S. money Cubans have, but it is substantial," said Paolo Spadoni, a Cuba expert from the University of Florida in Gainesville. A report authored by Spadoni last year roughly estimated that at least $500 million was being stored in Cuban homes, most of it money received from relatives in the United States. Central Bank President Francisco Soberon told the Associated Press last week that authorities were surprised to see how many dollars Cubans have been "saving under their mattresses." Soberon, however, declined to provide figures on how many dollars have been exchanged or deposited since the currency switch was announced. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From extropy at unreasonable.com Mon Nov 8 23:03:22 2004 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:03:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Medical ethics Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20041108174851.02efba60@unreasonable.com> My daughter, a fourth-generation sf reader, has a term paper coming up on medical ethics. Noting the card-carrying and de facto philosophers in our community, I thought I'd ask for links to sites and printed works that you have found well-written and thoughtful (non-fiction or sf). Unfortunately, she is not free to choose any topic within medical ethics. The paper must deal with reproductive medicine (including surrogacy), AIDS, or cloning, but she may want to read works on other areas on her own. -- David Lubkin. From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Nov 8 23:20:47 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 09:50:47 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <006b01c4c5b2$3c107aa0$35f44d0c@hal2001> References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> <006b01c4c5b2$3c107aa0$35f44d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411081520ba3ce03@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 11:44:01 -0500, John K Clark wrote: > > They are voting from fear. Fear truly is > > "the mind killer". > > Fear is a useful survival trait, if it were not evolution would not have > ensured that every animal with a brain has it. Pretty much all those same animals die of old age (there *may* be an exception here and there, my mind is blank this morning). Yet, I'm not a big supporter of old age as a useful trait for the future of humanity. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From fortean1 at mindspring.com Tue Nov 9 03:33:44 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 20:33:44 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Teleportation Physics Study References: <470a3c52041107214226829daa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <41903A98.4CCD257A@mindspring.com> Surfing the SIPRNET about 10 years ago I searched under 'paranormal' and 'psychic.' I found several USG sites dealing with American, European, and Communist (mostly Chinese and Soviet) study areas. The Communists were spending at maybe four times the Americans and Europeans. Terry ***** Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > It is interesting how in the US research programs based on "weird > science" get actually funded by mainstream military bodies, and with > the budgets quoted below. From the paper "Teleportation Physics > Study", funded by the USAF: We will need a physics theory of > consciousness and psychotronics, along with more experimental > data, in order to test the hypothesis in Section 5.1.1 and discover > the physical mechanisms that lay behind > the psychotronic manipulation of matter. P-Teleportation, if verified, > would represent a phenomenon that > could offer potential high-payoff military, intelligence and > commercial applications. This phenomenon > could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result > from a dramatic paradigm shift in > science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts! > Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. > 62 > experimental program similar in fashion to the > Remote Viewing program should be funded at $900,000 ??? 1,000,000 per > year in parallel with a > theoretical program funded at $500,000 per year for an initial > five-year duration. The role of > quantum physics theory and related quantum phenomena (i.e., > entanglement and teleportation) in > p-Teleportation and psychotronics should be explored in this program > (see for example, the > Biological Quantum Teleportation recommendation in Section 3.3). An > experiment definition > study should be conducted first to identify and propose the best > experiments for this program, > which should be funded at $80,000 for one year. > http://www.fas.org/sgp/eprint/teleport.pdf -- "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 riel at surriel.com Tue Nov 9 04:18:41 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 23:18:41 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Damien Broderick wrote: > There will be no jobs for unskilled workers in Britain within 10 years, > the leading employers' organisation claims today. > > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and > sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of > the cost. "Why is the office so dirty?" "We outsourced our janitor to India" Lets face it, the people doing "high skill" jobs need to be taken care of. They need to be fed, have their offices cleaned, people need to take deliveries, send around packages, mow the lawn, etc... I suspect quite a few of the "unskilled labor jobs" cannot be outsourced, making the scare story above quite unrealistic. 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 jonkc at att.net Tue Nov 9 06:48:53 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 01:48:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac><470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com><948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com><006b01c4c5b2$3c107aa0$35f44d0c@hal2001> <710b78fc0411081520ba3ce03@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <005d01c4c628$38d6cfd0$97fe4d0c@hal2001> "Emlyn" > Pretty much all those same animals die of old age. > [.] Yet, I'm not a big supporter of old age as a > useful trait for the future of humanity. At first I thought you were saying it would be preferable if we had no fear at all about anything; but then I thought no, you can't possibly mean that. Can you? Absolute fearlessness would be as detrimental to survival as an being incapable of being bored. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 9 18:34:57 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:34:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize Message-ID: <00de01c4c68a$d0b1b470$deebfb44@kevin> $50 million and a possible $1 billion in contracts to the winner! http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=96&ncid=753&e=10&u=/space/20041108/sc_space/exclusiverulessetfor50millionamericasspaceprize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 9 18:39:39 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 10:39:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108124135.74107.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041108124135.74107.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41910EEB.6020509@mac.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >--- BillK wrote: > > >>Anybody noticed the collapse in the USdollar exchange rate this year? >>And especially since Bush was re-elected. >>Last year we got about 1.6 USD for a pound. Now we get about 1.85 >>USD. If it continues (i.e. if the huge US deficit continues) we will >>all be able to pop over to the US and buy everything for loose >> >> >change. > > >>Isn't economics wonderful? >> >> > >To be expected with yesterdays announcement by IPG of a 60 day state of >emergency. Bush will get done what needs to be done, they'll have >elections in January, and things will get better. Meanwhile the >international left will use its assets to leverage as much damage on >the US financially as it can. > > > What a laugh. We are doing a fine job of damaging our own economy and have been for decades. It is not an "international left" conspiracy if the economic chickens come home to roost. Both "left" and "right" have practiced disasterous economic policies for far too long in this country. Mr. Bush in particular has grossly added to the huge debt burden of this country. >Financial pressure is about all they can do, really. They don't have >the military might or will to do anything. Switzerland could come up >with a larger army in 24 hours than Germany could draft together in 6 months. > > So might makes right heh? -s From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 9 18:42:14 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 10:42:14 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041108045051.01b2d750@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac> <470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com> <948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041108045051.01b2d750@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <41910F86.5020209@mac.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 02:33 AM 11/8/2004 -0800, Samantha wrote: > >> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:14:24 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 >> wrote: >> > Olga, I couldn't agree more on what you say here, but the fact is, >> he has won. >> >> He squeaked by. Unfortunately in this country it is winner (no matter >> by how slim a margin) take all. > > > When you're voting for President, what method would you prefer? Surely > not *loser* take all? (That was 2000, same guy, right?) Surely not > rotating chairs during the period of office? Or abolishing the office > entirely in favor of a committee? > I have no easy solution. However pretending that GW Bush represents me or nearly 50% of Americans who voted against him is abhorrent as hell. -samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 9 18:53:06 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 10:53:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041106225659.77565.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041106225659.77565.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41911212.6090107@mac.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >--- Damien Broderick wrote: > > >>But I can't see why keeping everyone healthy and youthful would >>`bankrupt the social security system'. On the >>contrary, I think this is one of the great benefits of any negligible >>senescence treatment, and a major motive for governments to invest >>heavily in its development *before* the shit hits the fan. >> >> > >You are extremely optimistic to think that a government is going to be >that smart and will actually implement such an optimistic solution. No, >they will find that people will be living to 120 with ease, you will >have three retired people for every working person. The word 'taxpayer' >will become synonymous with 'slave' in future society and will be >looked down on ("I remember when I was a tax payer, worst 40 years of >my life.") > > > Since I don't get the government paid off until mid-year and actually not until the end of Fall if you count all taxes and fees imposed by various governmental bodies, I hardly see that I am more of a slave with more retired people supposedly drawing from social security. But the solution to the SS mess is very clearly to dismantle it with as much compassion and care for those who have been led to depend on it and are already doing so or will be too soon to do something else as possible. The second part of the solution is to do something about the rising median age of the population. For that life extension, anti-aging and continuously improved medicine AND healthier life habits of the population are essential. We must increase the healthy and productive years if all we Boomers aren't going to be seen as a parasitical burden. - samantha From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 9 19:00:15 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:00:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize In-Reply-To: <00de01c4c68a$d0b1b470$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041109190015.50614.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > $50 million and a possible $1 billion in contracts > to the winner! > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=96&ncid=753&e=10&u=/space/20041108/sc_space/exclusiverulessetfor50millionamericasspaceprize Yeah, but look at the deadline. A number of people (myself included) have been advocating that the 2010 goal should be something short of orbit - say, a suborbital but significant distance point-to-point hop, like L.A. to Tokyo, or at least Mojave to Maine. Else one runs a severe risk that no one will show up for the challenge in time. (Especially with the added, though relatively minor, complication of docking capability.) From sjatkins at gmail.com Tue Nov 9 19:07:06 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:07:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: <1099685848.20563.452.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <948b11e04110911072f813c2@mail.gmail.com> When we speak of California you are already speaking of around 13% of the population of the country. Not exactly a negligible out-of-touch little sanctuary as nearly portrayed. I do not understand how anyone with open eyes to the many errors and horrors of the last four years attributable to Bush and his administration could possibly vote for the man. I think that is a very fair question that has nothing in the least to do with "living in a cultural bubble". I don't see how being in one of the swing states such as Ohio would make the decision to vote for a president with one of the worse records in our history more rational. I find that portraying those who don't understand what if any rational decision making was behind this win as living in some out of touch bubble is itself not in the least helpful to understanding and just adds more polarization. - samantha On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:56:01 -0600, Greg Burch wrote: > I've kept my mouth shut here (but certainly not elsewhere -- on my blog, for instance) since the election. I've seen that the Europeans and the Americans who voted for Bush need to vent: They're tired and scared. But I can't go on without registering that things like this article are part of the problem. It's hysterical nonsense from people who live entirely encased in a cultural bubble that includes zero contact with anyone with whom they disagree. Frankly, all the preaching about tolerance and diversity from people who live in such bubbles seems ironic at least and outright hypocritical at worst. How many times have I read and heard in the last few days that people in New York and San Francisco and Seattle and London and Brussels can't understand how America elected Bush? They can't understand because they have no intercourse with the people who voted for Bush. Their conception of huge swaths of American culture is a shallow caricature that would be funny if it wasn! > 't so sad. > > I'm an atheist. I'm a libertarian. I don't suffer from a lack of literacy or even education; I know that humans evolved over a period of billions of years -- imagine that! I didn't have to vote for Bush because I live in the capital of Red State America, Houston, Texas, so I had the luxury of voting symbolically for the libertarians. But if I'd lived in Florida or Ohio, I'd have voted for Bush. My liberty to be irreligious and follow Enlightenment values has not been curtailed and, contrary to what one would think from reading the New York Times, the LA Times, watching all but one of the major American news networks or reading basically all of the press in Europe, my liberty to be irreligious is not in immediate danger. > > GB > http://gregburch.net/burchismo.html > From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 9 19:08:30 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:08:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <41910F86.5020209@mac.com> Message-ID: <20041109190830.63892.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > > At 02:33 AM 11/8/2004 -0800, Samantha wrote: > >> He squeaked by. Unfortunately in this country it > is winner (no matter > >> by how slim a margin) take all. > > > > When you're voting for President, what method > would you prefer? Surely > > not *loser* take all? (That was 2000, same guy, > right?) Surely not > > rotating chairs during the period of office? Or > abolishing the office > > entirely in favor of a committee? > > I have no easy solution. However pretending that GW > Bush represents me > or nearly 50% of Americans who voted against him is > abhorrent as hell. "America is the worst democracy in the world, except for all the other democracies in the world." (For a slightly incorrect/outdated definition that includes republics.) I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet implemented a far better solution. From sjatkins at gmail.com Tue Nov 9 19:11:22 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:11:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04110911115a3054b4@mail.gmail.com> The way to make it realistic is to count the number of domestic jobs of various types as against the number of people needing jobs and having various levels of skills. I believe you will find we have an increasing problem. -s On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 23:18:41 -0500 (EST), Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Damien Broderick wrote: > > > There will be no jobs for unskilled workers in Britain within 10 years, > > the leading employers' organisation claims today. > > > > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and > > sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of > > the cost. > > "Why is the office so dirty?" > > "We outsourced our janitor to India" > > Lets face it, the people doing "high skill" jobs need to be > taken care of. They need to be fed, have their offices cleaned, > people need to take deliveries, send around packages, mow the > lawn, etc... > > I suspect quite a few of the "unskilled labor jobs" cannot be > outsourced, making the scare story above quite unrealistic. > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 9 19:23:18 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:23:18 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <002801c4c234$a6950b10$6600a8c0@brainiac><470a3c520411032314346978ae@mail.gmail.com><948b11e04110802333d4c9f46@mail.gmail.com><6.1.1.1.0.20041108045051.01b2d750@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <41910F86.5020209@mac.com> Message-ID: <012801c4c691$91e75130$deebfb44@kevin> I felt the same way when Clinto was president with his 43% victory in a three-way race. At least Bush has a majority. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samantha Atkins" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 12:42 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > Damien Broderick wrote: > > > At 02:33 AM 11/8/2004 -0800, Samantha wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:14:24 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 > >> wrote: > >> > Olga, I couldn't agree more on what you say here, but the fact is, > >> he has won. > >> > >> He squeaked by. Unfortunately in this country it is winner (no matter > >> by how slim a margin) take all. > > > > > > When you're voting for President, what method would you prefer? Surely > > not *loser* take all? (That was 2000, same guy, right?) Surely not > > rotating chairs during the period of office? Or abolishing the office > > entirely in favor of a committee? > > > > I have no easy solution. However pretending that GW Bush represents me > or nearly 50% of Americans who voted against him is abhorrent as hell. > > -samantha > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:40:55 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:40:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize In-Reply-To: <20041109190015.50614.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041109194055.90102.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > $50 million and a possible $1 billion in contracts > > to the winner! > > > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=96&ncid=753&e=10&u=/space/20041108/sc_space/exclusiverulessetfor50millionamericasspaceprize > > Yeah, but look at the deadline. A number of people > (myself included) have been advocating that the 2010 > goal should be something short of orbit - say, a > suborbital but significant distance point-to-point > hop, like L.A. to Tokyo, or at least Mojave to Maine. > Else one runs a severe risk that no one will show up > for the challenge in time. (Especially with the > added, > though relatively minor, complication of docking > capability.) An LA to Tokyo hop is of such significance (you need to reach at least mach 16 to do it ballistically) that if you can reach that its not much tougher to go into orbit. Bigelow's market isn't in Tokyo, its market is in orbit. Bigelow doesn't, therefore, have an interest in getting to Tokyo, unless you can prove it will get rich customers to his launch site quicker to get them into orbit for his space hotel. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 9 19:46:22 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:46:22 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election References: <1099685848.20563.452.camel@localhost> <948b11e04110911072f813c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <013101c4c694$cac8c030$deebfb44@kevin> This has nothing to do with living in a bubble. I think it is a matter of priorities. I think that if you asked, you would find that most people here agree that Bush has made some grave mistakes over the last few years. The real debate is whether or not Kerry would have made the same, or even larger mistakes when it comes to the interests of people in this country - (and the world) Personally I think that Kerry, in the same situation as Bush, would have done the same thing. In fact, he supported it. I also see Kerry as unpredictable due to his flip-flop nature and desire to be everything to everyone. This unpredictability means to me that he would drag us into an even greater mess as he tried to capitulate to every country in the world and make everyone happy...which is impossible and usually ends up in pissing everyone off and putting you right back where you started. The opinions of other nations should not be ignored, but at the same time, they are not the deciding factor. Our president is the president of the United States of America, not the president of the world. He doesn;t answer to everyone else. His job is to look after the interests of the US. His job description does not include doing what is best for China, or India, or Pakistan, or Iraq. His job is to protect America. If someone intentionally threatens, pretends to have the capability, is wanred in advance, and chooses not to back down, then you go to war. This war was of Saddam's doing, not Bush's. If Saddam wanted to protect his people, he could have quit acting like a criminal. He wouldn;t have hid military equipment behind civilians. For some reason, you think of Bush as a warmonger who wanted to go to war and kill civilians. You treat this as if Kerry would have done differently. You put the blame of the war squarely on Bush's shoulders. Here is where you are making your mistake. Your priorities are the lives of foreign civilians over the protection of the US civilians against people like Saddam who clearly want to kill us. They say so at every opportunity and do so when gioven the chance. Let me restate this....12 UN resolutions...all ignored. Who's fault is this war again? I can understand your reason for not supporting Kerry, but I don;t think you have made an honest attempt to understand why some of us support Bush. Or maybe we haven't made it clear enough. Maybe this will help. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samantha Atkins" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 1:07 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > When we speak of California you are already speaking of around 13% of > the population of the country. Not exactly a negligible out-of-touch > little sanctuary as nearly portrayed. > > I do not understand how anyone with open eyes to the many errors and > horrors of the last four years attributable to Bush and his > administration could possibly vote for the man. I think that is a > very fair question that has nothing in the least to do with "living in > a cultural bubble". I don't see how being in one of the swing states > such as Ohio would make the decision to vote for a president with one > of the worse records in our history more rational. > > I find that portraying those who don't understand what if any rational > decision making was behind this win as living in some out of touch > bubble is itself not in the least helpful to understanding and just > adds more polarization. > > - samantha > > > > On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:56:01 -0600, Greg Burch wrote: > > I've kept my mouth shut here (but certainly not elsewhere -- on my blog, for instance) since the election. I've seen that the Europeans and the Americans who voted for Bush need to vent: They're tired and scared. But I can't go on without registering that things like this article are part of the problem. It's hysterical nonsense from people who live entirely encased in a cultural bubble that includes zero contact with anyone with whom they disagree. Frankly, all the preaching about tolerance and diversity from people who live in such bubbles seems ironic at least and outright hypocritical at worst. How many times have I read and heard in the last few days that people in New York and San Francisco and Seattle and London and Brussels can't understand how America elected Bush? They can't understand because they have no intercourse with the people who voted for Bush. Their conception of huge swaths of American culture is a shallow caricature that would be funny if it wa! > sn! > > 't so sad. > > > > I'm an atheist. I'm a libertarian. I don't suffer from a lack of literacy or even education; I know that humans evolved over a period of billions of years -- imagine that! I didn't have to vote for Bush because I live in the capital of Red State America, Houston, Texas, so I had the luxury of voting symbolically for the libertarians. But if I'd lived in Florida or Ohio, I'd have voted for Bush. My liberty to be irreligious and follow Enlightenment values has not been curtailed and, contrary to what one would think from reading the New York Times, the LA Times, watching all but one of the major American news networks or reading basically all of the press in Europe, my liberty to be irreligious is not in immediate danger. > > > > GB > > http://gregburch.net/burchismo.html > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 20:01:08 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:01:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <948b11e04110911072f813c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041109200108.98170.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > When we speak of California you are already speaking of around 13% of > the population of the country. Not exactly a negligible out-of-touch > little sanctuary as nearly portrayed. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm Not even all of california, or even most or half. It is clear from the county vote map that most Kerry support is enclaved in parts of the country which are a small segment of the nation. In particular, those who most loudly declaim, "I don't know anybody who voted for Bush" are speaking from locales which are so heavily democrat that they cannot hope to have a fair and balanced idea of what cross-sectional America thinks without getting out of their enclaves for significant periods of time (and not spending it in another democrat enclave). When I talk with my Seattle friends, it is rather offensive to hear the vituperative language they use towards Bush, the 'facts' they claim to have seen on their local media. It is clear they are enclaved to a significant degree, mentally as much as anything. Their vacations to 'the country' are to Sun Valley, Lake Chelan, and Whistler, BC: i.e. isolated liberal resort enclaves. It appears my republican friends, wherever they are, are much better traveled, acculturated, and tolerant of divergent opinions, while my liberal friends are provincial, narrow minded, intolerant, petty, spiteful, mean, vengeful, and disbelieving. Liberals pretend to an elitism that only exists in university degrees, publishing records, etc. and not to diversity, cultural exposure, etc. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pharos at gmail.com Tue Nov 9 20:17:16 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 20:17:16 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041109200108.98170.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <948b11e04110911072f813c2@mail.gmail.com> <20041109200108.98170.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:01:08 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > When I talk with my Seattle friends, it is rather offensive to hear the > vituperative language they use towards Bush, the 'facts' they claim to > have seen on their local media. It is clear they are enclaved to a > significant degree, mentally as much as anything. Their vacations to > 'the country' are to Sun Valley, Lake Chelan, and Whistler, BC: i.e. > isolated liberal resort enclaves. > Agreed. Try reading Tom Wolfe, on the elite that got lost in middle America 'Talk to someone in Cincinnati? Are you crazy?'. . . and so the Democrats blew it Or, "The future is Republican - Bush has policies that could keep his party in power for decades, says Michael Barone" I think they are telling it like it is. BillK From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 9 20:34:25 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:34:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: <20041109203425.AED9257E2A@finney.org> Today there is no excuse for anyone to live in an ideological enclave. We should all be making an effort to expose ourselves to a wide range of political views. It is as easy as visiting a good mix of web logs and other sites. Perhaps people could post their favorite liberal/conservative/other blogs for keeping themselves exposed to a wide variety of viewpoints. Hal From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 9 21:28:16 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:28:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize In-Reply-To: <20041109194055.90102.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041109212816.55673.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Yeah, but look at the deadline. A number of > people > > (myself included) have been advocating that the > 2010 > > goal should be something short of orbit - say, a > > suborbital but significant distance point-to-point > > hop, like L.A. to Tokyo, or at least Mojave to > Maine. > > Else one runs a severe risk that no one will show > up > > for the challenge in time. (Especially with the > > added, > > though relatively minor, complication of docking > > capability.) > > An LA to Tokyo hop is of such significance (you need > to reach at least > mach 16 to do it ballistically) that if you can > reach that its not much > tougher to go into orbit. Bigelow's market isn't in > Tokyo, its market > is in orbit. Bigelow doesn't, therefore, have an > interest in getting to > Tokyo, unless you can prove it will get rich > customers to his launch > site quicker to get them into orbit for his space > hotel. Let me rephrase, then: With the current deadline, there is a very high risk that no one will even seriously try to claim the prize by 2010 (if anyone does, it will be semi-obvious fraudsters like the da Vinci team was on the first X Prize: putting out press releases and promises but little if any actual flights and hardware). The resulting disappointment will likely leave the task undone through 2015, assuming no other funding effort comes to the rescue. On the other hand, sponsor a midway goal at 2010 and then the full thing at 2015, and the odds are significantly increased that service can start around 2015 - which makes it worthwhile even if the midway goal by itself is of marginal, maybe even zero, direct value to Bigelow. So, no, it doesn't matter that he doesn't want to go to Tokyo. Just pick any two reasonably accessible points a good distance apart - or even let the contestants pick their own launch and landing sites, so long as they are at least X kilometers apart. (To pick an extreme example, most contestants would view Iraq to Singapore as unfeasable even if they could do the much longer L.A. to Tokyo trip. But who knows, there might be a group with connections that could find usable launch and landing sites in those two areas. Very unlikely, especially since this contest is for American companies only, but it doesn't cost anything to allow it.) From steve365 at btinternet.com Tue Nov 9 22:01:21 2004 From: steve365 at btinternet.com (Stephen Davies) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:01:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041109203425.AED9257E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041109220121.22681.qmail@web86106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Absolutely right. I make a deliberate effort to investigate writings and arguments that I find ideologically uncongenial. If you don't you end up intellectually lazy and slack and, most importantly, unaware of the real nature of the world and society you live in (as the Democrats have found out). You may decide like Dorothy Parker "This is not a book to be set aside lightly. It should be hurled with great force" but at least it reminds you of what you're up against. Like Greg I think a lot of the reaction to the result is hysterical and OTT, and I'm not a Bush fan at all. For heavens sake it's only four years (unlike the UK where a PM really can go on and on and on...) and the various checks built into the system are still there. I think a great many people clearly do only read or watch or listen to stuff that confirms their predilictions and are very painfully surprised when they get a wack from reality. Sadly the academic profession is particularly prone to this. Hal Finney wrote: Today there is no excuse for anyone to live in an ideological enclave. We should all be making an effort to expose ourselves to a wide range of political views. It is as easy as visiting a good mix of web logs and other sites. Perhaps people could post their favorite liberal/conservative/other blogs for keeping themselves exposed to a wide variety of viewpoints. Hal _______________________________________________ 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: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 22:16:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 14:16:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize In-Reply-To: <20041109212816.55673.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041109221616.1545.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Let me rephrase, then: > > With the current deadline, there is a very high risk > that no one will even seriously try to claim the > prize by 2010 (if anyone does, it will be > semi-obvious fraudsters like the da Vinci team was > on the first X Prize: putting out press releases and > promises but little if any actual flights and > hardware). The resulting disappointment will likely > leave the task undone through 2015, assuming no other > funding effort comes to the rescue. I don't agree. I know that Rutan has been working on his Tier Two program for some time, and other projects under way for a while, like Kistler, Kelly, XCOR, Pioneer, et al demonstrate that Bigelow's market is clearly a next step that is possible. The ballistic sub-orbital market is certainly another one, but isn't one that will contribute any new knowledge base to anyone pursuing Bigelow's prize that doesn't already exist in NASA archives or research facilities. It cost about $22 million for Rutan/Allen to do what they did for a $10 million prize. Roton spent over $30 million to do what Bigelow is proposing and went tits up, with the conclusion that it would cost at least $70 million do achieve it, but that it was possible. I predict whoever does it will spend about $100-120 million developing building and launching the first vehicle to win Bigelow's prize, and that it will be won by a company that has been working on that market already for several years. Could be Rutan, could be someone else. I'll put 2:1 odds that it's Rutan. > > On the other hand, sponsor a midway goal at 2010 and > then the full thing at 2015, and the odds are > significantly increased that service can start around > 2015 - which makes it worthwhile even if the midway > goal by itself is of marginal, maybe even zero, direct > value to Bigelow. > > So, no, it doesn't matter that he doesn't want to go > to Tokyo. The flight regieme of a ballistic shuttle is so inconsequentially indifferent from that of what Bigelow needs, that it is in Bigelow's interest to demand the full boat. One thing that annoyed me about the X-Prize were all the pissant projects from backyard BS artists acting like real competitors with nothing to back up their bs. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 9 22:20:35 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:20:35 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize References: <20041109212816.55673.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <020d01c4c6aa$5659eb50$deebfb44@kevin> I think the point is to have the capability to deliver people to the ISS during the gap period between the shuttle fleet, which is expected to be retired in 2010, and whatever they come up with next. 2015 will put them in too much competition with NASA. If someone can pull this off by 2010, they will have a good chance at a virtual monopoly for a few years. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 3:28 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > Yeah, but look at the deadline. A number of > > people > > > (myself included) have been advocating that the > > 2010 > > > goal should be something short of orbit - say, a > > > suborbital but significant distance point-to-point > > > hop, like L.A. to Tokyo, or at least Mojave to > > Maine. > > > Else one runs a severe risk that no one will show > > up > > > for the challenge in time. (Especially with the > > > added, > > > though relatively minor, complication of docking > > > capability.) > > > > An LA to Tokyo hop is of such significance (you need > > to reach at least > > mach 16 to do it ballistically) that if you can > > reach that its not much > > tougher to go into orbit. Bigelow's market isn't in > > Tokyo, its market > > is in orbit. Bigelow doesn't, therefore, have an > > interest in getting to > > Tokyo, unless you can prove it will get rich > > customers to his launch > > site quicker to get them into orbit for his space > > hotel. > > Let me rephrase, then: > > With the current deadline, there is a very high risk > that no one will even seriously try to claim the > prize by 2010 (if anyone does, it will be > semi-obvious fraudsters like the da Vinci team was > on the first X Prize: putting out press releases and > promises but little if any actual flights and > hardware). The resulting disappointment will likely > leave the task undone through 2015, assuming no other > funding effort comes to the rescue. > > On the other hand, sponsor a midway goal at 2010 and > then the full thing at 2015, and the odds are > significantly increased that service can start around > 2015 - which makes it worthwhile even if the midway > goal by itself is of marginal, maybe even zero, direct > value to Bigelow. > > So, no, it doesn't matter that he doesn't want to go > to Tokyo. Just pick any two reasonably accessible > points a good distance apart - or even let the > contestants pick their own launch and landing sites, > so long as they are at least X kilometers apart. (To > pick an extreme example, most contestants would view > Iraq to Singapore as unfeasable even if they could do > the much longer L.A. to Tokyo trip. But who knows, > there might be a group with connections that could > find usable launch and landing sites in those two > areas. Very unlikely, especially since this contest > is for American companies only, but it doesn't cost > anything to allow it.) > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 9 22:29:57 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:29:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election References: <20041109200108.98170.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <021601c4c6ab$a50c23c0$deebfb44@kevin> Mike, I've been wanting to ask you...What is your take on NH? Why do you think it went to Kerry? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: "Samantha Atkins" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 2:01 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > > --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > When we speak of California you are already speaking of around 13% of > > the population of the country. Not exactly a negligible out-of-touch > > little sanctuary as nearly portrayed. > > http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm > > Not even all of california, or even most or half. It is clear from the > county vote map that most Kerry support is enclaved in parts of the > country which are a small segment of the nation. In particular, those > who most loudly declaim, "I don't know anybody who voted for Bush" are > speaking from locales which are so heavily democrat that they cannot > hope to have a fair and balanced idea of what cross-sectional America > thinks without getting out of their enclaves for significant periods of > time (and not spending it in another democrat enclave). > > When I talk with my Seattle friends, it is rather offensive to hear the > vituperative language they use towards Bush, the 'facts' they claim to > have seen on their local media. It is clear they are enclaved to a > significant degree, mentally as much as anything. Their vacations to > 'the country' are to Sun Valley, Lake Chelan, and Whistler, BC: i.e. > isolated liberal resort enclaves. > > It appears my republican friends, wherever they are, are much better > traveled, acculturated, and tolerant of divergent opinions, while my > liberal friends are provincial, narrow minded, intolerant, petty, > spiteful, mean, vengeful, and disbelieving. Liberals pretend to an > elitism that only exists in university degrees, publishing records, > etc. and not to diversity, cultural exposure, etc. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From maxm at mail.tele.dk Tue Nov 9 22:39:06 2004 From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:39:06 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4191470A.4010903@mail.tele.dk> Damien Broderick wrote: > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing > and sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction > of the cost. A cannot really see anything good about outsourcing. Shure we can get stuff cheaper. But it is acheived by people working for less money. Not by people working more efficiently. So it is a net loss. Furthermore if we "rationalise" by using cheaper labor we will not get the benefits of automation, as there will be less motivation to automate. -- hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark http://www.mxm.dk/ IT's Mad Science From Steve365 at btinternet.com Tue Nov 9 22:59:30 2004 From: Steve365 at btinternet.com (Steve Davies) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:59:30 -0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <4191470A.4010903@mail.tele.dk> Message-ID: <002301c4c6af$c70952f0$ab018751@oemcomputer> Max M wrote > Damien Broderick wrote: > > > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing > > and sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction > > of the cost. > > > A cannot really see anything good about outsourcing. Shure we can get > stuff cheaper. But it is acheived by people working for less money. Not > by people working more efficiently. So it is a net loss. Not at all. It's done by people working for less money than those they replace doing the same or similar work, true. However (a) The people who do the replacing are more productive and earning more than they did before, and (b) all the empirical evidence shows that the people who are replaced will move into areas where they have comparable or higher incomes than they did before. (This is clearly the case here in the UK for example). Overall on a global scale productivity per capita and therefore total wealth will increase. The problem is the social costs of adjusting to change and the challenge is to develop means of minimising those. Opposition to outsourcing is essentially opposition to economic change. Also you have to ask in what way is a job moving from e.g. New York to Florida different from that job moving to Bangalore? Economically there's no difference whatever. > > Furthermore if we "rationalise" by using cheaper labor we will not get > the benefits of automation, as there will be less motivation to automate. Not true, it means the incentive is to automate other kinds of work. SD From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 23:14:34 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 15:14:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <021601c4c6ab$a50c23c0$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041109231434.21137.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Mike, I've been wanting to ask you...What is your take on NH? Why do > you think it went to Kerry? a) Kerry bussed in 25,000 "campaign workers" on election day. b) 15% of voters registered on election day (we are just starting that investigation, which may result in prosecutions all the way to the top) c) Kerry is from Massachusetts d) Vermont's Howard Dean built up a lot of support here which translated to Kerry e) The Democrats created an illegal unregistered PAC called the "Clean Ballot Project" whose sole aim was to keep all serious third party candidates off the ballot. They kept the Constitution Party off, they kept almost all of the LPNH candidates off, and nearly kept Nader off but he had more money and better lawyers and exposed the scam, which the media never reported on. The dems sent teams of people to the homes of petition signers to strong arm them into recinding their signatures. They wanted to give anti-war voters only one choice: Kerry. f) the media never reported on any of the other democrat dirty tricks and criminal activities here in this election. Ultimately, NH is one of the best educated states, and Bush's down home persona suffered the same ignorant snobbery you see so much of on this list. There was a lot of ticket splitting this year, as GOP candidates Charlie Bass, Jeb Bradley, and Judd Gregg were reelected to US Congress and Senate, but Bush lost by less than 10,000 votes out of 670,000 cast, with 98,000 new registrants on election day. He could have asked for a recount if he wanted. I imagine that he'd pick up a good number of votes just because the less literate vote more for Bush and might have difficulty filling out the circle on the ballot. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From vanvidum at msn.com Tue Nov 9 23:56:19 2004 From: vanvidum at msn.com (Paul carbone) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:56:19 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: >From: Mike Lorrey >Reply-To: ExI chat list >To: Kevin Freels , ExI chat list > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election >Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 15:14:34 -0800 (PST) > > Mike, I've been wanting to ask you...What is your take on NH? Why do > > you think it went to Kerry? > >a) Kerry bussed in 25,000 "campaign workers" on election day. >b) 15% of voters registered on election day (we are just starting that >investigation, which may result in prosecutions all the way to the top) >c) Kerry is from Massachusetts >d) Vermont's Howard Dean built up a lot of support here which >translated to Kerry >e) The Democrats created an illegal unregistered PAC called the "Clean >Ballot Project" whose sole aim was to keep all serious third party >candidates off the ballot. They kept the Constitution Party off, they >kept almost all of the LPNH candidates off, and nearly kept Nader off >but he had more money and better lawyers and exposed the scam, which >the media never reported on. The dems sent teams of people to the homes >of petition signers to strong arm them into recinding their signatures. >They wanted to give anti-war voters only one choice: Kerry. >f) the media never reported on any of the other democrat dirty tricks >and criminal activities here in this election. I would suggest that continued movement from MA to NH between the elections contributed. Rather ironic, Massachusettsites try to escape our own stagnant state, only to drag down our more vibrant neighbor. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 23:57:48 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 15:57:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] First Extropic Brain Augment In-Reply-To: <20041109231434.21137.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041109235748.38527.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> >From "SiliconValleyToday.com": "This is your brain. This is your brain on .... err: Strong electrical impulses sent through your brain will fry it, but weaker ones can boost your verbal skills by up to 20 percent. Researchers at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke say a current of two thousandths of an ampere (a fraction of that needed to power an LED) applied for 20 minutes boosts brain activity - enough to produce a significant improvement in verbal response. And apart from an itchy sensation around the area to which the current is applied, subjects in the trials reported no side effects. "This process is so easy to miniaturize that it essentially becomes wearable," lead researcher Eric Wassermann told Wired News. "One day a patient could be wearing it in a hat with the power source in a bucket and turning it on perhaps at critical times of day."" ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From brentn at freeshell.org Wed Nov 10 00:06:04 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 19:06:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041109231434.21137.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/9/04 15:14) Mike Lorrey wrote: >Ultimately, NH is one of the best educated states, and Bush's down home >persona suffered the same ignorant snobbery you see so much of on this >list. You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for someone, I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated seems to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to think more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to do. (e.g.) >of votes just because the less literate vote more for Bush and might >have difficulty filling out the circle on the ballot. If you aren't literate, you don't deserve to vote. Sorry. That might be heresy here, but I am a firm believer that the right to vote is one that should be earned. If you are not able to fill out a ballot, one can only assume that you are also not capable of gathering enough information on your own to make an informed choice and the use of that capability is the responsibility that balances the right. However much you rant, rave, and wail about how some of us exercise those critical thinking skills, any republic or democracy requires the exercise thereof for stability. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 10 00:23:26 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:53:26 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <41911212.6090107@mac.com> References: <20041106225659.77565.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> <41911212.6090107@mac.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04110916232f8004cb@mail.gmail.com> > But the solution to the SS mess is very clearly to dismantle it with as > much compassion and care for those who have been led to depend on it and > are already doing so or will be too soon to do something else as > possible. The second part of the solution is to do something about > the rising median age of the population. For that life extension, > anti-aging and continuously improved medicine AND healthier life habits > of the population are essential. We must increase the healthy and > productive years if all we Boomers aren't going to be seen as a > parasitical burden. > > - samantha > You don't want to keep slaving away all your life do you? Even the Japanese don't want that, and they seem to *really* *like* *working*. Why not try their idea, and start building robots. While you're at it, go open source! Japan's Robot Developers Go Linux "Japan's preoccupation with consumer robots is largely driven by economic imperatives. It has an aging population, declining birthrates and a looming labor shortage, which means that the development of a standard robot platform could simply be a matter of time. However, despite its growing popularity in robotics, Linux cannot yet claim victory." http://www.technewsworld.com/story/32281.html Manga really affected that country. Maybe a lot of Astro Boy didn't come through in the translation? Can you imagine proposing developing robots as a solution to impending aging population based labor shortages, in any of the anglo western countries? People would look at you like you were mad. The funky thing is, I think those crazy kids in Japan will probably pull this off. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 10 00:38:45 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:08:45 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041109190830.63892.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <41910F86.5020209@mac.com> <20041109190830.63892.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > "America is the worst democracy in the world, except > for all the other democracies in the world." (For a > slightly incorrect/outdated definition that includes > republics.) > > I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet > implemented a far better solution. Hey big fella, that's a substantial claim. There are a LOT of democracies outside the US, and, living in one of them, I can tell you that your statement is not obviously true from the outside. Care to back that statement up? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From glc at cartwrightlawgroup.com Wed Nov 10 00:46:52 2004 From: glc at cartwrightlawgroup.com (Gregory Cartwright) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:46:52 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <41910F86.5020209@mac.com><20041109190830.63892.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <026901c4c6be$c5854d30$1300005a@greg> Hey kids! compare and contrast! http://sg.news.yahoo.com/041109/1/3odtu.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Emlyn" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:38 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville > Adrian Tymes wrote: >> "America is the worst democracy in the world, except >> for all the other democracies in the world." (For a >> slightly incorrect/outdated definition that includes >> republics.) >> >> I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet >> implemented a far better solution. > > Hey big fella, that's a substantial claim. There are a LOT of > democracies outside the US, and, living in one of them, I can tell you > that your statement is not obviously true from the outside. Care to > back that statement up? > > -- > Emlyn > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 10 00:49:40 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:49:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: <20041110004940.CF79757E2A@finney.org> Brent Neal writes: > If you aren't literate, you don't deserve to vote. Sorry. That might > be heresy here, but I am a firm believer that the right to vote is one > that should be earned. If you are not able to fill out a ballot, one can > only assume that you are also not capable of gathering enough information > on your own to make an informed choice and the use of that capability is > the responsibility that balances the right. However much you rant, rave, > and wail about how some of us exercise those critical thinking skills, > any republic or democracy requires the exercise thereof for stability. I suggest that a good way to think about this is to imagine that in the future you will be able to move to a space station or virtual world, where the different worlds have different forms of government. Ask yourself whether you would rather move to a station where everyone could vote irregardless of ability or knowledge, vs a station where voters had to pass some kind of test. You'd choose based on which system seemed to produce the most favorable results. This kind of approach bypasses arguments based on natural rights by allowing people to focus on which systems would produce outcomes they prefer. Hopefully in the future we will have enough diversity that people will be able to voluntarily choose their form of government in some way along these lines. Hal From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 10 01:41:41 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:11:41 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110004940.CF79757E2A@finney.org> References: <20041110004940.CF79757E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <710b78fc04110917414dcbfc3@mail.gmail.com> > I suggest that a good way to think about this is to imagine that in the > future you will be able to move to a space station or virtual world, where > the different worlds have different forms of government. Ask yourself > whether you would rather move to a station where everyone could vote > irregardless of ability or knowledge, vs a station where voters had to > pass some kind of test. You'd choose based on which system seemed to > produce the most favorable results. > > > Hal Interesting... On reflection, I'd probably choose the station that required a test. However, it'd depend heavily on what was in the test, how the test was set up, what kind of process was required to change the test, etc. This all of course goes back to the nature of the democratic institutions underlying the test. I support freedom of movement of people between legal jurisdictions; no borders. However, the right to vote is another matter entirely. Bare minimums, like getting the illiterate (some exception for the blind of course!) out of voting would be a big step up. I agree with Brent; some basic level of intelligence & rational thought is really required on the part of citizens for a democracy to work. The ability to read & write is a subset of the requirement, but it's a good start. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 10 01:41:56 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:41:56 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: <1100050916.12928@whirlwind.he.net> Brent Neal wrote: > You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for someone, > I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated seems > to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to think > more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to do. There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart folks preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city liberals are as provincial and poorly educated as your average flyover country resident, they just choose to let their ignorance shine in different areas, and tend to believe in the myth of their intellectual skills a little more. Just because you like a different flavor of Kool-Aid does not change the fact that you are still drinking Kool-Aid. There is no shortage of tools and frauds on both sides, and being trendy or fashionable is not an indication of credibility. In practice, blue state folks are just as ignorant of science, mathematics, and culture as red state folks. They just specialize in different sub-areas when it comes to ignorance. If you do not recognize this (no matter which side you claim to be on), then you are precisely the type of person I am talking about. I do find that some stereotypes tend to be true. Red-Staters tend to be historians and tend to view things in a historical context, whereas I find that most Blue-Staters have an appalling lack of knowledge of history. Blue-Staters tend to be more ethnically worldly than Red-Staters, though not to the extent that many Blue-Staters appear to believe. Red-Staters are more religious on average, but not that much and not in any way that makes a difference, since Blue-Staters have their own quasi-religious belief systems that Red-Staters generally do not share. I tend to find the religious right-wing more tolerable than the "intellectual" left-wing in that the religious right does not try to make any claim as to the superiority of their own brain power as individuals (that is reserved for god), whereas I've found that the intellectual left tends to take the superiority of their thinking skills and knowledge to be axiomatic (and hence whatever garbage may result from it). Appeals to god are so much cleaner and pleasant in comparison. I don't really fall under either side, and have lived in both "parts" of the country most of my life. Claiming clear intellectual superiority for team you voted for is hubris born of ignorance. j. andrew rogers From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Nov 10 01:45:16 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:15:16 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <1100050916.12928@whirlwind.he.net> References: <1100050916.12928@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: <710b78fc04110917455c7432e0@mail.gmail.com> btw Voter turnout in Tuesday's election unlikely to have been higher than in 2000 Andrea Lynn, Humanities Editor University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 11/3/04 CHAMPAIGN, Ill. - Despite the widespread assumption that voter turnout was substantially higher in the 2004 presidential election than it was in the 2000 election, "the numbers suggest a different story," says Scott Althaus, a professor of speech communication and political science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who conducts research on the effects of presidential campaigns. etc http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/11/04/3548414 On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:41:56 -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > Brent Neal wrote: > > You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for someone, > > I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated seems > > to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to think > > more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to do. > > > There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart folks > preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city liberals > are as provincial and poorly educated as your average flyover country > resident, they just choose to let their ignorance shine in different > areas, and tend to believe in the myth of their intellectual skills a > little more. Just because you like a different flavor of Kool-Aid does > not change the fact that you are still drinking Kool-Aid. There is no > shortage of tools and frauds on both sides, and being trendy or > fashionable is not an indication of credibility. > > In practice, blue state folks are just as ignorant of science, > mathematics, and culture as red state folks. They just specialize in > different sub-areas when it comes to ignorance. If you do not recognize > this (no matter which side you claim to be on), then you are precisely > the type of person I am talking about. > > I do find that some stereotypes tend to be true. Red-Staters tend to be > historians and tend to view things in a historical context, whereas I > find that most Blue-Staters have an appalling lack of knowledge of > history. Blue-Staters tend to be more ethnically worldly than > Red-Staters, though not to the extent that many Blue-Staters appear to > believe. Red-Staters are more religious on average, but not that much > and not in any way that makes a difference, since Blue-Staters have > their own quasi-religious belief systems that Red-Staters generally do > not share. > > I tend to find the religious right-wing more tolerable than the > "intellectual" left-wing in that the religious right does not try to > make any claim as to the superiority of their own brain power as > individuals (that is reserved for god), whereas I've found that the > intellectual left tends to take the superiority of their thinking skills > and knowledge to be axiomatic (and hence whatever garbage may result > from it). Appeals to god are so much cleaner and pleasant in comparison. > > I don't really fall under either side, and have lived in both "parts" of > the country most of my life. Claiming clear intellectual superiority > for team you voted for is hubris born of ignorance. > > > j. andrew rogers > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 10 02:02:34 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 20:02:34 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard References: <20041106225659.77565.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com><41911212.6090107@mac.com> <710b78fc04110916232f8004cb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002101c4c6c9$5922de40$deebfb44@kevin> I don;t want to keep slaving all my life, but I don;t want to take other people's money to pay for my vacations either. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Emlyn" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 6:23 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard > > But the solution to the SS mess is very clearly to dismantle it with as > > much compassion and care for those who have been led to depend on it and > > are already doing so or will be too soon to do something else as > > possible. The second part of the solution is to do something about > > the rising median age of the population. For that life extension, > > anti-aging and continuously improved medicine AND healthier life habits > > of the population are essential. We must increase the healthy and > > productive years if all we Boomers aren't going to be seen as a > > parasitical burden. > > > > - samantha > > > > You don't want to keep slaving away all your life do you? Even the > Japanese don't want that, and they seem to *really* *like* *working*. > Why not try their idea, and start building robots. While you're at it, > go open source! > > Japan's Robot Developers Go Linux > "Japan's preoccupation with consumer robots is largely driven by > economic imperatives. It has an aging population, declining birthrates > and a looming labor shortage, which means that the development of a > standard robot platform could simply be a matter of time. However, > despite its growing popularity in robotics, Linux cannot yet claim > victory." > http://www.technewsworld.com/story/32281.html > > Manga really affected that country. Maybe a lot of Astro Boy didn't > come through in the translation? > > Can you imagine proposing developing robots as a solution to impending > aging population based labor shortages, in any of the anglo western > countries? People would look at you like you were mad. The funky thing > is, I think those crazy kids in Japan will probably pull this off. > > -- > Emlyn > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From glc at cartwrightlawgroup.com Wed Nov 10 01:08:25 2004 From: glc at cartwrightlawgroup.com (Gregory Cartwright) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:08:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election References: <20041110004940.CF79757E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <02f201c4c6c1$c8925ec0$1300005a@greg> Dear Hal: I agree with the general proposition that different systems can yield different results from which to choose. But why do we suppose that space stations, islands, or virtual worlds would behave much differently than the political systems and choices we have today. Can't be transaction costs. (eg cheaper optiont to move to another system would increase more violitility/choice). It's hard to believe that it would be more cost effective for me to emigrate to a space colony than it would be for me to move to Canada. Indeed, Mexico is about a 20 minute drive from here. (I am not sure that human behavior will be much different because the people are located off planet. Any thoughts? BTW, one tool I like to use to compare different systems is culling through the data at www.nationmaster.com It always yields interesting results. Kind Regards, Greg ----- Original Message ----- From: ""Hal Finney"" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 4:49 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > Brent Neal writes: >> If you aren't literate, you don't deserve to vote. Sorry. That might >> be heresy here, but I am a firm believer that the right to vote is one >> that should be earned. If you are not able to fill out a ballot, one can >> only assume that you are also not capable of gathering enough information >> on your own to make an informed choice and the use of that capability is >> the responsibility that balances the right. However much you rant, rave, >> and wail about how some of us exercise those critical thinking skills, >> any republic or democracy requires the exercise thereof for stability. > > I suggest that a good way to think about this is to imagine that in the > future you will be able to move to a space station or virtual world, where > the different worlds have different forms of government. Ask yourself > whether you would rather move to a station where everyone could vote > irregardless of ability or knowledge, vs a station where voters had to > pass some kind of test. You'd choose based on which system seemed to > produce the most favorable results. > > This kind of approach bypasses arguments based on natural rights by > allowing people to focus on which systems would produce outcomes they > prefer. Hopefully in the future we will have enough diversity that > people will be able to voluntarily choose their form of government in > some way along these lines. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > 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 Nov 10 02:15:52 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:15:52 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <02f201c4c6c1$c8925ec0$1300005a@greg> References: <20041110004940.CF79757E2A@finney.org> <02f201c4c6c1$c8925ec0$1300005a@greg> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041109201405.01991508@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:08 PM 11/9/2004 -0800, Greg wrote: > BTW, one tool I like to use to compare different systems is culling > through the data at www.nationmaster.com It always yields interesting results. This is entertaining: 27. United States $6702.42 per person 42. Australia $4398.94 per person Damned filthy socialists! Damien Broderick From brentn at freeshell.org Wed Nov 10 03:16:07 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:16:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <1100050916.12928@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: (11/9/04 17:41) J. Andrew Rogers wrote: >Brent Neal wrote: >> You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for someone, >> I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated seems >> to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to think >> more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to do. > > >There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart folks >preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city liberals I would disagree. You're comparing apples and oranges. "big-city liberal" does not equal "educated." "Uneducated," however, does equal a likely Bush voter as has been amply covered on most of the major news sources. > >In practice, blue state folks are just as ignorant of science, >mathematics, and culture as red state folks. They just specialize in >different sub-areas when it comes to ignorance. If you do not recognize >this (no matter which side you claim to be on), then you are precisely >the type of person I am talking about. Your fallacy here is that you are assuming that "blue-state" and "red-state" persons are homogenous groups. You also got your cause and effect backwards. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From extropy at unreasonable.com Wed Nov 10 05:09:59 2004 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:09:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: <1100050916.12928@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20041109231729.08a674e8@unreasonable.com> Brent Neal wrote: >"big-city liberal" does not equal "educated." "Uneducated," however, does >equal a likely Bush voter as has been amply covered on most of the major >news sources. Amply covered, perhaps, but apparently untrue. See the exit polls CNN reports at http://tinyurl.com/57l72 No high school (4%) -- Bush 49 % / Kerry 50% H. S. graduate (22%) -- Bush 52% / Kerry 47% Some college (32%) -- Bush 54% / Kerry 46% College graduate (26%) -- Bush 52% / Kerry 46% Postgrad study (16%) -- Bush 44% / Kerry 55% (It would be interesting to see a breakdown by field of study. Engineers are notoriously conservative and scientists liberal.) >Your fallacy here is that you are assuming that "blue-state" and >"red-state" persons are homogenous groups. You also got your cause and >effect backwards. Given the abundance of red in nominally blue states, the state-level view is inadequate, and leads to erroneous conclusions. See 2000 http://tinyurl.com/3ndap 2004 http://tinyurl.com/3l2uz on USA Today for maps color-coded by county. Notice how red New York is, where Bush got about 40% of the vote (and 50% of the white vote). The exit polls show that the pre-election predictions and post-election rationalizations for Kerry's loss misstate and oversimplify what went on. Bush got 48% of women voters (up from 43%), 25% of Jews (up from 6%), 44% of Latinos (up from 35%), 44% of Asians (up from 41%), 23% of gays (another source says 35%), 45% of young voters (18-29), 13% of self-declared liberals, 31% of atheists, 46% of new voters, and Sarah Michelle Gellar. Bush improved his results over 2000 in nearly every category in the poll and in nearly every state. James Carville seems to be one of the few on the left who both understands that the world has changed and has remained committed to the left. He grasped 9/11/01 and 11/3/04 immediately. Of course, there's no sign that anyone's listening to him; instead, there's talk of Howard Dean becoming the DNC chairman. Some among the libertarians, like John Hospers and a few on this list, have reconsidered and adapted in the wake of 9/11, but most have not. The LP was even more of a joke this year than ever. There are profound questions to be answered, such as those raised in Spencer Weart, Never at War: Why Democracies Will Not Fight One Another Thomas Barnett, The Pentagon's New Map Fareed Zakaria, The Future of Freedom that have been blithely ignored by the LP's candidates. A typical candidate, unfortunately including several I've known for years and otherwise respect, presents a fantastic position on how we should proceed on the issues of Iraq and terror. One would think that viable non-statist solutions exist. -- David Lubkin. From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 10 06:17:13 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:17:13 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20041109231729.08a674e8@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <000001c4c6ec$eefa5060$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > David Lubkin > > (It would be interesting to see a breakdown by field of > study. Engineers are notoriously conservative and scientists liberal.) YES! But why is that? I had a professor who was at Berkeley in 1969. His comment was that one could always tell who were the engineers. They were the guys who were watching the riots from the fifth floor of the library and cheering for the police. {8^D spike From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 10 06:53:50 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:53:50 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <000001c4c6ec$eefa5060$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000001c4c6ec$eefa5060$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <472EA93C-32E5-11D9-B05A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 9, 2004, at 10:17 PM, Spike wrote: >> (It would be interesting to see a breakdown by field of >> study. Engineers are notoriously conservative and scientists liberal.) > > YES! But why is that? Simple. Scientists primarily work with models of the ideal. Engineers primarily work with models of the real. Everything else follows from that. j. andrew rogers From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 10 07:50:22 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 23:50:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2D080AB5-32ED-11D9-B05A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 9, 2004, at 7:16 PM, Brent Neal wrote: > (11/9/04 17:41) J. Andrew Rogers wrote: >> There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart folks >> preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city >> liberals > > I would disagree. You're comparing apples and oranges. "big-city > liberal" does not equal "educated." "Uneducated," however, does equal > a likely Bush voter as has been amply covered on most of the major > news sources. My point was that big city liberals (and I use that as a descriptive rather than a pejorative) view themselves as very educated. I agree that being an urban liberal does not equal "educated", by they very much perceive themselves as being exceptionally well-educated whether they actually are or not. They bring up their superior education and intellectual capacity when ever they have to bring fly-over country into the conversation e.g. talking about politics. I also do not equate schooling with education, though the naive might. There is no shortage of well-schooled ignoramuses and idiots out in the wild. Yet I have met some shockingly well-educated people in the most unlikely of places and in the absence of formal education. Really bright people are not all that common and they stand out anywhere, but I have met them in every kind of place imaginable -- give a bright mind access to books and you'll be surprised what they can do. I've lived in some really shabby places and met some very interesting people. I've known genuine po' white trailer trash with no education but who were obscenely well read thanks to the library, whose intelligence was blindingly obvious. In another life outside the trailer park, these guys would have had PhDs and the respect of the establishment elite but that was not in their cards. Or more often than not, they simply did not care to pursue it. And usually the opinions of these guys are well-respected within their communities. The big city liberal believes they are intellectually superior to these guys because of where they live and how they look and where they went to school (if at all), but in a real battle of intelligence I know where I would put my money. I am a Silicon Valley elitist, but I have lived in many parts of the country including Bush-voter country and I can become one of them with ease. If you think these people are uneducated, fools, or idiots, you are sadly mistaken. The media likes to paint them as such because the media is very much made up of the stereotypical big city liberal. I gain little by defending them, but knowing them as well as I do I find it the height of arrogance, prejudice, and bigotry that their opinions and perspectives are automatically dismissed by the urban liberals on the presumption that these people are ignorant, stupid, and superstitious. I live in a veritable haven of left-wing intellectuals and have for a decade or two, and all I've been able to conclude is that most of these folks have never lived outside their comfortable liberal Democrat enclaves and have a view of the rest of the world that is almost pure fiction. I get along with the urban liberals just fine and blend as one of them with ease, but their shallowness on many issues is readily transparent to someone who has lived in a much more diverse set of societies and cultures. I am not a Republican, but considering how unfairly and disrespectfully urban liberal Democrat culture treats everyone else in the country I am not surprised that people like Kerry, who is the epitome of the urban liberal left-wing intellectual, faired poorly in most parts of the country. The people who voted for Bush are neither stupid nor ill-educated, and the perpetuation of that myth only hurts the Democrats, and really brings *their* intelligence and worldliness into question. Given that the people who voted for Bush are neither stupid nor ill-educated nor uninformed nor even particularly more religious, an intelligent Kerry voter *should* be asking themselves why they came to a different conclusion. That most don't suggests that there is plenty of less-than-brilliant voters for both parties. cheers, j. andrew rogers From amara.graps at gmail.com Wed Nov 10 08:03:54 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:03:54 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: re: Scientists and engineers: breakdown of voting for Bush and Kerry Small anecdotal data; Gathered at lunch in the cafeteria at a large military/engineering company in Florence yesterday, and in a teleconference last Thursday with our American and Italian colleagues. Half of my working group (in Italy and the US) are engineers, designing and building instruments on spacecraft. The rest are scientists and various technicians. None of them voted for, in the case of the Italians, would have voted for Bush. I doubt that you can break down the election results into 'scientists' (for Kerry) and 'engineers' (for Bush). The world and its people are not that simple. Amara -- Amara Graps, PhD www.amara.com Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Wed Nov 10 08:31:43 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:31:43 +0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] What is worse: hammer and sickle or cross? In-Reply-To: <20041108134109.4071.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20041108115608.00aa1f00@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041109194440.00acc710@pop.cris.net> At 05:41 AM 11/8/04 -0800, you Al Brooks wrote: >Get a hold of yourself, Gennady. At one time the cross was worse, but after >the purges of 1936-39 the hammer & sickle outdid the cross at murder and >mind control. You know that. >> (And what is worse: hammer and sickle or cross?) >>Gennady Those who rallied under hammer and sickle killed millions of people but never dreamed of Apocalypse and death of billions of infidels as do those who rally under one Cross, one God and one President. See the article Jesus and Jihad below. Unbelievable, but the best-selling novels for adults in the United States, the "Left Behind" series of evangelical thrillers, are the books where millions of Americans can delight in juicy details of a bloody Second Coming and annihilation of all non-Christians. They literally follow the Revelation in their most cherished reveries and, nightmarishly, the American President is one of them. How far the Christian ayatollahs, the exact counterparts of Islamic species, with the only difference that the former are equipped with the Bible as a guidebook, with enormous, absolute power in their hands and supertechnologies and might of only remaining superpower, are ready to go with afterelection preponderance in 4 million and how much may be imposed upon all of us in the real world? How soon will nano-Jesus come and what the Dies Irae will he prepare for us? How much fun and mind and body control can we expect in chiliastic interval before that? Won't the perpetual progress be arrested in the manageable static theofascist quasi-Singularity of eternal dystopia? What is worse and more dangerous for the future of the civilization: hammer and sickle or cross, Cote d'Ivoire with missiles or the Christian ayatollahs with full-fledged NBIC, the Bible or Communist Manifesto? Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine ======================== Jesus and Jihad By Nicholas D. Kristoff New York Times Saturday 17 July 2004 If the latest in the "Left Behind" series of evangelical thrillers is to be believed, Jesus will return to Earth, gather non-Christians to his left and toss them into everlasting fire: "Jesus merely raised one hand a few inches and a yawning chasm opened in the earth, stretching far and wide enough to swallow all of them. They tumbled in, howling and screeching, but their wailing was soon quashed and all was silent when the earth closed itself again." These are the best-selling novels for adults in the United States, and they have sold more than 60 million copies worldwide. The latest is "Glorious Appearing," which has Jesus returning to Earth to wipe all non-Christians from the planet. It's disconcerting to find ethnic cleansing celebrated as the height of piety. If a Muslim were to write an Islamic version of "Glorious Appearing" and publish it in Saudi Arabia, jubilantly describing a massacre of millions of non-Muslims by God, we would have a fit. We have quite properly linked the fundamentalist religious tracts of Islam with the intolerance they nurture, and it's time to remove the motes from our own eyes. In "Glorious Appearing," Jesus merely speaks and the bodies of the enemy are ripped open. Christians have to drive carefully to avoid "hitting splayed and filleted bodies of men and women and horses." "The riders not thrown," the novel continues, "leaped from their horses and tried to control them with the reins, but even as they struggled, their own flesh dissolved, their eyes melted and their tongues disintegrated. . . . Seconds later the same plague afflicted the horses, their flesh and eyes and tongues melting away, leaving grotesque skeletons standing, before they, too, rattled to the pavement." One might have thought that Jesus would be more of an animal lover. These scenes also raise an eschatological problem: Could devout fundamentalists really enjoy paradise as their friends, relatives and neighbors were heaved into hell? As my Times colleague David Kirkpatrick noted in an article, this portrayal of a bloody Second Coming reflects a shift in American portrayals of Jesus, from a gentle Mister Rogers figure to a martial messiah presiding over a sea of blood. Militant Christianity rises to confront Militant Islam. This matters in the real world, in the same way that fundamentalist Islamic tracts in Saudi Arabia do. Each form of fundamentalism creates a stark moral division between decent, pious types like oneself - and infidels headed for hell. No, I don't think the readers of "Glorious Appearing" will ram planes into buildings. But we did imprison thousands of Muslims here and abroad after 9/11, and ordinary Americans joined in the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in part because of a lack of empathy for the prisoners. It's harder to feel empathy for such people if we regard them as infidels and expect Jesus to dissolve their tongues and eyes any day now. I had reservations about writing this column because I don't want to mock anyone's religious beliefs, and millions of Americans think "Glorious Appearing" describes God's will. Yet ultimately I think it's a mistake to treat religion as a taboo, either in this country or in Saudi Arabia. I often write about religion precisely because faith has a vast impact on society. Since I've praised the work that evangelicals do in the third world (Christian aid groups are being particularly helpful in Sudan, at a time when most of the world has done nothing about the genocide there), I also feel a responsibility to protest intolerance at home. Should we really give intolerance a pass if it is rooted in religious faith? Many American Christians once read the Bible to mean that African-Americans were cursed as descendants of Noah's son Ham, and were intended by God to be enslaved. In the 19th century, millions of Americans sincerely accepted this Biblical justification for slavery as God's word - but surely it would have been wrong to defer to such racist nonsense simply because speaking out could have been perceived as denigrating some people's religious faith. People have the right to believe in a racist God, or a God who throws millions of nonevangelicals into hell. I don't think we should ban books that say that. But we should be embarrassed when our best-selling books gleefully celebrate religious intolerance and violence against infidels. That's not what America stands for, and I doubt that it's what God stands for. From brentn at freeshell.org Wed Nov 10 11:04:53 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:04:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20041109231729.08a674e8@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: (11/10/04 0:09) David Lubkin wrote: >Given the abundance of red in nominally blue states, the state-level view >is inadequate, and leads to erroneous conclusions. See > >2000 http://tinyurl.com/3ndap >2004 http://tinyurl.com/3l2uz > >on USA Today for maps color-coded by county. Notice how red New York is, where >Bush got about 40% of the vote (and 50% of the white vote). Its funny you bring this up. Your maps also lead to erroneous conclusions, since they do not account for either 1) the population density of the counties in question or 2) the margins by which Bush won. For a clearer picture, see http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/ B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 10 13:48:19 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:48:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2DFE362E-331F-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 10 Nov 2004, at 12:04, Brent Neal wrote: > Its funny you bring this up. Your maps also lead to erroneous > conclusions, since they do not account for either 1) the population > density of the counties in question or 2) the margins by which Bush > won. For a clearer picture, see > > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/ I find the purple cartogram at the bottom of the link difficult to interpret. I have been looking for a graph plotting population density by county vs. proportion of the vote for Bush. Does anyone know where I can get this? I keep hearing that urban voters would be more likely to vote of Kerry, but it would be much simpler to see if there was an actual graph comparing population density with voting patterns. This is a fairly compelling graph of Bush's popularity. Despite getting improved numbers in this election its seems clear that the war and other factors have been eroding his support since 9/11 and Bush would probably have lost if an election were held in six months: http://www.psy.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/kabe-e.html Of course extrapolating trends are dangerous, but we do this all the time for silicon chips, why not presidents?? best, patrick From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 10 13:28:34 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:28:34 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Storyteller's Daughter Message-ID: Hi Folks, I discovered last weekend that my favorite Sufi writer, Idries Shah (1924-1996) had a daughter, Saira Shah, who is following in her father's footsteps as a writer, but with a journalistic bent. She wrote the film "Beneath the Veil" about the Taliban, that was presented in the summer of 2001 on CNN, and she has a book: The Storyteller's Daughter, that is just recently published. I'm pleased to learn about her because I liked very much her father's writings and because she is giving first-hand knowledge of Afghanistan and the Taliban that I didn't know and that I think is important for others to understand. Her father, Idries Shah, made a deep impression on me starting about 15 years ago. Shah was the most prolific publisher of Sufi literature before he died. His tales taught me about sufis, and helped me learn about myself in a psychological way, but his most memorable book was his based-on-fact, but fiction work: Kara Kush. I could not put the 575(!) page book down because the story he wove is gripping. In that book: you will get into the mind of an Afghan and people in an unusual war situation (Afghanistan-Soviet Union). From what I read in interviews with Saira Shah, she is similarly as courageous as her father, although she might not think of herself that way. In this interview: http://www.identitytheory.com/interviews/birnbaum133.html Author of The Storyteller's Daughter talks with Robert Birnbaum Posted: November 19, 2003 ? 2003 Robert Birnbaum Birnbaum introduces her: "Reporter and broadcaster Saira Shah was born in Britain of an Afghan father (though half Scottish), writer Idries Shah, and a British mother (though Indian). She first visited Afghanistan in the '80s and there became a freelance journalist covering the Afghan resistance to the Soviet occupation. She has regularly traveled to hot spots like the Balkans, Algiers, Palestine, Congo, Iraq, Columbia, Northern Ireland and Sudan. She was part of the group that made Beneath the Veil, shown in this country on CNN, which vividly exhibits the hell that was Taliban Afghanistan. With her dear friend, director James Miller, Shah also made a sequel called Unholy War that won numerous awards including a Peabody Award. Last year Shah and Miller set up a production company and were working on a documentary for HBO in Israel in May 2003 when Miller was killed by Israeli soldiers in the Gaza Strip. Shah has recently published a memoir, The Storyteller's Daughter. For the time being she lives in London." and we learn some of her perspective of the situation in Afghanistan leading to the rise of the Taliban. I had thought, before I read the interview, that the Taliban was a very particular kind of person that emerged from within the country's fighters, a mindset that was the result of hard years of fighting the Soviets. According to her, it's more complicated than that. In her view, the Taliban are a mindset from several different cultural impulses: Pushtun tribal values, conservative village mullahs with a very narrow view of Islam and the West and an influx of mainly wahhabi Muslims (Arabs) who came to fight alongside the mujahidin against the Soviet Union. The gist of her interview is that the west is trying to solve the wrong problem with the wrong methods. If one doesn't pay attention and work on the sources of the problems, removing or changing the figurehead (bin Laden or whoever else is in charge and in the hierarchy) will make no difference. a part of the interview: SS = Saira Shah, RB = Robert Birnbaum SS: [...] And the second reason is that there was symmetry after the Taliban. History made more sense because you could see a progression and it really became clear I had not seen and that really the West had not seen, in the '80s, that there were two separate wars being fought in Afghanistan. There was the Superpower conflict. But there was also the mujahadin who were fighting a really different war. Pakistan was fighting a really different war for Islam. We really didn't recognize it at the time. It's exactly what I was saying about people not seeing things that they are not set up to see. In the book I say that we'd be in Peshawar and dead bodies with their throats cut would come floating down the canal. These were the victims of intra-mujahadin fighting -- different factions were fighting among themselves, and there would be explosions in the town, and we never really looked into them. We didn't look and we didn't perceive. It seemed to me that history had come around and we were again in a position where I got a second chance, if you like. And again in the '80s Afghanistan was considered important because it was the front line in the Superpower conflict and now it was considered important as the front line in the war against terror. It seemed like that there was a real danger of the same mistake being made and the wrong things being looked at. So it just seemed to be symmetry and also my story? RB: Has it not in fact already happened, these mistakes two years later? SS: I think it is happening. RB: Just today I came across this: "We have executed a private assessment of Afghanistan, available to both civilian and military elements of the USG, and these are our key judgements: 1) Taliban is back in force, strong in the south, and opening a northern front. 2) Goodwill for US and NATO has collapsed. 3) Support for the Afghan government is in flux-the US Government is largely to blame. 4) Refugees unable to return home are aggravating instability and poverty and so on? So what's changed?" SS: Says it all, doesn't it? I couldn't agree more. The West set out to solve a series of problems in Afghanistan. The West is a very problem-solving culture. And one of the problems of Afghanistan is that it doesn't lend itself readily to being sorted out on the West's terms. And I am afraid that the West really picked the wrong problems to solve and the wrong methods to solve them. In being very fixated on the Taliban and Osama bin Ladin, they neglected the cause of the Taliban and the causes of bin Ladin. The Taliban particularly are not a homogenous group. RB: But mostly they are Pushtuns? SS: Mostly Pushtuns, yeah. Even in something like this [the above-mentioned assessment]. "The Taliban could take power?" as if there is this kind of creature called Taliban. In fact, the Taliban are a very ad hoc sort of thing. For wont of a better word you could almost call them a mind set. 'Taliban' just means students. It's not that the Taliban are coming back, they have never gone away. They are still there. There is a massive culture of war lordism in Afghanistan, as is quite well known. Where do they get those weapons? Well, they got them from the Soviet occupation-both from the Soviet Union, in captured weapons and the United States. So I fear for Afghanistan. I fear now is a little window and things will get very grim again unless there is a very different sort of commitment and that's not only for money but a commitment to attention. RB: The Afghan worldview seems to me to be almost untranslatable into English.There are some values that don't seem to cross over the linguistic barrier. And for all the talk about the fanaticism of the Taliban towards the end of your book you quote someone, Abdul Haq, claiming that the Taliban could have been bought off. Why didn't the US do that? SS: Oh yeah, he said that to me, tragically, a few days before he was killed. He said it a couple of days before the US bombing [of Afghanistan] started. He was pulling his hair out and he was saying, "It would cost a fraction of the price." At that point it was a political thing for the States. I am sure they were very well aware that they could have bought off the Taliban. RB: Are you sure about that? SS: Yes, because Pakistan knew that. Pakistan, had already, with Saudi money, bought them off. And Pakistan was desperate to avoid a war in Afghanistan and would certainly have been saying that to the US. But that wasn't the point. The point at that time was that it was just post-9/11 and they needed to be seen to go in and be doing something. Just giving a whole lot of money to a lot of warlords would not have gone [over] too well, even if it had been covert. But it would have worked. It's like that old fable I grew up with-I think it's an Aesop's fable and it's in Rumi as well. The Sun and the Wind were having an argument about the horseman, about who could take the cloak off the horseman. And the wind blew and blew and the horseman just drew his cloak tighter. And then the sun came out and the horseman thought, "Oh what a lovely day, I'll just take my cloak off and sit down." That is more the approach you need in Afghanistan. If you go in with an army, Afghanistan is the graveyard of armies. It's not going to work. If you are perceived to be an occupying force, it's not going to work. I remember going in to Chitral as the US bombing started and there was a sign up saying, "To America, we yearn for death as you yearn for life." You are not going to beat a people like that. It's not worth. It's just not worth it. There are different ways. There are different ways to try? [...] RB: Isn't there a great deal of hopelessness attached to Afghanistan? The pictures and the fact that Kabul had been decimated, a good part of the agriculture has been destroyed. Millions of people have been uprooted. What grandeur of human spirit will lift Afghanistan from those terrible and declining conditions? SS: At this point it needs a little bit of help- that human spirit. [laughs] We are equating two different layers that don't go together. But yes, you can't expect a country that has been systematically destroyed over twenty years to suddenly become a flourishing economy and democracy. It's just not going to happen. It needs help from outside. Partly at the end of the book I am trying to explain the difficulty in helping. It needs a specific sort of help. It needs a help without assumptions, a help without expectations. It needs more than even decent charity. It needs love, for wont of a better word. And that's hard. I am saying as well as money there must be a quality of attention. I don't see that happening. --------------- I suggest to read the whole interview. In another interview I found about her: http://www.bordersstores.com/features/feature.jsp?file=shah she says more about this topic. Q: Talk about what it was like to grow up as an Afgan-in-exile in Britain. SS: We weren't exactly exiles-a return trip seemed to be always around the corner-until the Soviet Union invaded in 1979, when I was 15. I grew up with two self-contained worlds that rarely met: my sedate middle class existence in Kent, and a sort of virtual homeland, woven from stories. Q:Why did you become a journalist? SS: I wanted to travel to Afghanistan, and the country was at war. I also felt (but didn't really realize it at the time) a need to reconcile my Eastern myth-making side with my Western love of factual truth. I told myself I wanted to uncover the truth behind the myth, but probably, more likely, I wanted to discover that the myth was literal truth. Q:Please talk about your search for personal and cultural identity. How have the facts informed you? How about the ancestral myth that has been your inheritance? Which gets you closer to truth, fact or mythology? SS: A lot of the book deals with the question of how to approach truth. There is a Persian saying: "the question about the sky, the answer about a rope." Facts try to build a ladder, rung by rung, to approach the sky, while stories and myths try to provide an overarching rainbow of metaphor, which can give you a taste of what the sky is like, though not necessarily physically reach it! In my quest for Afghanistan, I used both. Both were helpful-and I suppose you could argue that neither could be really useful without the other. [...] Q: Do you think things have changed in Afghanistan since the most recent war? SS: Of course they've changed-nothing stays still. But there are still overwhelming problems. The main one, I think, being that the West picked the wrong problem to solve-getting rid of the Taliban and chasing Osama. There needs to be much more emphasis from the West on rebuilding Afghanistan, rather than destroying perceived enemies. That will take at least a generation and require cash and care. Q:Do you think Osama bin Laden is alive or dead? SS: I have no clue-and I think Osama bin Laden is a huge red herring. The West needs to concentrate on the factors that created Osama and helped him to flourish, not on the man himself. There can be any number of Osamas. Q:How often do you get to Afghanistan these days? When were you last there? SS: I was last there in October 2001-at the ending of the book. I was supposed to go this spring, but the tragic death of my friend and business partner James Miller made it impossible. I hope to go and spend proper time there when I have finished the film I was working on with James. In the meantime, I am campaigning for Israel to hold a proper, independent, and open investigation into how he was killed. ------------ 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/ ******************************************************************** "Trust in the Universe, but tie up your camels first." (adaptation of a Sufi proverb) From brentn at freeshell.org Wed Nov 10 14:20:08 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:20:08 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20041109231729.08a674e8@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: (11/10/04 0:09) David Lubkin wrote: >Amply covered, perhaps, but apparently untrue. See the exit polls CNN >reports at http://tinyurl.com/57l72 > >No high school (4%) -- Bush 49 % / Kerry 50% >H. S. graduate (22%) -- Bush 52% / Kerry 47% >Some college (32%) -- Bush 54% / Kerry 46% >College graduate (26%) -- Bush 52% / Kerry 46% >Postgrad study (16%) -- Bush 44% / Kerry 55% > >(It would be interesting to see a breakdown by field of study. Engineers >are notoriously conservative and scientists liberal.) Reliability of exit polls not withstanding, I spent some quality time with the census data and found that the percentage of people in a state with a 4-yr degree or higher correlated pretty well with Kerry's performance in the state. I didn't do anything formal, but apparently some researchers at the University of Maryland did, and found the same thing. Brent -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Nov 10 14:34:10 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:34:10 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fighting for God in a secular Europe Message-ID: <470a3c52041110063410fe1754@mail.gmail.com> This article is quite relevant to recent discussions. Newsweek: For Europe, the clash of civilizations is less between "Islam" and "the West" than between muscular religiosity and militant secularism. With the collapse of communism, Europe's religious conservatives - Catholic or Muslim - now see secularism as their chief enemy. To the naked eye, the secularists appear to have won. Western European pews are empty. Church membership is plummeting. Families are shrinking, breaking up and evolving as parliaments pass laws to pave the way for gay marriages. Fantasies of a Christian Europe have been dealt a blow by surging immigration and the EU's nod to Turkish accession earlier this month; the religious vigor of many of Europe's 30 million-odd Muslims stands in marked contrast to the apathy of the Christian flock. Writes Catholic theologian George Weigel: "European man has convinced himself that in order to be modern and free, he must be radically secular." After Rocco Buttiglione, the conservative Roman Catholic nominee for the Justice portfolio, pronounced homosexuality to be a "sin" and unwed mothers "bad," the outcry from parliamentarians forced its incoming president, Jos? Manuel Dur?o Barroso, to withdraw his entire slate of commissioners just two days before EU leaders gathered to sign the new European Constitution, which despite strenuous lobbying from Christians contains no mention of God or Christianity. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6370137/site/newsweek/ From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 14:51:21 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:51:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041110145121.58524.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brent Neal wrote: > (11/9/04 15:14) Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >Ultimately, NH is one of the best educated states, and Bush's down > home > >persona suffered the same ignorant snobbery you see so much of on > this > >list. > > You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for someone, > I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated > seems to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to > think more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us > to do. (e.g.) You seem to be confusing education with intelligence. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From steve365 at btinternet.com Wed Nov 10 14:52:31 2004 From: steve365 at btinternet.com (Stephen Davies) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:52:31 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041110145231.59672.qmail@web86102.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> That doesn't mean though that people with a 4 year degree or higher account for the greater propensity to vote for Kerry because they voted for him. There could be some other variable (such as large conurbations) that accounts for both the high level of such people and the propensity to vote a certain way, or it could be that the concentration of a large number of such people in a given area has a neighbourhood effect that influences the actions of others around them. I'm not saying either is the case mind, just that as always you need to be very careful with simple correlations. I suspect myself that there is an underlying masked variable and that it's the impact on people's behaviour and way of thinking of living in a large conurbation that is highly and obviously integrated into the world economy. Brent Neal wrote: Reliability of exit polls not withstanding, I spent some quality time with the census data and found that the percentage of people in a state with a 4-yr degree or higher correlated pretty well with Kerry's performance in the state. I didn't do anything formal, but apparently some researchers at the University of Maryland did, and found the same thing. Brent -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein _______________________________________________ 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: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 14:52:54 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:52:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] straight from the horse's mouth In-Reply-To: <20041109004020.60188.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041110145254.8570.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Last weekend Karl Rove stated that what substantially contributed to Kerry's defeat was his allegedly fuzzy position on funding the Iraq war in 2003. Actually, Kerry's rather sound reasoning was: because the Bush administration had no intention in 2003 of raising tax rates to pay for Iraq occupation funding, reconstruction & occupation would be funded by increased deficit spending. Kerry wanted to make the statement of only supporting the $87 billion Iraq war appropriations legislation if it were to be backed by increasing taxes to keep the deficit at a lesser growth rate than the administration wanted in 2003-4 and probably wants in 2005; though now that Bush is relieved of running for reelection he may or may not decide to raise taxes. Whatever the merits of Kerry's vote last year, it was a sincere statement. Rove boastfully admitted Kerry's genuine and solid position was "the gift that kept on giving" Bush's reelection the conservative and swing (e.g. Reagan Democrat) votes it needed to keep Bush as president. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 15:04:02 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:04:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > "America is the worst democracy in the world, except > > for all the other democracies in the world." (For a > > slightly incorrect/outdated definition that includes > > republics.) > > > > I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet > > implemented a far better solution. > > Hey big fella, that's a substantial claim. There are a LOT of > democracies outside the US, and, living in one of them, I can tell > you > that your statement is not obviously true from the outside. Care to > back that statement up? 1) What percent of the aboriginal population of Australia is either in jail or has been in jail, compared to the anglo population, and compare and contrast that to the US? 2) What is the fine for not voting? 3) What limitations are there on right to speech, rights to bear arms, to be secure in one's home against search and seizure, takings, and what authority do parents have to educate their own children? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Nov 10 15:23:24 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:23:24 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7681EB79-332C-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 10 Nov 2004, at 16:04, Mike Lorrey wrote: > 1) What percent of the aboriginal population of Australia is either in > jail or has been in jail, compared to the anglo population, and compare > and contrast that to the US? Aboriginal deaths in custody (and aboriginals in custody) is a big issue. No doubt. And its to my country's shame that it has not been addressed adequately. In the US what is the relevant comparison population? Blacks in LA county? Native American indians? According to this random google listing, the US in 2003 had the largest number of prisoners per head of population anywhere in the world: http://www.charleston.net/stories/060103/wor_01jailbirds.shtml So whatever the quality of your democracy you still have to lock up approximately 1% of the population. > 2) What is the fine for not voting? There is no fine for not voting. There is a fine for not turning up to a polling booth on election day. Its like a minor traffic fine. About $30. Though its often waived. I missed voting a couple of times and I didn't get fined. My impression is that voting is much simpler in Australia than USA. I have never experienced any delay in voting. There are many polling stations. Voting outside your precinct is simple and voting fraud is v. rarely if ever discussed. > 3) What limitations are there on right to speech, rights to bear arms, > to be secure in one's home against search and seizure, takings, and > what authority do parents have to educate their own children? Well as you probably know we don't have a Bill of Rights as the USA has. That's our loss in my opinion. However, its what the people chose. There was a referendum and the majority of Australians rejected a Bill of Rights. And since we get about 98% turnout to the polls we can sure that the majority of voters were against it. The majority doesn't always make wise decisions as the current US political situation shows. best, patrick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 15:32:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:32:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <02f201c4c6c1$c8925ec0$1300005a@greg> Message-ID: <20041110153247.65050.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gregory Cartwright wrote: > Dear Hal: > > I agree with the general proposition that different systems can > yield different results from which to choose. But why do we suppose > that space stations, islands, or virtual worlds would behave much > differently than the political systems and choices we have today. It is a sense of being divorced from the vast mass of humanity that sounds liberating. What is not considered is that liberty in practice mostly comes down to resource availability, recoverability, and utilization efficiency. Many space stations, islands, or other such environments I believe would quite quickly run up against resource restraints that would cause a population to impose Georgist measures to impose costs for utilization of resources beyond "one's fair share", unless the community were specifically designed to provide each inhabitant much more than they need under normal marginal utility practices and took passive or active measures to maintain population at an optimum level. Proponents of space colonies and islands (particularly artificial ones) also tend to overlook the infrastructure costs of creating "there". For colonists to get 'there' is one thing, but building the "there" is another huge barrier. There is still far too much unsettled land available on this planet for it to be cost effective to live on artificial islands or space colonies. Until some real Georgist lifeboat measures are imposed by reality or by artificially created scarcity of natural land, space or sea colonization will not become an attractive option in an economic sense, and thus will not be viable options for liberty seekers unless some secret santa comes along. Bigelow is the sort of secret santa needed: someone willing to put forward the money with no expectation of gain in any sort of short or mid term scenario (if at all). Historically, liberty seekers have always depended on Nature as benefactor as much as or more than on their own wit and resourcefulness. When Nature does not provide, the costs for another to be the benefactor are quite high. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 15:36:44 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:36:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <1100050916.12928@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: <20041110153644.74080.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> I nominate this post for Post of the Month. --- "J. Andrew Rogers" wrote: > Brent Neal wrote: > > You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for > someone, > > I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated > seems > > to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to think > > more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to > do. > > > There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart folks > preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city > liberals > are as provincial and poorly educated as your average flyover country > resident, they just choose to let their ignorance shine in different > areas, and tend to believe in the myth of their intellectual skills a > little more. Just because you like a different flavor of Kool-Aid > does > not change the fact that you are still drinking Kool-Aid. There is > no > shortage of tools and frauds on both sides, and being trendy or > fashionable is not an indication of credibility. > > > In practice, blue state folks are just as ignorant of science, > mathematics, and culture as red state folks. They just specialize in > different sub-areas when it comes to ignorance. If you do not > recognize > this (no matter which side you claim to be on), then you are > precisely > the type of person I am talking about. > > I do find that some stereotypes tend to be true. Red-Staters tend to > be > historians and tend to view things in a historical context, whereas I > find that most Blue-Staters have an appalling lack of knowledge of > history. Blue-Staters tend to be more ethnically worldly than > Red-Staters, though not to the extent that many Blue-Staters appear > to > believe. Red-Staters are more religious on average, but not that > much > and not in any way that makes a difference, since Blue-Staters have > their own quasi-religious belief systems that Red-Staters generally > do > not share. > > I tend to find the religious right-wing more tolerable than the > "intellectual" left-wing in that the religious right does not try to > make any claim as to the superiority of their own brain power as > individuals (that is reserved for god), whereas I've found that the > intellectual left tends to take the superiority of their thinking > skills > and knowledge to be axiomatic (and hence whatever garbage may result > from it). Appeals to god are so much cleaner and pleasant in > comparison. > > I don't really fall under either side, and have lived in both "parts" > of > the country most of my life. Claiming clear intellectual superiority > for team you voted for is hubris born of ignorance. > > > j. andrew rogers > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 15:38:06 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:38:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04110917455c7432e0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041110153806.60687.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Bogus. I was at the polls, I saw how swamped registrars were everywhere, and overloaded in some areas, far beyond their experience or ability to cope. --- Emlyn wrote: > btw > > Voter turnout in Tuesday's election unlikely to have been higher > than in 2000 > Andrea Lynn, Humanities Editor > University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign > > 11/3/04 > > CHAMPAIGN, Ill. - Despite the widespread assumption that voter > turnout > was substantially higher in the 2004 presidential election than it > was > in the 2000 election, "the numbers suggest a different story," says > Scott Althaus, a professor of speech communication and political > science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who > conducts > research on the effects of presidential campaigns. > > etc > > http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/11/04/3548414 > > > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:41:56 -0800, J. Andrew Rogers > wrote: > > Brent Neal wrote: > > > You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for > someone, > > > I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated > seems > > > to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to > think > > > more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to > do. > > > > > > There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart > folks > > preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city > liberals > > are as provincial and poorly educated as your average flyover > country > > resident, they just choose to let their ignorance shine in > different > > areas, and tend to believe in the myth of their intellectual skills > a > > little more. Just because you like a different flavor of Kool-Aid > does > > not change the fact that you are still drinking Kool-Aid. There is > no > > shortage of tools and frauds on both sides, and being trendy or > > fashionable is not an indication of credibility. > > > > In practice, blue state folks are just as ignorant of science, > > mathematics, and culture as red state folks. They just specialize > in > > different sub-areas when it comes to ignorance. If you do not > recognize > > this (no matter which side you claim to be on), then you are > precisely > > the type of person I am talking about. > > > > I do find that some stereotypes tend to be true. Red-Staters tend > to be > > historians and tend to view things in a historical context, whereas > I > > find that most Blue-Staters have an appalling lack of knowledge of > > history. Blue-Staters tend to be more ethnically worldly than > > Red-Staters, though not to the extent that many Blue-Staters appear > to > > believe. Red-Staters are more religious on average, but not that > much > > and not in any way that makes a difference, since Blue-Staters have > > their own quasi-religious belief systems that Red-Staters generally > do > > not share. > > > > I tend to find the religious right-wing more tolerable than the > > "intellectual" left-wing in that the religious right does not try > to > > make any claim as to the superiority of their own brain power as > > individuals (that is reserved for god), whereas I've found that the > > intellectual left tends to take the superiority of their thinking > skills > > and knowledge to be axiomatic (and hence whatever garbage may > result > > from it). Appeals to god are so much cleaner and pleasant in > comparison. > > > > I don't really fall under either side, and have lived in both > "parts" of > > the country most of my life. Claiming clear intellectual > superiority > > for team you voted for is hubris born of ignorance. > > > > > > j. andrew rogers > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > -- > Emlyn > > http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 15:39:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:39:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041109201405.01991508@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041110153959.51330.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 05:08 PM 11/9/2004 -0800, Greg wrote: > > > BTW, one tool I like to use to compare different systems is > culling > > through the data at www.nationmaster.com It always yields > interesting results. > > This is entertaining: > > 27. United > States > $6702.42 per person > > 42. > Australia > $4398.94 per person > > Damned filthy socialists! Facts taken in isolation are meaningless, Damien, you should be intelligent enough to realize this. What are the relative incomes vs tax burden? What are the relative immigration rates? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 10 15:46:05 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:46:05 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110153644.74080.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000901c4c73c$63f2acb0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> j. andrew rogers posted another excellent essay yesterday titled Enlightenment and the election, which was even better than this one in some ways. Way to go Rogers! spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Mike Lorrey > Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 7:37 AM > To: andrew at ceruleansystems.com; ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > > > I nominate this post for Post of the Month. > > > > > > > There is no evidence in this particular election that the > smart folks > > preferentially voted any one way... > > j. andrew rogers From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 16:11:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:11:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041110161135.55487.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brent Neal wrote: > (11/9/04 17:41) J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > >Brent Neal wrote: > >> You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for > someone, > >> I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated > seems > >> to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to > think > >> more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to > do. > > > > > >There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart > folks > >preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city > liberals > > I would disagree. You're comparing apples and oranges. "big-city > liberal" does not equal "educated." "Uneducated," however, does > equal a likely Bush voter as has been amply covered on most of the > major news sources. No, while the news sources try to make this implication to mollify their own tortured sense of eliteness, the 'less educated' states do not mean 'uneducated' states. They are primarily populated by people who see more value in hard work and productive living rather than piling up initials after one's name as a means to status. In my life I've met at least as many morons with degrees as I have met without degrees. While having a degree of any sort does not make one a liberal, having a degree in the arts or the 'soft sciences' almost condemns one to being a liberal. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 16:14:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:14:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <000901c4c73c$63f2acb0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041110161456.57795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> While the liberal intelligentsia and media have been pompously trying to portray blue states as better educated and red states as more ignorantly benighted, even going so far as promoting a hoaxed up list of states by average IQ vs how they voted which alleges to show smart states as for Kerry and dumb states as for Bush, here is some real data which cannot be disputed: SAT Scores by State vs election results: Iowa 1180 Bush North Dakota 1173 Bush Utah 1149 Bush Minnesota 1144 Kerry Kansas 1139 Bush Wisconsin 1137 Kerry Nebraska 1126 Bush South Dakota 1126 Bush Illinois 1116 Kerry Missouri 1116 Bush Tennessee 1115 Bush Mississippi 1111 Bush Oklahoma 1111 Bush Alabama 1107 Bush Louisiana 1101 Bush Michigan 1101 Kerry New Mexico 1101 Bush Arkansas 1098 Bush Kentucky 1093 Bush Montana 1090 Bush Wyoming 1087 Bush Idaho 1072 Bush Colorado 1071 Bush Ohio 1063 Bush Arizona 1047 Bush Oregon 1036 Kerry Washington 1034 Kerry West Virginia 1034 Bush New Hampshire 1032 Kerry Alaska 1024 Bush Nevada 1019 Bush Maryland 1011 Kerry Florida 1010 Bush Connecticut 1008 Kerry Massachusetts 1007 Kerry Vermont 1005 Kerry California 1002 Kerry Delaware 1002 Kerry Virginia 1001 Bush New Jersey 997 Kerry Maine 996 Kerry New York 992 Kerry Rhode Island 991 Kerry Texas 989 Bush Pennsylvania 987 Kerry Hawaii 986 Kerry Indiana 982 Bush North Carolina 964 Bush Georgia 953 Bush D.C. 951 Kerry South Carolina 947 Bush ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 16:45:53 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:45:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110161456.57795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041110164554.52778.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> What i resent is gay marriage not being able to get the tax breaks that straight marriage receives. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 16:57:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:57:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <2DFE362E-331F-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041110165746.87546.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > > On 10 Nov 2004, at 12:04, Brent Neal wrote: > > > Its funny you bring this up. Your maps also lead to erroneous > > conclusions, since they do not account for either 1) the population > > > density of the counties in question or 2) the margins by which Bush > > > won. For a clearer picture, see > > > > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/ > > I find the purple cartogram at the bottom of the link difficult to > interpret. Especially as the human eye interprets colors unevenly. Selecting unproportional tones of blue and red can result in disparate perception of the map. > > This is a fairly compelling graph of Bush's popularity. Despite > getting > improved numbers in this election its seems clear that the war and > other factors have been eroding his support since 9/11 and Bush would > probably have lost if an election were held in six months: Actually, given the rising economy, it's likely his support will be higher in six months. However, a number of factors, some intentionally wrought by domestic and international Bush opponents, attempted to draw down his support during the election. It is no accident that the price of oil has magically dropped ten dollars a barrel a week after the election, as an example. A lot of the 'problems' that were keeping oil high have magically resolved themselves since those who kept them from being resolved have no reason to delay any longer. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 10 17:02:01 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:02:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] straight from the horse's mouth Message-ID: I think one of the problems with Kerry's vote against the $87 billion is that his protest vote was not coupled with alternate legislation for a smaller amount for for a bill to increase taxes to fund the war. A protest vote without appropriate action seems like a change of mind to me. I debated on whether to add a bit about how I didn't vote for Bush, etc etc to prevent all the "Bush is an idiot, Kerry should have won" replies. BAL >From: Al Brooks >To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >Subject: [extropy-chat] straight from the horse's mouth >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:52:54 -0800 (PST) > >Last weekend Karl Rove stated that what substantially >contributed to Kerry's defeat was his allegedly fuzzy >position on funding the Iraq war in 2003. Actually, >Kerry's rather sound reasoning was: because the Bush >administration had no intention in 2003 of raising tax >rates to pay for Iraq occupation funding, >reconstruction & occupation would be funded by >increased deficit spending. Kerry wanted to make the >statement of only supporting the $87 billion Iraq war >appropriations legislation if it were to be backed by >increasing taxes to keep the deficit at a lesser >growth rate than the administration wanted in 2003-4 >and probably wants in 2005; though now that Bush is >relieved of running for reelection he may or may not >decide to raise taxes. >Whatever the merits of Kerry's vote last year, it was >a sincere statement. Rove boastfully admitted Kerry's >genuine and solid position was "the gift that kept on >giving" Bush's reelection the conservative and swing >(e.g. Reagan Democrat) votes it needed to keep Bush as >president. > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. >www.yahoo.com > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 10 17:37:50 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:37:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: We get the benefit that the capital that would have gone to labor can now go to more useful things. The money you save buying cheaper goods allows you to purchase more goods and services, etc etc. Jobs are really just displaced, not eliminated. BAL >From: Max M >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' >Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:39:06 +0100 > >Damien Broderick wrote: > >>The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and >>sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of the >>cost. > > >A cannot really see anything good about outsourcing. Shure we can get stuff >cheaper. But it is acheived by people working for less money. Not by people >working more efficiently. So it is a net loss. > >Furthermore if we "rationalise" by using cheaper labor we will not get the >benefits of automation, as there will be less motivation to automate. > >-- > >hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark > >http://www.mxm.dk/ >IT's Mad Science > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 17:54:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:54:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110164554.52778.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041110175410.91480.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > What i resent is gay marriage not being able to get > the tax breaks that straight marriage receives. Tax breaks are not a right, they are a privilege. Privileges get granted to those who successfully buy enough politicians. Stop being cheap. If you can't accomplish this, you need to stop supporting the whole idea that the state has the right to force anything on anyone, or give anyone special privileges to the exclusion of others for any reason. Start voting Libertarian. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 10 17:58:25 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 09:58:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election Message-ID: <1100109505.4071@whirlwind.he.net> Patrick Wilken wrote: > I keep hearing that urban voters would be more likely to > vote of Kerry, but it would be much simpler to see if there was an > actual graph comparing population density with voting patterns. Actually, urbanization and population density does not lead to voting for Kerry, though it is a very popular myth. In fact, there seems to be only a weak correlation at best and probably none at all. The problem is that most people have no idea how urbanization is actually distributed among the population geographically. It is hard to interpret these facts by looking at maps, which tend to show density by county, primarily because counties in the west are as large as entire States in the east. I looked at this in detail a year or so ago, and there were some surprising facts. I do not remember where I got the demographics and stats, but they are out there. The mountain west is the second most urbanized region of the country, with urbanization in the ~80% range, with the New York area being the most urbanized. The mountain west went almost exclusively for Bush. It is also important to note that the mountain west has the greatest percentage of third-party voters as well, and is demographically the youngest region of the country. The urbanization bit throws many people for a loop, considering that you have huge States and average populations. Unlike either coast and just about every place east of the Rocky Mountains, the mountain west has very few communities -- 40 to 50 miles of nothing between small towns is normal. But many of the ones they have are major metros that exceed a million people and are among the largest cities in the US. When you consider that almost the entire population of the state lives in one or two large metros in these States, it all makes sense. j. andrew rogers From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 10 18:14:09 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:14:09 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation In-Reply-To: <20041110153959.51330.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041109201405.01991508@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041110153959.51330.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110115930.01b97ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:39 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, MLwrote: > > > This is entertaining: > > > 27. > >United States $6702.42 per person > > > > 42. > > > > Australia $4398.94 per person > >Facts taken in isolation are meaningless, Damien, you should be >intelligent enough to realize this. What are the relative incomes vs >tax burden? Just teasing, Mike. But let's see, using the same database: North America: United States: Economy Gross National Income: $9780 billion (2001) [1st of 205] (per $ GDP): $93.58 per $100 [18th of 170] (per capita): $33684.34 per person [5th of 172] av. tax = 19.9% Oceania: Australia: Economy Gross National Income: $386 billion (2001) [14th of 205] (per $ GDP): $73.45 per $100 [37th of 170] (per capita): $19562.14 per person [20th of 172] av. tax = 22.49% Of course included in that extra 2.5 percent tax paid by Australians is medical coverage for all and some other goodies. Then again, we don't have to pay for nuclear weapons. Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:16:41 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:16:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110175410.91480.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041110181641.85476.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> "if we cannot be free, then at least we can be cheap"-- Frank Zappa > Stop being > cheap. > ===== > Mike Lorrey __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:22:42 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:22:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] straight from the horse's mouth In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041110182242.77164.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Well okay, then Kerry's vote was in fact "the gift that kept on giving". If Karl Rove says so, then I listen-- nothing succeeds like success. > I debated on whether to add a bit about how I didn't > vote for Bush, etc etc > to prevent all the "Bush is an idiot, Kerry should > have won" replies. > BAL If Bush is indeed an idiot he is the brightest idiot who ever lived. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 10 18:24:34 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:24:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04110917455c7432e0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041110182434.72129.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > Voter turnout in Tuesday's election unlikely to > have been higher than in 2000 > Andrea Lynn, Humanities Editor > University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign > > 11/3/04 > > CHAMPAIGN, Ill. - Despite the widespread assumption > that voter turnout > was substantially higher in the 2004 presidential > election than it was > in the 2000 election, "the numbers suggest a > different story," says > Scott Althaus, a professor of speech communication > and political > science at the University of Illinois at > Urbana-Champaign who conducts > research on the effects of presidential campaigns. > > etc > > http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/11/04/3548414 Possible flaw: > According to vote totals as of 10 a.m. CST today, > ["today" being 11/4/04] between 51 and 52 percent of > voting-age Americans cast votes in Tuesday's > presidential election. In the 2000 presidential > election, by contrast, 51.2 percent of the > voting-age population cast ballots, as reported by > the U.S. Census. However, quite a few votes - absentees, mostly - are not tallied until days or weeks later. Quite possibly enough to bump it up a few percentage points. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:25:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:25:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110115930.01b97ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041110182535.97684.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:39 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, MLwrote: > > > > > This is entertaining: > > > > > 27. > > > >United States $6702.42 per person > > > > > > 42. > > > > > > > Australia $4398.94 per person > > > >Facts taken in isolation are meaningless, Damien, you should be > >intelligent enough to realize this. What are the relative incomes vs > >tax burden? > > > Just teasing, Mike. But let's see, using the same database: > > > North America: > United > States: Economy > National Income: $9780 billion (2001) (per capita): $33684.34 per person > av. tax = 19.9% > > > Oceania: Australia: > Economy > > National Income: $386 billion (2001) > capita): $19562.14 per person > av. tax = 22.49% > > Of course included in that extra 2.5 percent tax paid by Australians > is medical coverage for all and some other goodies. Then again, we > don't have to pay for nuclear weapons. or space shuttles or Hubble Telescopes, or Galileo, Cassini, or other probes, or other countries defense needs/internation policing. (You are welcome, btw) Or the R&D on those custom Australian F-111's ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 10 18:34:48 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:34:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041110183448.74902.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > "America is the worst democracy in the world, > except > > for all the other democracies in the world." (For > a > > slightly incorrect/outdated definition that > includes > > republics.) > > > > I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet > > implemented a far better solution. > > Hey big fella, that's a substantial claim. There are > a LOT of > democracies outside the US, and, living in one of > them, I can tell you > that your statement is not obviously true from the > outside. Care to > back that statement up? I was quoting Winston Churchill. Google around for his speech and the justifications he came up with, if you want. ;) From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 10 18:42:03 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:42:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize In-Reply-To: <020d01c4c6aa$5659eb50$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041110184203.52403.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I think the point is to have the capability to > deliver people to the ISS > during the gap period between the shuttle fleet, > which is expected to be > retired in 2010, and whatever they come up with > next. 2015 will put them in > too much competition with NASA. If someone can pull > this off by 2010, they > will have a good chance at a virtual monopoly for a > few years. If one believes that NASA will stick to its schedule without slipping yet again. (Remember how the Space Shuttle's own development panned out.) Still, I can see this logic - thanks for pointing it out. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 10 18:45:56 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:45:56 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election References: <1100109505.4071@whirlwind.he.net> Message-ID: <006e01c4c755$84125cc0$deebfb44@kevin> I just came to an interesting revelation. It needs further study, but in a small sampling, I have found that People who voted for Bush are more likely to prefer Peter Pan peanut butter, and those who prefer Jiff generally support Kerry. The numbers are as follows: Of the 60 people sampled, 32 preferred Peter Pan. 28 of these voted for Bush Of the 28 that chose Jiff, 24 preferred Kerry This left Bush with a 32-28 win over Kerry. I am working on a poll to study this phenomenon further and will be posting it online. I'll let everyone know when the poll goes up. If I am correct, this could open the door to an even greater understanding of why seemingly educated and intelligent people can agree that the quarks exist having never seen them directly, but can't agree on simple matters such as the role of government in marriage. Kevin Freels "This town needs and enema!" - Jack Nicholson as "The Joker" From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 10 18:49:04 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:49:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election References: <20041110153644.74080.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008b01c4c755$f420e2c0$deebfb44@kevin> I second that ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 9:36 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > I nominate this post for Post of the Month. > > --- "J. Andrew Rogers" wrote: > > > Brent Neal wrote: > > > You know, if the smart folks tend to preferentially vote for > > someone, > > > I'd consider that carefully. Even though our status as educated > > seems > > > to attract disdain from you, my experience is that we tend to think > > > more about our own choices, and not what our preacher tells us to > > do. > > > > > > There is no evidence in this particular election that the smart folks > > preferentially voted any one way. Most self-described big city > > liberals > > are as provincial and poorly educated as your average flyover country > > resident, they just choose to let their ignorance shine in different > > areas, and tend to believe in the myth of their intellectual skills a > > little more. Just because you like a different flavor of Kool-Aid > > does > > not change the fact that you are still drinking Kool-Aid. There is > > no > > shortage of tools and frauds on both sides, and being trendy or > > fashionable is not an indication of credibility. > > > > > > In practice, blue state folks are just as ignorant of science, > > mathematics, and culture as red state folks. They just specialize in > > different sub-areas when it comes to ignorance. If you do not > > recognize > > this (no matter which side you claim to be on), then you are > > precisely > > the type of person I am talking about. > > > > I do find that some stereotypes tend to be true. Red-Staters tend to > > be > > historians and tend to view things in a historical context, whereas I > > find that most Blue-Staters have an appalling lack of knowledge of > > history. Blue-Staters tend to be more ethnically worldly than > > Red-Staters, though not to the extent that many Blue-Staters appear > > to > > believe. Red-Staters are more religious on average, but not that > > much > > and not in any way that makes a difference, since Blue-Staters have > > their own quasi-religious belief systems that Red-Staters generally > > do > > not share. > > > > I tend to find the religious right-wing more tolerable than the > > "intellectual" left-wing in that the religious right does not try to > > make any claim as to the superiority of their own brain power as > > individuals (that is reserved for god), whereas I've found that the > > intellectual left tends to take the superiority of their thinking > > skills > > and knowledge to be axiomatic (and hence whatever garbage may result > > from it). Appeals to god are so much cleaner and pleasant in > > comparison. > > > > I don't really fall under either side, and have lived in both "parts" > > of > > the country most of my life. Claiming clear intellectual superiority > > for team you voted for is hubris born of ignorance. > > > > > > j. andrew rogers > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 10 18:55:57 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:55:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: The next race: America's space Prize In-Reply-To: <20041109221616.1545.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041110185557.68164.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > With the current deadline, there is a very high > risk > > that no one will even seriously try to claim the > > prize by 2010 (if anyone does, it will be > > semi-obvious fraudsters like the da Vinci team was > > on the first X Prize: putting out press releases > and > > promises but little if any actual flights and > > hardware). The resulting disappointment will > likely > > leave the task undone through 2015, assuming no > other > > funding effort comes to the rescue. > > I don't agree. I know that Rutan has been working on > his Tier Two > program for some time, and other projects under way > for a while, like > Kistler, Kelly, XCOR, Pioneer, et al demonstrate > that Bigelow's market > is clearly a next step that is possible. Possible, yes. The disagreement is on how much technical effort is necessary: is getting there by 2010 feasable? > The > ballistic sub-orbital > market is certainly another one, but isn't one that > will contribute any > new knowledge base to anyone pursuing Bigelow's > prize that doesn't > already exist in NASA archives or research > facilities. If that was all that was needed, we'd have cheap access to orbit today. The problem is the development effort: even if the knowledge is there, it takes time - years, even - to assemble it into a specific manufacturing team and rocket design, tool up, test the rocket, and get it certified for use. > The flight regieme of a ballistic shuttle is so > inconsequentially > indifferent from that of what Bigelow needs, that it > is in Bigelow's > interest to demand the full boat. Orbit requires achieving roughly 8 km/s. A ballistic shuttle can get good distance while achieving significantly less than that (and disappating less energy upon atmospheric reentry). > One thing that > annoyed me about the > X-Prize were all the pissant projects from backyard > BS artists acting > like real competitors with nothing to back up their > bs. I predict the same artists will be pretending to go for Bigelow's prize as well. The change in flight regime doesn't change this one bit - but one can hope that the press will have learned from its experience here, and not cover nearly as much those who don't have any flying hardware. The pretenders annoyed me too. From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 10 18:56:29 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:56:29 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041110183448.74902.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110183448.74902.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110124959.01c5fa30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:34 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > "America is the worst democracy in the world, except > > > for all the other democracies in the world." >I was quoting Winston Churchill. Well, no, you weren't. Churchill said something very different, making a general point rather than a national one. (And I rather think that had he wished to restrict his remark about democracy to a single nation, it would have been the United Kingdom, for all that he was half American by parentage.) Damien Broderick [what he actually said: "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."] From maxm at mail.tele.dk Wed Nov 10 20:53:55 2004 From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:53:55 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41927FE3.2040708@mail.tele.dk> Brian Lee wrote: > We get the benefit that the capital that would have gone to labor can > now go to more useful things. Yes, I can buy stuff cheaper. > The money you save buying cheaper goods allows you to purchase more > goods and services, etc etc. Not really. It's not only about me. My neighbour who lost his job, can buy less stuff because of unemployment, and I can buy less stuff because my union fee/unemployment insurance rises in price. > Jobs are really just displaced, not eliminated. I didn't mean that they are eliminated. They are made less valuable. Makin stuff cheaper by using cheaper labor doesn't add wealth. Only increased productivity, new technology and more efficient markets creates wealth. -- hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark http://www.mxm.dk/ IT's Mad Science From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 10 21:00:11 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:00:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110124959.01c5fa30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041110210011.99648.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:34 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote: > >I was quoting Winston Churchill. > > Well, no, you weren't. Churchill said something very > different, making a > general point rather than a national one. (And I > rather think that had he > wished to restrict his remark about democracy to a > single nation, it would > have been the United Kingdom, for all that he was > half American by parentage.) > > Damien Broderick > [what he actually said: "Democracy is the worst form > of government except > for all those others that have been tried."] I stand corrected. The national form is the only one I'd heard, and I'd heard it directly attributed to him many times. From rafal at smigrodzki.org Wed Nov 10 21:43:07 2004 From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:43:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <41927FE3.2040708@mail.tele.dk> References: <41927FE3.2040708@mail.tele.dk> Message-ID: <41928B6B.5090007@smigrodzki.org> Max M wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > >> The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing >> and sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a >> fraction of the cost. > > > > > A cannot really see anything good about outsourcing. Shure we can get > stuff cheaper. But it is acheived by people working for less money. > Not by people working more efficiently. So it is a net loss. > > Furthermore if we "rationalise" by using cheaper labor we will not get > the benefits of automation, as there will be less motivation to automate. > ### If this was the wta-talk, saying that free trade is a "net loss" would be more excusable but here on exi-chat an at least elementary knowledge of economics is de rigeur. Obviously, as any voluntary contractual relationship between humans, free trade in labor (derisively referred to as "outsourcing") results in net gains for both parties involved the trade. Furthermore, as per the rule of comparative advantage, free trade results in allocations of labor to its most productive use within the society (achievable in the absence of perfect knowledge of preferences). Therefore, free trade in labor is a net gain, for the employer, the employees, and for third parties (i.e. the society at large). Of course, the lazy, and the inefficient might have to mend their ways, or temporarily accept lower standard of living (until the increased productivity trickles down even to them in the form of welfare and charity) - but I see it as a gain, too. Rafal From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 01:06:50 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:36:50 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:04:02 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > --- Emlyn wrote: > > > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > "America is the worst democracy in the world, except > > > for all the other democracies in the world." (For a > > > slightly incorrect/outdated definition that includes > > > republics.) > > > > > > I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet > > > implemented a far better solution. > > > > Hey big fella, that's a substantial claim. There are a LOT of > > democracies outside the US, and, living in one of them, I can tell > > you > > that your statement is not obviously true from the outside. Care to > > back that statement up? > > 1) What percent of the aboriginal population of Australia is either in > jail or has been in jail, compared to the anglo population, and compare > and contrast that to the US? Patrick answered this well. Our jails are not overfull. > > 2) What is the fine for not voting? > A couple of dollars. Certainly low enough that conscientious objection is cheap & easy. > 3) What limitations are there on right to speech, rights to bear arms, > to be secure in one's home against search and seizure, takings, and > what authority do parents have to educate their own children? > See Patrick's reply. For speech, things seem pretty good, maybe that's changing but it used to be the case at least that civil suits don't deal in the orders of magnitude of money changing hands that they do in the US, and the government rarely suppresses things; people jump up and down when they ban a movie or something of that ilk. Right to bear arms? I certainly hope not. I don't have a constitutional right to fart in elevators or bear nukes either. The last thing I'd want is suburbs full of small arms. Search, seizure, takings, well all these seem to be eroding in the midst of the war on terror, with our spy agencies and whatnot being allowed a pretty free hand if you are suspected of being a terrorist. Like in the US. As to educating your own kids, we just started doing that recently, and it turns out it's surprisingly easy. Disconcertingly so. Once you decide to home educate, there's a small amount of bureacracy to navigate, all under the auspices of one very helpful but extraordinarily overworked public servant in South Australia, and then you are on your own; she has a chat with you once a year to see how it's going, but basically you have a free hand. I'd like to see the public school funding for our child come our way to help with books and stuff (we are now a one income family again after all), but that's a totally different story, and in the end I do prefer we struggle by on our own rather than take government subsidies if we can, so it'll do. Quick note; are there any other extro homeschoolers out there? > > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 00:55:40 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:25:40 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041110210011.99648.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110124959.01c5fa30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041110210011.99648.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc041110165544aedaff@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:00:11 -0800 (PST), Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > > > At 10:34 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > >I was quoting Winston Churchill. > > > > Well, no, you weren't. Churchill said something very > > different, making a > > general point rather than a national one. (And I > > rather think that had he > > wished to restrict his remark about democracy to a > > single nation, it would > > have been the United Kingdom, for all that he was > > half American by parentage.) > > > > Damien Broderick > > [what he actually said: "Democracy is the worst form > > of government except > > for all those others that have been tried."] > > I stand corrected. The national form is the only one > I'd heard, and I'd heard it directly attributed to him > many times. > "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried." - Winston Churchill -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 11 02:25:44 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:25:44 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Jail In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110200724.019f5c88@pop-server.satx.rr.com> > > 1) What percent of the aboriginal population of Australia is either in > > jail or has been in jail, compared to the anglo population, and compare > > and contrast that to the US? > >Patrick answered this well. Our jails are not overfull. As we've seen in previous iterations, this is a difficult topic, easy to troll. One aspect is that the Aussie aboriginal population is about one percent (maybe a few times larger if people with aboriginal ancestors somewhere in their background are counted in). Cf. whom in the US? Indians are the obvious comparison, or maybe blacks. Let's just look at the general numbers to start with: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0528-02.htm Incarceration Rates (Number incarcerated per 100,000) US 715 Australia 114 < In 2003, 68 percent of prison and jail inmates were members of racial or ethnic minorities, the government said. An estimated 12 percent of all black men in their 20s were in jails or prisons, as were 3.7 percent of Hispanic men and 1.6 percent of white men in that age group, according to the report. > And http://www.dlncoalition.org/dln_issues/indians_jailed_more_often.htm : < Despite progress made in equalizing parole dates, Native Americans still are overrepresented in the state's prison population. Indians make up less than 9 percent of the state's population but 23 percent of the prison population. > But the situation for black Aussies is nasty as well: http://www.gfbv.de/gfbv_e/docus/aborigin.htm These comparative figures fail to disclose turnover rates. I suspect short repeated terms (as suggested above) for drunkenness and fighting might drastically inflate the data for Indians and black Aussies. Not good, even so. Awful, in fact. [Emlyn:] >last thing I'd want is suburbs full of small arms. Yep. This is the general consensus in Australia, and both the conservative and the slightly less conservative parties know it, and so retain weapons restrictions in their platforms. Rail as much as you like about the need for guns at your fingers and guns at your toes, Mike, it didn't seem to do the Branch Davidians a hell of a lot of good when it came to a showdown with the vile forces of government. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 11 02:30:49 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:30:49 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Technique for 'turning off' danger genes cuts cholesterol Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041110202833.01c5e188@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/story.jsp?story=581597 By Steve Connor, Science Editor 11 November 2004 Scientists have found a way of treating potentially fatal diseases by switching off harmful genes. In what is described as one of the most important breakthroughs in decades, researchers have shown that RNA interference can cut cholesterol levels in laboratory mice with a method that could be applied to humans at risk of heart attacks. They say RNA interference (RNAi) could be used to treat a wide range of disorders, from HIV and Aids to genetic diseases and cancer. RNAi can switch off harmful genes that cause disease but leave other essential genes untouched. Science had not previously demonstrated a safe, reliable way of using it on patients, but now researchers led by Hans-Peter Vornlocher, head of research at the pharmaceuticals company Alnylam Europe, have devised a simple method of delivering RNAi to all the cells of the body via an intravenous injection. In experiments on mice they injected short lengths of RNA - a molecule similar to DNA - that had been designed to switch off or "silence" the gene responsible for producing apoliprotein B, a protein involved in the synthesis of the damaging form of cholesterol. By coincidence, the researchers used another form of the cholesterol molecule, which they had attached to the RNA molecule to allow the RNA to slip through the cell membranes of the body. "The idea is that the lipophilic [fat-attracting] population of cholesterol molecules will act as a Trojan horse to get the RNA into the cells," Dr Vornlocher said. Results in the journal Nature showed that the technique successfully silenced the gene for apoliprotein B and consequently cut cholesterol levels in the bloodstream of the injected mice by up to a half. Dr Vornlocher said: "We have meaningfully advanced the field of RNAi. We think we can transfer the work into a human setting." Julian Downward, an expert in RNAi at Cancer Research UK, said the findings were a very exciting development in the design of new treatments for many incurable diseases. "For the first time it harnesses the great potency and specificity that RNA interference has shown in the lab to a format that can be used in patients in the clinic," Dr Downward said. "This brings the prospect of uniquely targeted therapies a big step closer, even for diseases that have previously proven hard to develop conventional drugs against." John Rossi of the Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope in Duarte in California, who is working on ways of using RNAi to treat patients with Aids, said the Alnylam technique of attaching RNA molecules to cholesterol is potentially very important."It is hoped this approach might be used to shut down disease-related genes in humans; with [this study in mice] that dreams moves a little closer to reality," Dr Rossi says in a Nature editorial. "The beauty of these results in the relative simplicity of the delivery method." Further research is, however, needed to monitor potential side-effects and to assess how long the effect persists without the need for further injections. Andrew Hamilton, lecturer in gene regulation and mechanisms of disease at the University of Glasgow, said: "It's one more step toward the clinic for RNAi." "Although there may be many diseases we could treat with RNAi-based medicine, we need more work on targeting, efficiency, persistence and possible side-effects." John Maraganore, chief executive of Alnylam, said: "We are committed to working on direct and systemic applications of RNAi in cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, hepatitis, cancer and many infectious diseases." 10 November 2004 20:28 From moulton at moulton.com Wed Nov 10 23:51:09 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:51:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110161456.57795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041110161456.57795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1100130669.20563.1845.camel@localhost> On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 11:14, Mike Lorrey wrote: > While the liberal intelligentsia and media have been pompously trying > to portray blue states as better educated and red states as more > ignorantly benighted, even going so far as promoting a hoaxed up list > of states by average IQ vs how they voted which alleges to show smart > states as for Kerry and dumb states as for Bush, here is some real data > which cannot be disputed: SAT Scores by State vs election results: Lines of SAT scores deleted. Before you make too much of the SAT scores and the election results you first need to somehow show that the individuals that generated the SAT scores voted in the election. Or at least describe why you think there is some relationship between SAT scores which are in many cases generated by individuals under the voting age and election results. Fred From dwish at indco.net Thu Nov 11 05:24:56 2004 From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:24:56 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <41928B6B.5090007@smigrodzki.org> Message-ID: <20041111052445.XOFV610.fe5@bigdlptop> I know this sounds a little racist, but trust in that I am not. When I was living in the southern Delta area of Arkansas I once talked to an old black man that threw me a curve on the outsourcing issue. We were talking about the old days of his youth, which was long ago as he was 91, 10 years ago and I was 21. He had spoke about the poor on the "otherside of the tracks", as he put it, were caused by the cotton gin. It seems that after the civil war his father became a wealthy business man by hiring freed slaves to work fields in Arkansas picking cotton, weird to me because I thought they is what most wanted to be free from. But as teams they could provide a good living working the land for various farms in the area, until the cotton gin was setup in the area. The automated processing of cotton and then introduction of the harvester all but made the job of a cotton picker obsolete. So the man, being educated -- he could read and write, both big things then, decided to retrain workers of his to use new the equipment. And so the old man had less workers, but better, bigger gains -- and through his fruit became a wealthy black farmer that passed the business down to his son. The true moral to this story struck last year when I thought back about past "outsourcing". Labor markets go were labor is cheap, the trick to the economics is the knowledge of when to do the R&D and seeing the opportunity before you and doing something about it. Americans must, like always, retool, rethink, and redesign. Business is a changing environment and that has always been the case only a lot faster now. If you don't try to get ahead, don't complain about being left behind. We now compete against the global structure the very meaning of Free markets should signal that. I hate Americans saying that "outsourcing" is killing jobs. Nanotechnology, biotechnology and other technology fields are going to open a huge new market creating jobs in the lab and service industries. If we invent it, it is made somewhere else, we buy, we're not flying someone from China over to fix it. We need to focus on policies that aid Americans in re-education and training to help those who want to help themselves and not give out entitlements to those that won't get off their lazy asses to help themselves. And yes the 91 man, still worked his farm and gave no slack to those neighbors that complained the "man" was keeping them down or just wanted to draw a check from the government that as he saw it, he was paying for. Not sure, but I think that fact pissed he off a little. Lol. God bless that guy, what an American. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2004 3:43 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Max M wrote: > Damien Broderick wrote: > >> The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing >> and sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a >> fraction of the cost. > > > > > A cannot really see anything good about outsourcing. Shure we can get > stuff cheaper. But it is acheived by people working for less money. > Not by people working more efficiently. So it is a net loss. > > Furthermore if we "rationalise" by using cheaper labor we will not get > the benefits of automation, as there will be less motivation to automate. > ### If this was the wta-talk, saying that free trade is a "net loss" would be more excusable but here on exi-chat an at least elementary knowledge of economics is de rigeur. Obviously, as any voluntary contractual relationship between humans, free trade in labor (derisively referred to as "outsourcing") results in net gains for both parties involved the trade. Furthermore, as per the rule of comparative advantage, free trade results in allocations of labor to its most productive use within the society (achievable in the absence of perfect knowledge of preferences). Therefore, free trade in labor is a net gain, for the employer, the employees, and for third parties (i.e. the society at large). Of course, the lazy, and the inefficient might have to mend their ways, or temporarily accept lower standard of living (until the increased productivity trickles down even to them in the form of welfare and charity) - but I see it as a gain, too. Rafal _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.788 / Virus Database: 533 - Release Date: 11/1/2004 From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 06:40:31 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:10:31 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04111022403ad07501@mail.gmail.com> I often think of national economies as like water reservoirs at different heights, all blocked off from each other. When you join them together, aka globablism, you inevitably get a period where the higher reservoir pours into the low one. Now in the long one, I know the idea is that all the reservoirs go up, because of all kind of wonderful increased efficiencies. However, in the short term, it seems pretty clear that there can be all kind of nasty negative consequences in wealthy countries for labour, and very positive consequences in poor countries. Personally, I'm all for it. What I think it must do eventually is to level out the economies of the world, removing the different equillibria which are the current source of profit for companies in globalising (eg: outsourcing your labour to india/china/etc). So the long term effect really has to be a good one in terms of equality. In the short term, we'll get good and bad effects, with most of the bad stuff happening in western labour markets, but hopefully we can ride that out. If global labour could move with less restriction, this interim period should be less painful (eg: you or I could easily move to India if so inclined, and take up a job there, where, relative to their local economy, the job pays pretty well). Emlyn On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:04:55 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/08/njobs08.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/11/08/ixnewstop.html > > By Malcolm Moore, Economics Correspondent > (Filed: 08/11/2004) > > There will be no jobs for unskilled workers in Britain within 10 years, the > leading employers' organisation claims today. > > The prediction is based on the growth in "outsourcing" manufacturing and > sales jobs abroad to economies where staff are hired at a fraction of the cost. > > Digby Jones, the director-general of the CBI, will tell his annual > conference in Birmingham: "There will not be any work in Britain for > unskilled people . . . within one scholastic generation." > > In a survey of 150 companies, which employ 750,000 people between them, 51 > per cent said the pressure to move their jobs abroad had increased. > [etc] > > "Protectionist voices who think they can stop this - that's cloud cuckoo > land," he will tell the conference, which will be attended by Gordon Brown, > the Chancellor, and Peter Mandelson, the European Trade Commissioner. > > "Ensuring people have the skills remains our problem. You have nothing to > fear if you skill yourself." > [etc etc] > > ================== > > The trouble with this `skilling yourself' theory, as far as I can tell, is > the insidious and inevitable slide of remaining and new jobs toward the > righthand side of the capability bell curve. Outsourcing doesn't just mean > equally stupid people will work for less; it means extremely capable people > will work for less. For a while, anyway. > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 11 06:58:17 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 00:58:17 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04111022403ad07501@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc04111022403ad07501@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111004820.01c36ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:10 PM 11/11/2004 +1030, Emmers wrote: >If global labour could move with less restriction, this interim period >should be less painful (eg: you or I could easily move to India if so >inclined, and take up a job there, where, relative to their local >economy, the job pays pretty well). There's not a lot stopping you from doing this kind of thing right now (well, aside from the kids). Have notepad, will travel. Move to Mexico or India or Sri Lanka or Russia, etc. But that assumes you'd manage the culture-shock, language gap, and perhaps more importantly that the locals accept your presence, your wicked Western ways, your godlessness, the job you've filched from their own bright kid, etc. And perhaps the health services aren't too crash-hot. And of course folks like Emlyn and me can live in Oz, equivalent in most respects to the States but safer, while earning US$$ worth 1/3 more than AU$$. Better to spend a currency even more degraded, but WestCiv has its appeal. Damien Broderick From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Nov 11 07:34:33 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:34:33 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville References: <20041110183448.74902.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00ad01c4c7c0$e3ce8fb0$6600a8c0@brainiac> > Adrian Tymes wrote: > "America is the worst democracy in the world, except for all the other democracies in the world." (For a slightly incorrect/outdated definition that includes republics.) > I.e., it does not seem like anyone else has yet implemented a far better solution. You may be right. Yet, I ran into this quote from Mencken today, and it made me go hmmmm ...: "As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." [1920] -H. L. Mencken (1880 - 1956) Olga From alito at organicrobot.com Thu Nov 11 07:52:53 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:52:53 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 11:36 +1030, Emlyn wrote: > See Patrick's reply. For speech, things seem pretty good, maybe that's > changing but it used to be the case at least that civil suits don't > deal in the orders of magnitude of money changing hands that they do > in the US, and the government rarely suppresses things; people jump up > and down when they ban a movie or something of that ilk. People jump up and down about a tiny minority of the films being banned (ie whenever they ban something that got a prize in some foreign competition, and even then most times the ban isn't lifted). Most books and films banned noone ever hears about. Games are now being banned and censored too (Manhunt in the first category, GTA 3 in the second). X-rated material is, of course, illegal to sell in all states so everyone has to buy from canberra, and don't try to host it anywhere in australia. Chunks of the internet can be ordered to be blocked off and the list of blocked sites is itself censored. And then there's the Rabelais four case (ie not only can your stuff be banned but you can go to jail for it too (but they'll let you off, cos they are all nice people)) (btw, you have to pay for them to censor you) That said, freedom of speech is not an issue here, mainly because people don't care or are unaware. It just happens that what most people want to communicate is well within the set boundaries, and hosting porn in the US is cheaper anyway. alejandro From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 11 10:49:15 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:49:15 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Some Joy in Ozville In-Reply-To: <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111044305.019c9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:52 PM 11/11/2004 +1000, alejandro wrote: >People [in Oz] jump up and down about a tiny minority of the films being >banned >(ie whenever they ban something that got a prize in some foreign >competition, and even then most times the ban isn't lifted). Most books >and films banned noone ever hears about. Games are now being banned and >censored too On the other hand, it seems to me inconceivable that the hypocritical panic and hysteria of a Janet Jackson boob flash could happen in Oz during a football or cricket game on TV. Oh no! The horror! Small infants might see a naked breast! But it's true that in some ways the censorious climate in Australia remains oddly prudish/school-marmish in certain directions. On the other hand, the furrin (and beautiful translation-captioned) movies traditional on SBS are incredibly naughtier than anything shown here on American free-to-air. Damien Broderick From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 10:53:08 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:53:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Intelligent Tools: The Cornerstone of a New Civilization Message-ID: <470a3c5204111102532af20aa3@mail.gmail.com> The following article briefly describes the developments of tools and knowledge in human history and states that these two phenomena co-exist only in intelligent tools. It focuses on the productive merits of the past intelligent tools, and discusses the social and biological demerits related to their essence (animal or human). Moreover, since human beings were unable to produce an intelligent tool capable of outperforming human beings as tools, the technological basis of slavery continued to persist throughout history. The article then examines the current achievements of computer technology in producing intelligent tools. It argues that the *production* of intelligent tools makes it possible to bypass the social and natural *limitations* of all past intelligent tools. Once these tools *outperform* human beings as intelligent tools, humans will no longer be indispensable as production tools. Consequently, the inception of these new tools eradicates the *technological* basis of the subjugation of humans by humans. This eradication may start a new civilization by effecting higher human intelligence, more economic wealth and greater socio-political freedom in human's future society. http://www.ghandchi.com/353-IntelligentToolsEng.htm From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 10:58:46 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:58:46 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) against depression Message-ID: <470a3c5204111102587ac3ee24@mail.gmail.com> Interesting new technology related to brain imaging and mapping may provide a solution against a major medical and social problem. Medical News Today: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), a non-invasive technique that uses repeated short bursts of magnetic energy to stimulate nerve cells in the brain, is now being tested at Northwestern Memorial Hospital and Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine as a potential treatment for participants with major depression. Northwestern will be one of 16 centers participating in the nationwide clinical trial to evaluate the effectiveness of TMS on participants who have not responded to antidepressant medications during efforts to manage their depression. TMS produces about the same amount of magnetic energy as a standard MRI machine and works by sending pulses of magnetic energy aimed specifically at a portion of the brain called the left prefrontal cortex, which is thought to be involved with mood regulation. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=16192 From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 11:23:24 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:53:24 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111004820.01c36ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc04111022403ad07501@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041111004820.01c36ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04111103237c16ea20@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 00:58:17 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 05:10 PM 11/11/2004 +1030, Emmers wrote: > > >If global labour could move with less restriction, this interim period > >should be less painful (eg: you or I could easily move to India if so > >inclined, and take up a job there, where, relative to their local > >economy, the job pays pretty well). > > There's not a lot stopping you from doing this kind of thing right now > (well, aside from the kids). Have notepad, will travel. Move to Mexico or > India or Sri Lanka or Russia, etc. But that assumes you'd manage the > culture-shock, language gap, and perhaps more importantly that the locals > accept your presence, your wicked Western ways, your godlessness, the job > you've filched from their own bright kid, etc. And perhaps the health > services aren't too crash-hot. Aw, yer spoilsport, there I was thinking I might get a little flat near the taj-mahal. Seriously, could I just up and move to one of those countries? Or am I going to meet the same kinds of barriers that, say, Russians would meet (or Afghanis, more to the point) trying to move here? > > And of course folks like Emlyn and me can live in Oz, equivalent in most > respects to the States but safer, while earning US$$ worth 1/3 more than > AU$$. Better to spend a currency even more degraded, but WestCiv has its > appeal. > > > > Damien Broderick > Well, western civ is great. However, it does seem to have been supported for some time by siphoning resources out of poor countries; you know, the whole dis-integrated economy gig, with multinational making super cheap stuff in poor countries with sweatshop workers, selling them into rich countries for big profits and still providing us with stuff cheaper than we could make here. It's a step beyond slavery in most cases (in some it has been quite explicitly slavery, of course), but not far beyond. We'll continue to suffer in the west (well, people who don't do work far out to the right of the capability curve, as you've said previously), but I can't help thinking that in the long term it's for the best. Can iti be that, in the end, globalism and the world free market will actually put things right in the world? Funny times. I'm continually surprised that it's "conservatives" that advocate globalism. I guess it benefits big capital in the short term, even if it does help to kill it in the long term. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 11 11:26:47 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:56:47 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Some Joy in Ozville In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111044305.019c9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> <6.1.1.1.0.20041111044305.019c9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411110326645d60f3@mail.gmail.com> Also, we've got the 'net just like everyone else. Censorship seems quaintly anachronistic; if I'm properly protected, I can get just about anything that can exist as a fistful of bits. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * (My virus checker goes up to 11) On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:49:15 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 05:52 PM 11/11/2004 +1000, alejandro wrote: > > >People [in Oz] jump up and down about a tiny minority of the films being > >banned > >(ie whenever they ban something that got a prize in some foreign > >competition, and even then most times the ban isn't lifted). Most books > >and films banned noone ever hears about. Games are now being banned and > >censored too > > On the other hand, it seems to me inconceivable that the hypocritical panic > and hysteria of a Janet Jackson boob flash could happen in Oz during a > football or cricket game on TV. Oh no! The horror! Small infants might see > a naked breast! > > But it's true that in some ways the censorious climate in Australia remains > oddly prudish/school-marmish in certain directions. On the other hand, the > furrin (and beautiful translation-captioned) movies traditional on SBS are > incredibly naughtier than anything shown here on American free-to-air. > > Damien Broderick > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Nov 11 12:41:54 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:41:54 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <20041110161456.57795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041110161456.57795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1157708E-33DF-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> > While the liberal intelligentsia and media have been pompously trying > to portray blue states as better educated and red states as more > ignorantly benighted, even going so far as promoting a hoaxed up list > of states by average IQ vs how they voted which alleges to show smart > states as for Kerry and dumb states as for Bush, here is some real data > which cannot be disputed: SAT Scores by State vs election results: I don't believe it anymore than I believed the IQ scores by state when I first saw them. Where do you get these figures? I found the original IQ scores pretending to show the South as dumber than the North insulting. However, its doesn't make any sense to me that California and New York are going to have lower average SAT scores than Mississippi or Kansas. Richer states are likely to better education and better SAT scores. It would be fascinating if this wasn't true. This seems to be to be a simple inversion of the original bogus IQ post. One confusing factor is that there are large differences in the proportion of students taking the SAT in different states: http://www.sciway.net/statistics/satstates96-98.html According to these 1998 figures, which haven't changed much in six years (the r^2 correlation between total SAT scores by state between 1998 and 2004 is .98), Alabama only has 8% of graduates taking the test, whereas New York has 76%. Given the reasonable assumption that the probability of taking the SAT is non-random (i.e., when the number of students doing the test is not 100% of the State the better educated students are more likely to take the test) it would seem the figures below (if true) are worthless without a proper normalization. If we do a simple correlation between voting for Bush and total SAT score we get a positive r^2 correlation of .12, whereas if you look at voting for Bush compared with proportion of students sitting the SAT you get a negative r^2 correlation of .31 (i.e., states with more students sitting the test are much more likely to vote for Kerry). Much more of the variation in State voting is accounted for by the likelihood of students sitting the test, than the total SAT score. My guess is that this is related to the fact that on average poorer states were more likely to vote for Bush than richer ones. best, patrick =================================================== State Vote Vote SAT V SAT M % Total Alabama Bush 1 562 558 8 1107 Alaska Bush 1 521 520 52 1024 Arizona Bush 1 525 528 32 1047 Arkansas Bush 1 568 555 6 1098 California Kerry 0 497 516 47 1002 Colorado Bush 1 537 542 31 1071 Connecticut Kerry 0 510 509 80 1008 D.C. Kerry 0 488 476 83 951 Delaware Kerry 0 501 493 70 1002 Florida Bush 1 500 501 52 1010 Georgia Bush 1 486 482 64 953 Hawaii Kerry 0 483 513 55 986 Idaho Bush 1 545 544 16 1072 Illinois Kerry 0 564 581 13 1116 Indiana Bush 1 497 500 59 982 Iowa Bush 1 593 601 5 1180 Kansas Bush 1 582 585 9 1139 Kentucky Bush 1 547 550 13 1093 Louisiana Bush 1 562 558 8 1101 Maine Kerry 0 504 501 68 996 Maryland Kerry 0 506 508 65 1011 Massachusetts Kerry 0 508 508 77 1007 Michigan Kerry 0 558 569 11 1101 Minnesota Kerry 0 585 598 9 1144 Mississippi Bush 1 562 549 4 1111 Missouri Bush 1 570 573 8 1116 Montana Bush 1 543 546 24 1090 Nebraska Bush 1 565 571 8 1126 Nevada Bush 1 510 513 33 1019 New Hampshire Kerry 0 523 520 74 1032 New Jersey Kerry 0 497 508 79 997 New Mexico Bush 1 554 551 12 1101 New York Kerry 0 495 503 76 992 North Carolina Bush 1 490 492 62 964 North Dakota Bush 1 590 599 5 1173 Ohio Bush 1 526 540 24 1063 Oklahoma Bush 1 568 564 8 1111 Oregon Kerry 0 528 528 53 1036 Pennsylvania Kerry 0 497 495 71 987 Rhode Island Kerry 0 501 495 72 991 South Carolina Bush 1 478 473 61 947 South Dakota Bush 1 584 581 5 1126 Tennessee Bush 1 564 557 13 1115 Texas Bush 1 494 501 51 989 Utah Bush 1 572 570 4 1149 Vermont Kerry 0 508 504 71 1005 Virginia Bush 1 507 499 66 1001 Washington Kerry 0 524 526 53 1034 West Virginia Bush 1 525 513 18 1034 Wisconsin Kerry 0 581 594 7 1137 Wyoming Bush 1 548 546 10 1087 From Walter_Chen at compal.com Thu Nov 11 14:41:29 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:41:29 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> The Greatest Secret by Darrell Daybre 2004 *********************** This process, which uses energy, is how everything is created in the world, and to those "in the know", is now considered to be ?the blueprint to how the universe works!? For the first time in history, experts from all over the world, in all the major fields such as science, psychology, spirituality, metaphysics, and human potential, are all agreeing that there is only one way to create anything in your life (including your happiness, prosperity, health, and more). Famous and notable people like Bill Gates, Steven Spielberg, Tiger Woods, J. Rockefeller, Einstein, Thoreau, and Gandhi have used this power, (this 'Secret') to create real miracles, and some experts are now calling it the ?Secret of Life.? And with it, you too can create miracles in your life, and use it to create your most heartfelt wants and desires? This is the foundation for everything that is happening in your life. You will learn how through your thoughts - the power of intention - and the Law of Attraction, that we literally have the power to create and attract the people, events, and circumstances in our lives. If you use this power correctly, you will have the option to bring about what you desire. The only thing required for this is to be aware of the power that you possess, and we can show you to apply the exact steps necessary for putting this power to work for you. *********************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Nov 11 14:51:22 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:51:22 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> Message-ID: <2782BAE2-33F1-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> This would seem to be a breakdown in moderation... On 11 Nov 2004, at 15:41, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > The Greatest Secret > by Darrell Daybre 2004 > *********************** > This process, which uses energy, is how everything is created in the > world, and to those "in the know", > is now considered to be ?the blueprint to how the universe works!? > > For the first time in history, experts from all over the world, in all > the major fields such as science, psychology, spirituality, > > metaphysics, and human potential, are all agreeing that there is only > one way to create anything in your life (including your happiness, > prosperity, health, and more). > > Famous and notable people like Bill Gates, Steven Spielberg, Tiger > Woods, J. Rockefeller, Einstein, Thoreau, and Gandhi > > have used this power, (this 'Secret') to create real miracles, and > some experts are now calling it the ?Secret of Life.? > > And with it, you too can create miracles in your life, and use it to > create your most heartfelt wants and desires? > > This is the foundation for everything that is happening in your life. > You will learn how through your thoughts > - the power of intention - and the Law of Attraction, that we > literally have the power to create and attract the people, > > events, and circumstances in our lives. If you use this power > correctly, you will have the option to bring about what you desire. > > The only thing required for this is to be aware of the power that you > possess, and we can show you to apply the exact steps necessary for > putting this power to work for you. > > *********************** > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 16:46:45 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:46:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <1157708E-33DF-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041111164645.20764.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> I know protecting heterosexual marriage is constitutional, but it does not appear fair. As long as gays are discriminated against in any way I am a blue-stater. > > While the liberal intelligentsia and media have > been pompously trying > > to portray blue states as better educated and red > states as more > > ignorantly benighted, even going so far as > promoting a hoaxed up list > > of states by average IQ vs how they voted which > alleges to show smart > > states as for Kerry and dumb states as for Bush, __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 16:53:57 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:53:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation Message-ID: Yeah, the US gets kind of ripped off. We pay for a massive defense but get no healthcare. All the other countries get the benefit of not having to keep a large army, nukes etc. BAL >From: Damien Broderick >To: ExI chat list >Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:14:09 -0600 > >At 07:39 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, MLwrote: >> >> > This is entertaining: >> >> > 27. > >> >United States $6702.42 per person >> > >> > 42. >> > > >> > Australia $4398.94 per person >> >>Facts taken in isolation are meaningless, Damien, you should be >>intelligent enough to realize this. What are the relative incomes vs >>tax burden? > > >Just teasing, Mike. But let's see, using the same database: > > >North America: United >States: Economy > >Gross >National Income: $9780 billion (2001) >[1st >of 205] >(per $ >GDP): $93.58 per $100 >[18th >of >170] >(per >capita): $33684.34 per person >[5th >of >172] > >av. tax = 19.9% > > >Oceania: Australia: >Economy > >Gross >National Income: $386 billion (2001) >[14th >of 205] >(per $ >GDP): $73.45 per $100 >[37th >of >170] >(per >capita): $19562.14 per person >[20th >of >172] > >av. tax = 22.49% > >Of course included in that extra 2.5 percent tax paid by Australians is >medical coverage for all and some other goodies. Then again, we don't have >to pay for nuclear weapons. > >Damien Broderick > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 16:58:45 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:58:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: Outsourcing benefits the entire economy. Of course some neighbors will lose jobs, but on the whole everyone benefits from low cost goods and can buy more other stuff while some people lose jobs, transfer jobs, learn new stuff, whatever. BAL >From: Max M >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:53:55 +0100 > >Brian Lee wrote: > >>We get the benefit that the capital that would have gone to labor can now >>go to more useful things. > > >Yes, I can buy stuff cheaper. > >>The money you save buying cheaper goods allows you to purchase more goods >>and services, etc etc. > > >Not really. It's not only about me. My neighbour who lost his job, can buy >less stuff because of unemployment, and I can buy less stuff because my >union fee/unemployment insurance rises in price. > >>Jobs are really just displaced, not eliminated. > > >I didn't mean that they are eliminated. They are made less valuable. Makin >stuff cheaper by using cheaper labor doesn't add wealth. Only increased >productivity, new technology and more efficient markets creates wealth. > >-- > >hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark > >http://www.mxm.dk/ >IT's Mad Science > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 11 18:22:44 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:22:44 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election References: <20041111164645.20764.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00b401c4c81b$70a5e910$deebfb44@kevin> Is discrimination against gay marriage more important than the right to keep and bear arms? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:46 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election > I know protecting heterosexual marriage is > constitutional, but it does not appear fair. As long > as gays are discriminated against in any way I am a > blue-stater. > > > > > While the liberal intelligentsia and media have > > been pompously trying > > > to portray blue states as better educated and red > > states as more > > > ignorantly benighted, even going so far as > > promoting a hoaxed up list > > > of states by average IQ vs how they voted which > > alleges to show smart > > > states as for Kerry and dumb states as for Bush, > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. > www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 11 18:23:03 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:23:03 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation References: Message-ID: <00bc01c4c81b$7c885c40$deebfb44@kevin> Someone has to do it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Lee" To: Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 10:53 AM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation > Yeah, the US gets kind of ripped off. We pay for a massive defense but get > no healthcare. All the other countries get the benefit of not having to keep > a large army, nukes etc. > > BAL > > >From: Damien Broderick > >To: ExI chat list > >Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation > >Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:14:09 -0600 > > > >At 07:39 AM 11/10/2004 -0800, MLwrote: > >> > >> > This is entertaining: > >> > >> > 27. > > > >> >United States $6702.42 per person > >> > > >> > 42. > >> > > > > >> > Australia $4398.94 per person > >> > >>Facts taken in isolation are meaningless, Damien, you should be > >>intelligent enough to realize this. What are the relative incomes vs > >>tax burden? > > > > > >Just teasing, Mike. But let's see, using the same database: > > > > > >North America: United > >States: Economy > > > >Gross > >National Income: $9780 billion (2001) > >[1st > >of 205] > >(per $ > >GDP): $93.58 per $100 > >[18th > >of > >170] > >(per > >capita): $33684.34 per person > >[5th > >of > >172] > > > >av. tax = 19.9% > > > > > >Oceania: Australia: > >Economy > > > >Gross > >National Income: $386 billion (2001) > >[14th > >of 205] > >(per $ > >GDP): $73.45 per $100 > >[37th > >of > >170] > >(per > >capita): $19562.14 per person > >[20th > >of > >172] > > > >av. tax = 22.49% > > > >Of course included in that extra 2.5 percent tax paid by Australians is > >medical coverage for all and some other goodies. Then again, we don't have > >to pay for nuclear weapons. > > > >Damien Broderick > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Nov 11 18:51:02 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:51:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Application Abbreviations Message-ID: <209120-22004114111851297@M2W071.mail2web.com> Does anyone know what the following abbreviations stand for? SS, GR, and ST? (I know EM stands for emperical modeling.) Thanks, Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From hal at finney.org Thu Nov 11 18:54:16 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:54:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: <20041111185416.5A9CE57E2A@finney.org> I'm not an economist, and I can't quite figure out the answer to this question: can opening up free trade between two nations (or any two groups), one richer and one poorer, make the richer one become poorer? I think the answer is no, but I'm not certain. To approach it, I think of the simplest possible case: one person. He is isolated and works only for himself, making all his own goods. Now we introduce another person, a poorer person, and allow them to trade. Can this trade make the first person become poorer than he was? I don't think it can, because every trade he makes is done because, from his perspective, he gets more for the trade than he gives. Therefore each trade increases his net wealth. If a trade would make him poorer, he wouldn't make it. He'd just continue to make his own goods instead. Now, does this generalize to two nations? I'm not sure; generalizations from individuals to large groups are often erroneous in economics. But broadly speaking, if we look at each individual trade between the nations as being on net beneficial to both sides, then I think trade can only make both of them wealthier than if no trade were possible. If this is true, it puts a different perspective on outsourcing. It's not a problem of money being sucked overseas. Rather, the problem is one of redistribution within the richer country (we'll assume for now that outsourcing is an unalloyed benefit to the poorer country, no doubt an oversimplifed and false assumption). In the rich country, for each job lost overseas, someone there gets richer - and it follows, if my assumption is right, that the increase in wealth is greater than the loss to the unemployed person. This means that rich nations can, if they choose, compensate for the costs of outsourcing and other forms of free trade through redistribution of their own wealth. Of course the degree to which they choose to engage in such practices will vary from country to country depending on ideological and economic factors. But they have the potential to do so. Outsourcing is not a threat to rich nations, if my rather simplistic economic analysis is correct. It is merely a new economic factor that increases wealth while redistributing it, as indeed any new economic innovation is likely to do. Countries have it within their power to cushion such changes to whatever degree they like, without curtailing free trade. I'd be interested in hearing whether this naive economic approach holds up under a more rigorous analysis. Hal From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 11 19:34:11 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:34:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <20041111185416.5A9CE57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041111193411.51462.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > To approach it, I think of the simplest possible > case: one person. > He is isolated and works only for himself, making > all his own goods. > Now we introduce another person, a poorer person, > and allow them to trade. > Can this trade make the first person become poorer > than he was? > > I don't think it can, because every trade he makes > is done because, from > his perspective, he gets more for the trade than he > gives. Therefore > each trade increases his net wealth. If a trade > would make him poorer, > he wouldn't make it. He'd just continue to make his > own goods instead. > > Now, does this generalize to two nations? I'm not > sure; generalizations > from individuals to large groups are often erroneous > in economics. > But broadly speaking, if we look at each individual > trade between the > nations as being on net beneficial to both sides, > then I think trade > can only make both of them wealthier than if no > trade were possible. The problem is that a nation is not just one person. Let's say you have two people, one of whom gets 2 coins for a unit of wheat, and the other of whom consumes wheat at a certain rate. Now introduce a third person, who can provide a unit of wheat for only one coin. Trading with the less expensive wheat producer increases the wheat consumer's wealth by one coin per unit of wheat, and the less expensive wheat producer's wealth by the same - but it decreases the more expensive wheat producer's wealth by two coins per unit of wheat that would have been consumed. However, the more expensive wheat producer is now free to do something else - like, say, refine the one-coin-per-unit wheat into bread worth at least three coins per unit, which might not have been profitable using two-coin-per-unit wheat but might be profitable using one-coin-per-unit wheat. The wheat consumer has an extra coin per unit wheat lying around, some of which can go to purchase bread instead. *That* is how wealth is created. Trade just sets up conditions where this can happen, although it can often be so important that it gets all the credit. From Steve365 at btinternet.com Thu Nov 11 20:33:05 2004 From: Steve365 at btinternet.com (Steve Davies) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:33:05 -0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' References: <20041111193411.51462.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002601c4c82d$ae1aec20$86c47ad5@oemcomputer> > --- Hal Finney wrote: > > To approach it, I think of the simplest possible > > case: one person. > > He is isolated and works only for himself, making > > all his own goods. > > Now we introduce another person, a poorer person, > > and allow them to trade. > > Can this trade make the first person become poorer > > than he was? > > > > I don't think it can, because every trade he makes > > is done because, from > > his perspective, he gets more for the trade than he > > gives. Therefore > > each trade increases his net wealth. If a trade > > would make him poorer, > > he wouldn't make it. He'd just continue to make his > > own goods instead. > > > > Now, does this generalize to two nations? I'm not > > sure; generalizations > > from individuals to large groups are often erroneous > > in economics. > > But broadly speaking, if we look at each individual > > trade between the > > nations as being on net beneficial to both sides, > > then I think trade > > can only make both of them wealthier than if no > > trade were possible. Adrian Tymes replied > The problem is that a nation is not just one person. > Let's say you have two people, one of whom gets 2 > coins for a unit of wheat, and the other of whom > consumes wheat at a certain rate. Now introduce a > third person, who can provide a unit of wheat for only > one coin. Trading with the less expensive wheat > producer increases the wheat consumer's wealth by one > coin per unit of wheat, and the less expensive wheat > producer's wealth by the same - but it decreases the > more expensive wheat producer's wealth by two coins > per unit of wheat that would have been consumed. > > However, the more expensive wheat producer is now > free to do something else - like, say, refine the > one-coin-per-unit wheat into bread worth at least > three coins per unit, which might not have been > profitable using two-coin-per-unit wheat but might be > profitable using one-coin-per-unit wheat. The > wheat consumer has an extra coin per unit wheat > lying around, some of which can go to purchase bread > instead. *That* is how wealth is created. Trade just > sets up conditions where this can happen, although it > can often be so important that it gets all the credit. Adrian is surely right. Moreover we need to stop thinking about trade and exchange in terms of nations. Nations do not trade with each other, it is individuals and corporations that trade. In economic terms an exchange between somebody living in California and somebody living in New York is no different to exchange between the person in California and a third one in Shanghai. As long as trade exists (i.e. we aren't all living in self-sufficient households or latifundia) the question is not free trade or protection but rather what is the area of the planet's surface within which trade will be free and will result in economic integration and a division of labour? Economic theory and empirical experience all suggest that the larger the area within which trade is unfettered in terms of both population and geography, the greater the productivity gains. The problem, which is real, are the transitional costs of economic change. The producer in Adrian's example who switches from wheat to something else has a transitional period when he's worse off. Also there are psychological and social costs - it's pretty upsetting to learn that a skill you've spent many years acquiring is now redundant because you no longer have a comparative advantage in that area. Also, these problems are typically dealt with by political communities i.e. nation states or are seen to be the responsibility of the ruling elites of nation states. Opposition to such things as outsourcing and free trade is actually opposition to economic change and growth. That doesn't mean there aren't problems though but it's important to realise what those problems actually are, then we can try to work out ways of resolving them. Of course we might arrive at a collective decision to trade off greater social stability against greater economic growth - that would be fair enough. Unfortunately many people want to have their cake and eat it and there's always plenty of politicians around to tell them they can. SD From rafal at smigrodzki.org Thu Nov 11 21:08:05 2004 From: rafal at smigrodzki.org (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:08:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4193D4B5.1070507@smigrodzki.org> From: Max M >> >> Not really. It's not only about me. My neighbour who lost his job, >> can buy less stuff because of unemployment, and I can buy less stuff >> because my union fee/unemployment insurance rises in price. > ### This is interesting. Unemployment (i.e. presence of large numbers of able-bodied persons who are willing to work but are unable to secure a gainful exchange with other persons, exercising of their freedom of contract) is an artificial malady, produced by, of course, interference in the freedom of contract. It is virtually unknown in pluralistic economies. In fact, the forced (or, unwisely, willing) participation in labor unions is one of the prime causes of unemployment. Once the participants in an economy make one mistake, formation of unions (which is a form of reducing pluralism and lengthening feedback loops, the two most egregious sins you can commit against the society), they set themselves up to commit even more mistakes ("to keep the union fee down") - such as cutting themselves out of the international division of labor and further undermining their economic position. All the while shedding tears about their poor unemployed neighbors. Stop paying union dues, oust the monopolistic politicians who are regulating the economy to death, and you will have both full employment *and* cheap stuff. ------------------------------------- >> >> >>> Jobs are really just displaced, not eliminated. >> >> >> >> I didn't mean that they are eliminated. They are made less valuable. >> Makin stuff cheaper by using cheaper labor doesn't add wealth. Only >> increased productivity, new technology and more efficient markets >> creates wealth. > ### Of course, if you use cheaper labor (all else being equal), you can buy more of it, therefore you can make more stuff, therefore you are wealthier. QED. Rafal From artillo at comcast.net Thu Nov 11 21:15:31 2004 From: artillo at comcast.net (artillo at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:15:31 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Accelerating Change Message-ID: <111120042115.24296.4193D673000645DB00005EE82200762302010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> Have any of you seen this yet??? http://accelerating.org/ac2004/index.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hal at finney.org Thu Nov 11 22:08:06 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:08:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: <20041111220806.7AA1F57E2A@finney.org> Adrian Tymes writes: > The problem is that a nation is not just one person. > Let's say you have two people, one of whom gets 2 > coins for a unit of wheat, and the other of whom > consumes wheat at a certain rate. Now introduce a > third person, who can provide a unit of wheat for only > one coin. Trading with the less expensive wheat > producer increases the wheat consumer's wealth by one > coin per unit of wheat, and the less expensive wheat > producer's wealth by the same - but it decreases the > more expensive wheat producer's wealth by two coins > per unit of wheat that would have been consumed. You can't eat coins. Let's suppose they are apples. You start off with two people, an apple grower and a wheat grower. The wheat grower gets two apples for a unit of wheat. Now introduce a foreign guy who will provide a unit of wheat for only one apple. So the apple grower switches to him. He can now pay one apple for a unit of wheat. The net result is that before the foreigner came in, after an exchange, the apple grower had 1 unit of wheat and the wheat grower had two apples. After we introduce the foreign guy and do an exchange, the apple grower has 1 apple and 1 unit of wheat, and the wheat grower has 1 unit of wheat. Before trade, together they had 1 wheat and 2 apples; after trade, they have 1 apple and 2 wheats. Trade cost them an apple and gained them a wheat. But wheat is worth more to them than apples (otherwise they would not have previously had a price of two apples per wheat), so it is a net gain, consistent with my argument. > However, the more expensive wheat producer is now > free to do something else - like, say, refine the > one-coin-per-unit wheat into bread worth at least > three coins per unit. And that makes it even better. Hal From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 23:13:14 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:13:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Enlightenment and the election In-Reply-To: <00b401c4c81b$70a5e910$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041111231314.70741.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> No, i never said discrimination against gay marriage is more important than second amendment rights, gay marriage is merely my main interest, keeping in mind the ending clause of the first amendment: "...and to petition the government for a redress of grievances", even if there is no cause to think redress will be granted. >Kevin Freels cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Is discrimination against gay marriage more > important than the right to keep > and bear arms? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From maxm at mail.tele.dk Thu Nov 11 23:25:15 2004 From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:25:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <41928B6B.5090007@smigrodzki.org> References: <41927FE3.2040708@mail.tele.dk> <41928B6B.5090007@smigrodzki.org> Message-ID: <4193F4DB.7060509@mail.tele.dk> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Max M wrote: > >> A cannot really see anything good about outsourcing. Shure we can get >> stuff cheaper. But it is acheived by people working for less money. >> Not by people working more efficiently. So it is a net loss. >> >> Furthermore if we "rationalise" by using cheaper labor we will not >> get the benefits of automation, as there will be less motivation to >> automate. > > ### If this was the wta-talk, saying that free trade is a "net loss" > would be more excusable but here on exi-chat an at least elementary > knowledge of economics is de rigeur. Well if you want to pound me for having no economical understanding you need to come up with better economic arguments than you do here. > Obviously, as any voluntary contractual relationship between humans, > free trade in labor (derisively referred to as "outsourcing") results > in net gains for both parties involved the trade. Actually there are three parties here. You are forgetting the loss for the person loosing his job. If the job goes to somebody else because he is willing to work cheaper, then I don't see the gain. I am all for people loosing their jobs if there is a smarter way to do the same thing, or they are lazy/inefficient. But outsourcing is based on cheap labor, and that results in no net gain. We have seen it throughout history, farming, crafts etc. being automated. But in those cases labor where moved to other places because the same things could be produced more efficiently. > Of course, the lazy, and the inefficient might have to mend their > ways, or temporarily accept lower standard of living (until the > increased productivity trickles down even to them in the form of > welfare and charity) - but I see it as a gain, too. You getting fired, and your job being overtaken by somebody working for peanuts in a developed country has *nothing* to do with lazyness or inefficiency. I cannot see how you can argue that. The jobs being transfered now does not result in a better efficiency in producing the same products. I actually read an article just today, in the leading danish bussiness mag, that managers outsourcing should reconsidder the use of robots in production, as it was often cheaper to do it by manual labour in a developing country. -- hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark http://www.mxm.dk/ IT's Mad Science From hal at finney.org Thu Nov 11 23:53:35 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:53:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: <20041111235335.4C9B857E2A@finney.org> Max M (not Max More) writes: > I am all for people loosing their jobs if there is a smarter way to do > the same thing, or they are lazy/inefficient. But outsourcing is based > on cheap labor, and that results in no net gain. This reminds me of a story related at http://ingrimayne.saintjoe.edu/econ/International/InternTrade.html : : A fable by James Ingram also illustrates that free international trade : is production efficient. In his book, International Economic Problems : (John Wiley, 1970), he tells of a mysterious entrepreneur, Mr. X., who : announces to the world that he has found several amazing discoveries that : allow him to produce cheap televisions, automobiles, cameras, and other : goods. He sets up a plant on a large tract of land along the coast of : North Carolina; hires 5000 employees who are sworn to secrecy; and begins : buying grain, coal, and machinery. As the trains of grain and coal roll : into his factory, other trains full of televisions and automobiles roll : out of his factory into showrooms across the country. Mr. X is hailed : as another Edison or Bell, and his company becomes a favorite with Wall : Street investors. : : Consumers love Mr. X because his products are so much cheaper than what : they could buy before. Of course, his competitors dislike him, but their : attempts to get laws restricting his operations get nowhere. The Houses : of Congress ring with speeches saying that some economic adjustment is : an inevitable by-product of technological progress. : : Then, one day a small boy trying out his new skin-diving gear accidentally : penetrates Mr. X's security shield and learns Mr. X's secret. Nothing : is produced at the factory. It is all a front for a giant import-export : business. Mr. X transforms grain and coal into autos and televisions : by trade. His secret revealed, Mr. X is reviled and his factory shut : down. Members of Congress proclaim that the American standard of living : has had a narrow escape from the threat of cheap foreign labor and urge : more money for research in industrial technology. When I first heard this story, I was skeptical that anyone would welcome Mr. X's factory, with all of its economic dislocations, as long as they thought it was due to automation; but change their mind when they found out that it was accomplished by trade. But it sounds like you, Max, would have exactly this response. Why is it acceptable for your neighbor to lose his job if it is done better by a machine, which takes no pleasure in its accomplishment; but unacceptable if the job is taken by a poor person who is greatly benefited as a result? Hal From reason at longevitymeme.org Fri Nov 12 00:08:29 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:08:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] conversing with S. Jay Olshansky and Aubrey de Grey In-Reply-To: <2782BAE2-33F1-11D9-B950-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: Those of you interested in healthy life extension, what's going on in the biogerontology community, and the intersection between media, public support, funding, research and aging should take a look at this very educational conversation between myself, S. Jay Olshansky and Aubrey de Grey currently underway: http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000296.php S. Jay Olshansky had picked up on comments I made earlier in the week, and an exchange of views ensued in the comments to the post: http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000292.php Reason Founder, Longevity Meme From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 00:11:48 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:11:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] conversing with S. Jay Olshansky and Aubrey de Grey In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041112001148.83633.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Did any of you read of the recent vitamin E study that concluded a large fraction of those subjects who took only 200 IU a day had a higher rate of heart attacks? Even though it is only one study, what a bringdown. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 12 00:19:50 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:19:50 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <20041111235335.4C9B857E2A@finney.org> References: <20041111235335.4C9B857E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111181244.01b3fb00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:53 PM 11/11/2004 -0800, Hal asks: >Why is it acceptable for your >neighbor to lose his job if it is done better by a machine, which takes >no pleasure in its accomplishment; but unacceptable if the job is taken >by a poor person who is greatly benefited as a result? Obviously it's *not* acceptable in either case unless provisions are put in place to enable the neighbor's transition to a new job (if such exists or is even possible--and it won't be possible if automation/nanotech is broadly effective or once the whole world is job-leveled) or to obtain some of the benefits of the new arrangements (by being a stakeholder, say; ideally in many different enterprises--which, in the limit, might be done efficiently via enlightened government, or co-ops, or the Mafia, or churches, or the Extropy Investment Fund, whatever). Damien Broderick From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 12 00:57:48 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:57:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41940A8C.7020707@mac.com> Brian Lee wrote: > Outsourcing benefits the entire economy. Of course some neighbors will > lose jobs, but on the whole everyone benefits from low cost goods and > can buy more other stuff while some people lose jobs, transfer jobs, > learn new stuff, whatever. Intelligent transfer of jobs to areas where the same quality work can be done more cheaply makes sense. However, what we have now is often not very intelligent. Out-sourcing has become a panacea for many public software companies. Wall Street and other financial players nearly make it a requirement or at least ask for a strong why-not. It is not intelligent when companies assume that the code is all and can be picked up by any reaonsably competent software team successfully and relatively painlessly. This is very seldom the case. The code has its own inertia and quirks that the current onsite developers understand. The onsite developers, if they include the architects of the code, have considerable business and technical knowledge relevant to the code in question that can seldom be properly captured for transfer in a reasonably complete manner. Even for QA only transfers it is not uncommon to experience delays of 6 - 9 months before an offshore team is fully up to speed and workable processes in place. So this is a far cry from a panacea as many companies learn painfully. Folks can't "buy more stuff" if they have no income for significant periods of time while they are attempting to "learn new stuff". The real world is not so simple. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 12 01:18:09 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:18:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111181244.01b3fb00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041111235335.4C9B857E2A@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041111181244.01b3fb00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <41940F51.7000805@mac.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > > Obviously it's *not* acceptable in either case unless provisions are > put in place to enable the neighbor's transition to a new job (if such > exists or is even possible--and it won't be possible if > automation/nanotech is broadly effective or once the whole world is > job-leveled) or to obtain some of the benefits of the new arrangements > (by being a stakeholder, say; ideally in many different > enterprises--which, in the limit, might be done efficiently via > enlightened government, or co-ops, or the Mafia, or churches, or the > Extropy Investment Fund, whatever). Extropy Investment Fund sounds like a great idea. Is anyone setting such up? - samantha From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Nov 12 02:50:59 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:50:59 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] conversing with S. Jay Olshansky and Aubrey de Grey In-Reply-To: <20041112001148.83633.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004a01c4c862$711358a0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Al Brooks > > Did any of you read of the recent vitamin E study that > concluded a large fraction of those subjects who took > only 200 IU a day had a higher rate of heart attacks? > Even though it is only one study, what a bringdown. Surely I am not the only geezer here who recalls the big study that came out in 1977 that concluded that there are four vitamins that should not be taken in supplements: A, D, E and K. They reported at the time that those four might be more harmful than helpful if taken in the way that was so popular in those wacky days: megadoses of everything. spike From extropy at unreasonable.com Fri Nov 12 06:32:38 2004 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:32:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Phallic election results Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20041112010005.109f8e80@unreasonable.com> There's a healthy competition in visual representations of the election results. The most useful (and visually disturbing) I've seen so far is www.esri.com/industries/elections/graphics/results2004_lg.jpg Wonkette sees the blue jutting skyward as phallic. To me, the camera angle seems to come from the point of view of an incoming ICBM; the blue spires are stylized mushroom clouds. What would Edward Tufte say? There's the notion in the arts (certainly visual art and writing) that a work can have diverse and profound meaning not considered or intended by its creator, or indeed directly opposite the intended meaning. In recent political art, we have the portrait of Bush created from a composite of photos of dead soldiers. Seen by Michael Moore as a powerful anti-Bush statement while embraced by others as an expression of solidarity with Bush. http://photomatt.net/2004/07/mosaic/ Natasha -- I'm guessing that there are people who feel your work captures their fear and revulsion of transhumanity. Have you encountered this reaction? How did it make you feel? What did you say? -- David Lubkin. From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 12 06:53:34 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 07:53:34 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Moving brain implant seeks out signals In-Reply-To: <006c01c4c846$a7f58d50$89dfd383@dennis> References: <006c01c4c846$a7f58d50$89dfd383@dennis> Message-ID: <470a3c52041111225327007108@mail.gmail.com> A device that automatically moves electrodes through the brain to seek out the strongest signals is taking the idea of neural implants to a new level. Scary as this sounds, its developers at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena say devices like this will be essential if brain implants are ever going to work. Implants could one day help people who are paralysed or unable to communicate because of spinal injury or conditions such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease). Electrodes implanted in the brain could, in principle, pick up neural signals and convey them to a prosthetic arm or a computer cursor. But there is a problem. Implanted electrodes are usually unable to sense consistent neuronal signals for more than a few months, according to Igor Fineman, a neurosurgeon at the Huntington Hospital, also in Pasadena. To get around these problems, Joel Burdick and Richard Andersen at Caltech have developed a device in which the electrodes sense where the strongest signal is coming from, and move towards it. Their prototype, which is mounted on the skull, uses piezoelectric motors to move four electrodes independently of each other in 1-micrometre increments. http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996645 From hibbert at mydruthers.com Fri Nov 12 07:02:43 2004 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:02:43 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] conversing with S. Jay Olshansky and Aubrey de Grey In-Reply-To: <004a01c4c862$711358a0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <004a01c4c862$711358a0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <41946013.8050807@mydruthers.com> > Did any of you read of the recent vitamin E study that > concluded a large fraction of those subjects who took > only 200 IU a day had a higher rate of heart attacks? > Even though it is only one study, what a bringdown. The current recommendation at RealAge.com is still for 400 IU per day. I sent them email asking whether they would be reevaluating their recommendations. The article I read yesterday (in the San Jose Mercury News; presumably it was on the wire everywhere) said that a recent large study showed that people who took 400 IU per day were at increased risk (about 10% higher) of early death. Today I look at BBC news (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3998847.stm) and they point out that the participants in the study were 60 and over, and had heart trouble, so the results may not apply to young healthy adults. Whew! From the article: In the study, there was no increased risk of death with doses of 200 IU (133mg) per day or less, and there was evidence to suggest these doses might be of some benefit. Chris -- It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com http://mydruthers.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Fri Nov 12 10:39:20 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:39:20 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] statistics, damned statistics, and taxation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1C47D3F6-3497-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 11 Nov 2004, at 17:53, Brian Lee wrote: > Yeah, the US gets kind of ripped off. We pay for a massive defense but > get no healthcare. All the other countries get the benefit of not > having to keep a large army, nukes etc. I think getting 'ripped off' implies someone is doing the ripping, but its America's choice to do these things. You might say we "shoot ourselves in the foot", but no one is ripping you off. Despite what Mike says, no one is forcing America to favor military budgets over health or education. best, patrick From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 12 10:46:40 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:46:40 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Quantum astronomy experiment proposed Message-ID: <470a3c52041112024618cbf235@mail.gmail.com> Space.com: Quantum astronomy experiment proposed, possibly using the Allen Array Telescope and the narrow-band radio-wave detectors being build by the SETI Institute and the University of California, Berkeley.There are many ways we could go now in examining quantum results. If conscious observation is needed for the creation of an electron (this is one aspect of the Copenhagen Interpretation, the most popular version of quantum physics interpretations), then ideas about the origin of consciousness must be revised. If electrons in the brain create consciousness, but electrons require consciousness to exist, one is apparently caught in circular reasoning at best. But for this essay, we shall not discuss quantum biology. Another path we might go down would be the application of quantum physics to cosmology -- either the Inflationary origin of the universe, or the Hawking evaporation of black holes, as examples. But our essay is not about this vast field either. Today we will discuss the scaling of the simple double-slit laboratory experiment to cosmic distances, what can truly be called, "quantum astronomy." http://www.space.com/searchforlife/quantum_astronomy_041111.html From humania at t-online.de Fri Nov 12 10:45:24 2004 From: humania at t-online.de (Hubert Mania) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:45:24 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] For your information Message-ID: <001501c4c8a4$b8b5a400$5b91fea9@humaniaz2wf5fi> If you go to this website: http://www.extropy.com/about/index.html you will see that a certain Robert Bradbury is still on the Extropy Board of Directors. Robert Bradbury is an ueber-fascist and a mentally retarded desk top serial killer who has deliberately - out of the ambush of an alleged rationality and with the crutch of utilitarian filosofy, (yes, with two insignificant "f"'s) - displayed a plan to nuke some so called rogue states. He dead earnestly wants to throw nuclear fire on half of the world and leave only non-islamic and technophile humans to invite them to his white paradise of fascist immortality or immortal fascism. He has elaborated on this vison at least three times on Extropy list. Robert Bradbury has meanwhile left this list but he still is on the Extropian Board of Directors. Plain and careless ignorance? Thoughtlessness? Communication gap between "chiefs" and webmaster? Bad intention? P.S: And . . . no, I will NOT piss off, but continue to watch the development of Extropian filosofy from the viewpoint of Nietzsche's Dragon. From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Fri Nov 12 11:08:42 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:08:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Application Abbreviations In-Reply-To: <209120-22004114111851297@M2W071.mail2web.com> References: <209120-22004114111851297@M2W071.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <36DF7E02-349B-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Hi Natasha: > Does anyone know what the following abbreviations stand for? Check out: http://www.acronymfinder.com/ For instance: > SS, Schutzstaffeln (WWII, German) Self-Service Steam Ship (nautical vessel designation; also see MS for motor ship) Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (book by J. K. Rowling) Sa Saintet? (French: His/Her Holiness) Safe Sex Safety Stock (inventory control system) Safety Systems Saint Scholastica Saints Sakura Star (website) Salmon Sperm (carrier DNA) Same Size Sample Size Samurai Showdown/Samurai Spirits (SNK game) Samurai Spirits (SNK video game) Samurai Sword San Sebasti?n Sassari (Sardinia, Italy) Satellite-Switched Savage Species (roleplaying games, Dungeons & Dragons) Scanner Subsystem Scleral Spur (ophthalmology) Score Sheet Scoville Scale (measure of chili hotness) Screen Saver Screen Shot Scribe Sheet Sea Salt Sea State Search String Secondary School Secondary Storage Secret Service Section Secretary (Order of the Arrow, Boy Scouts of America) Sector Suite (FAA positions at an ARTCC) Secure Seal (anti-fraud technology used by banks) Security and Safeguards Security Service (MI5) Sega Saturn (game machine) Seismic Stability Select Standby (RS-449) Selective Service Selective Signaling Sell Stop (trading markets; stocks, bonds, commodities) Semisolid (pharmaceutics) Senior School Separate School (Toronto Catholic District School Board, Canada) Serial Slayer Serious Sam (game) Serta Sheep Service Sink (construction plans; plumbing) Service System (Bellcore) Service/Segment (Bellcore) Sesame Street Session Service Settleable Solids Seventh Son (book) Severn School (Severn High School) Severus Snape (Harry Potter character) Shared Services (IBM) Shared Slot Shell Script Shelter Supervisor Shetland Sheepdog Shining Soul (game) Ship Service Short Stop (baseball/softball position) Short Stuff Shortland Street (New Zealand TV soap opera) Shortstop (baseball) Shoulder Stretch (stretching exercises) Side, Side (geometry) Sidewalk Slam (band) Signal Simulator Signaling System (telecommunications) Silver Star Simmer Stat Simplex Signaling Sims Superstar (game)Single Shot Single Sided Single Signal Single Source Single Strand (DNA) Single Strength Sire Summary Sister Sledge (band) Six Sigma Sjogren's Syndrome Ski School Skyshrine (Everquest, gaming) Slave Select (electronics) Slick Shoes (band) Sliding Scale Slim Shady (Eminem albumn) Slow Start So Sorry So Sweet Social Science Social Security Social Studies Society of St. Sulpice (The Sulpicians; religious order) Software Support Solar System Soldier's System Solid State Sommersemester (German: summer semester) Sonic Shuffle (Sega game) Soprano Saxophone Sorry, Sloppy Source Selection Southend-On-Sea (British postcode) Souvenir Sheet (philately) Space Shuttle Space Station Spacely Sprockets Special Service Special Studies SpineShank (band)Spousal Support Spread Spectrum Sprint Spectrum (PCS) Sprite Show (webcomic) Staatsspoor (former railway station in The Hague) Stack Segment Staff Specialist StaidSoft Stainless Steel Standard Score Starshell Starship (science fiction) Start to Start State School (Australia) State Ship Status Signal Steady State (control systems engineering) Steam Stat Stefano Silvestri (Italian Undersecretary of Defense) Step-Son Steyr Scout (Counter-Strike, gaming) Stop State Storage to Storage Instruction Storm Shield (Diablo 2 game) Street Sharks (cartoon) Strip Search Strong Sad (cartoon character) Strong Safety (football) Structural Steel Stunt Squad Sua Santit? (Italian: His Holiness) Sub Space (online game) Submarine (conventional) Submarine Qualified Submersible Ship (submarine) Subnet Sweep Subordinate System Sub-Sonic Subspace (gaming) Subsystem Specification Suburban Service (Canadian post) Suicide Squad (Quake 3 clan) Suitable Substitute (US DoD) Sum of Squares SummerSlam (WWF PPV event) Summerslam (WWF Wrestling event held in August) Summoned Skull (Yu-Gi-Oh! card) Sunday School Sunset Sunshine Super Saiyan (game) Super Saiyan Saiyajin (Dragon World) Super Scalar Super Solenoid (anime; aka S2 or S^2) Super Sonic Super Sport Super Star Super Stock (racing category) Supersede Supervisory System (SONET)SS Supply Support Support Strategy Support System/Subsystem Sure, Sure Surface Search Surface to Surface Surveillance Station Survivor Series (WWF PPV event) Suspended Solids Svensk Standard (Swedish Standard) Swedish Standards Sweep Select Sweet Surrender Swing Space (Pentagon Renovation Project) Switch and Signaling Switching System Sworn Statement (Notary Public-Vital documents) Sylvia Saint (adult film star) Synthetic Substitution System Shock (computer game) System Specification System Status System Summary System Supervisor System Support Systemic Sclerosis best, patrick From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 12 11:28:23 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:28:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] For your information In-Reply-To: <001501c4c8a4$b8b5a400$5b91fea9@humaniaz2wf5fi> References: <001501c4c8a4$b8b5a400$5b91fea9@humaniaz2wf5fi> Message-ID: <470a3c52041112032826ec8aeb@mail.gmail.com> Hubert, I share your disagreement with the extreme views that Robert Bradbury has expressed at times. But look, I think "ueber-fascist and a mentally retarded desk top serial killer" is way too much. Note that if he were to sue you for saying this he would win hands down even with a mentally retarded lawyer. G. On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:45:24 +0100, Hubert Mania wrote: > If you go to this website: > > http://www.extropy.com/about/index.html > > you will see that a certain Robert Bradbury is still on the Extropy Board of > Directors. Robert Bradbury is an ueber-fascist and a mentally retarded > desk top serial killer who has deliberately - out of the ambush of an > alleged rationality and with the crutch of utilitarian filosofy, (yes, with > two insignificant "f"'s) - displayed a plan to nuke some so called rogue > states. He dead earnestly wants to throw nuclear fire on half of the world > and leave only non-islamic and technophile humans to invite them to his > white paradise of fascist immortality or immortal fascism. He > has elaborated on this vison at least three times on Extropy list. > > Robert Bradbury has meanwhile left this list but he still is on the > Extropian Board of Directors. > > Plain and careless ignorance? Thoughtlessness? Communication gap between > "chiefs" and webmaster? Bad intention? > > P.S: And . . . no, I will NOT piss off, but continue to watch the > development of Extropian filosofy from the viewpoint of Nietzsche's Dragon. From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 12 14:15:38 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:15:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Virtual girlfriend 1.0 Message-ID: <470a3c5204111206151109e22e@mail.gmail.com> To Whom It May Concern: Hong Kong based Artificial Life, a leading provider of intelligent agent based mobile technology and applications today announced the official release of its highly anticipated new mobile product line: V-Girl(TM) Version 1.0 - your virtual girlfriend. The V-Girl(TM) Version 1.0 has several outstanding and unique product features: it uses artificial intelligence, text to speech, real time chat, sophisticated user profiling and user specific content delivery, high quality 3-D animations and graphics, context sensitive functions and menu icons, over 3000 different video and audio streams, build in user contests, games-in-game functions and offers intelligent, interactive product placement opportunities for sponsors and advertisers. http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/November2004/8649.htm From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 12 14:30:44 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:30:44 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information Message-ID: Dear Hubert, relax.. you're looking at an old page on the extropy site Look here instead: http://www.extropy.org/directors.htm 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/ ******************************************************************** "Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher level." -- Enrico Fermi From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 12 14:38:54 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:38:54 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Virtual girlfriend 1.0 Message-ID: What, they offer no Virtual *boy*friend 1.0 ? sheesh! From humania at t-online.de Fri Nov 12 14:39:28 2004 From: humania at t-online.de (Hubert Mania) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:39:28 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information References: Message-ID: <000901c4c8c5$6b64fef0$5b91fea9@humaniaz2wf5fi> So, I am a fool again. Sorry everybody. Hubert Mania ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amara Graps" To: Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 3:30 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information > Dear Hubert, > > relax.. you're looking at an old page on the extropy site > > Look here instead: > > http://www.extropy.org/directors.htm > > 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/ > ******************************************************************** > "Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having > listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher > level." -- Enrico Fermi > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 12 15:33:19 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:33:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Virtual girlfriend 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <470a3c52041112073319e7a0f3@mail.gmail.com> $$$ Business opportunity! $$$ On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:38:54 +0100, Amara Graps wrote: > > What, they offer no Virtual *boy*friend 1.0 ? > > sheesh! From humania at t-online.de Fri Nov 12 17:22:59 2004 From: humania at t-online.de (Hubert Mania) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:22:59 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information References: <006001c4c8d5$7ab97420$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <000b01c4c8dc$44a91af0$5b91fea9@humaniaz2wf5fi> Yeah, Spike, you're right, sorry for the ad hominem, too, of course. I allow myself to be carried away. And after having pushed the send button I already regret my words. Hubert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spike" To: "'Hubert Mania'" Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 5:34 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information > bzzzzzzt.... flag on the play, five yard penalty. > > no ad hominem, hubert. > > spike > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > > Hubert Mania > > Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 6:39 AM > > To: ExI chat list > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information > > > > > > So, I am a fool again. Sorry everybody. > > > > Hubert Mania > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Amara Graps" > > To: > > Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 3:30 PM > > Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information > > > > > > > Dear Hubert, > > > > > > relax.. you're looking at an old page on the extropy site > > > > > > Look here instead: > > > > > > http://www.extropy.org/directors.htm > > > > > > 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/ > > > ******************************************************************** > > > "Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having > > > listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher > > > level." -- Enrico Fermi > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Nov 12 17:43:38 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:43:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information Message-ID: <298610-2200411512174338138@M2W044.mail2web.com> Thank you Amara for responding to his post, and I am sure the list moderators are responding privately. The extropy-chat list is very clear about the manner in which we work together to provide a venue for list members to engage in conversation and debates about the future and Extropic transhumanist ideas. In the past, we had too long a leeway between postings that were disingenuous and problematic. We have corrected that error to provide a new list for type of community we can all enjoy and learn from. Let?s all maintain its value. Natasha Natasha Vita-More President, Extropy Institute _______________________ From: Amara Graps >Dear Hubert, >relax.. you're looking at an old page on the extropy site >Look here instead: >http://www.extropy.org/directors.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From megao at sasktel.net Fri Nov 12 18:52:51 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:52:51 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? Message-ID: <41950683.1060404@sasktel.net> I have an interesting query... Can someone have the content of their site blocked from the major search engines and deleted from the results of past successful search terms that have brought hits? I am maybe being a bit theatric but What I have found today is that I can access my site http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan and the content seems to be intact. However, essentially my direct identity and direct presence on the web has been nearly completely ereased except to those who make a direct hit. Is it a problem with angelfire sites perhaps or could someone purposefully block a site? There is no porn or anything illegal to my site so I am a bit concerned. example : extropian +agroforestry +pharming which by content must bring up a direct hit , I get only the above reference. Web Results 1 - 1 of 1 for extropian +agroforestry +pharming . (0.21 seconds) Did you mean: extropian +agroforestry +farming [extropy-chat] Swedish researchers back for a "googlewhack" Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. ... this time searching for "pharming" + "THC" + "bioreactor" they did a googlewhack on our site. ... www.lucifer.com/pipermail/ extropy-chat/2004-July/007778.html - 3k - Cached - Similar pages Did you mean to search for: extropian +agroforestry +farming I find when searching "extropian agroforestry ventures" on kartoo.com absolutely no site specific reference except that found on third party sites. The last time in october that I found my site corrupted and nonexistant on any google, I found it on kartoo. After clicking the link from kartoo my google site miraculaously reserrected. Is angelfire content unstable? Morris Johnson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 12 18:56:45 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:56:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Gaia's dad is terse Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041112125530.01b0a7b8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> A nice, and somewhat harrowing, quote: "Imagine a survivor of a failed civilization with only a tattered book on aromatherapy for guidance in arresting a cholera epidemic. Yet, such a book would more likely be found amid the debris than a comprehensible medical text."-- James Lovelock From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 12 19:51:02 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:51:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041112134833.01a82ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> John Cramer (who devised the Transactional Interpretation of QT) writes on the Afshar QT experiments in the latest ANALOG: http://www.analogsf.com/0412/altview.shtml He concludes: < Does this mean that the theory of quantum mechanics has also been falsified? No indeed! The quantum formalism has no problem in predicting the Afshar result. A simple quantum mechanical calculation using the standard formalism shows that the wires should intercept only a very small fraction of the light. The problem encountered by the Copenhagen and Many-Worlds Interpretations is that the Afshar Experiment has identified a situation in which these popular interpretations of quantum mechanics are inconsistent with the quantum formalism itself. What about the Transactional Interpretation, which describes each quantum process as a handshake between a normal "offer" wave (y) and a back-in-time advanced "confirmation" wave (y*)? The offer waves from the laser pass through both pinholes and cancel at the positions of the zeroes in the interference pattern. Therefore, no transactions can form at these locations, and the wires can intercept only a very small amount of light. Thus, the Transactional interpretation is completely consistent with the results of the Afshar Experiment and with the quantum formalism. Does this mean that the Copenhagen and Many Worlds Interpretations, having been falsified by experiment, must be abandoned? Does it mean that the physics community must turn to an interpretation like the Transactional Interpretation that is consistent with the Afshar results? Perhaps. I predict that a new generation of "Quantum Lawyers" will begin to populate the physics literature with arguments challenging what "is" is and claming that the wounded interpretations never said that interference should be completely absent in a quantum which-way measurement. And most practicing physicists who learned the Copenhagen Interpretation at the knee of an old and beloved professor will not abandon that mode of thinking, even if it is found to be inconsistent with the formalism and with experiment. But nevertheless, the rules of the game have changed. There is a way of distinguishing between interpretations of quantum mechanics. It will take some time for the dust to settle, but I am confident that when it does we will have interpretations of quantum mechanics that are on a sounder footing than the ones presently embraced by most of the physics community.> Damien Broderick From reason at longevitymeme.org Fri Nov 12 20:17:57 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason .) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:17:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar Message-ID: <200411121417.AA308019300@longevitymeme.org> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Damien Broderick Reply-To: ExI chat list Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:51:02 -0600 >John Cramer (who devised the Transactional Interpretation of QT) writes on >the Afshar QT experiments in the latest ANALOG: > >http://www.analogsf.com/0412/altview.shtml That's very interesting. I recall giving a presentation on Cramer's TI to my department a good few years ago now. They were very sniffy - in particular, noting that current cosmology placed strong constraints on the amount of time-reversed (advanced? retarded? I can never remember which is which) radiation that could exist in the universe. I was in no way qualified to discuss this assertion, being a simple stellar mechanic by trade in those days. Of course, cosmology is and has been moving very fast, so this objection based on cosmological models may no longer be useful or valid. Reason Founder, Longevity Meme From naddy at mips.inka.de Fri Nov 12 22:25:45 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? References: <41950683.1060404@sasktel.net> Message-ID: Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote: > Can someone have the content of their site blocked from the major search > engines and deleted from the results of > past successful search terms that have brought hits? You can put up a /robots.txt and tell the spiders not to index your site. The major search engines should honor that. Old entries will eventually time out. I guess you could contact the search engine operators and ask them to accelerate this. www.angelfire.com does not have a robots.txt. > I am maybe being a bit theatric but What I have found today is that I > can access my site > http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan and the content seems to > be intact. You may have fallen victim to algorithms that try to identify search engine spam. To this human the page above looks very much like that sort of garbage. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From hal at finney.org Fri Nov 12 23:48:58 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:48:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Embracing change Message-ID: <20041112234858.425A457E2B@finney.org> It seems to me that one of the most universal human characteristics is fear or dislike of change. This manifests itself in so many ways throughout the world. At a simple level, I'm sure all of us have been involved in online or virtual communities and activities where a change to the interface is made. Almost always, the initial reaction is negative. People see many flaws in the new interface when they compare it with the one they are used to. After a while, though, they get used to the new one, and then they are happy with it. I'm sure that everyone involved in publishing, paper and online, must be familiar with the phenomenon. I saw an article last week pointed to by slashdot, http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20041103/bartle_01.shtml , about how this opposition to change is harming the development of online multiplayer games. Of course this is a trivial example. Another one just hit home yesterday, when it was announced that the state is thinking of selling our local fairground so it can be used for condos or a hotel, which would be the "highest and best use" of the property. Readers are invited to write into the newspaper about their reactions. Well, I know already that 95% of the letters are going to be negative. People hate this kind of change. Even though the fairgrounds are only used for fair-type events a few times a year and are idle or used for weekend sales events the rest of the year, everyone is going to be horrified at the suggestion that the aging structures be torn down. All they will think about is what they would lose, not what people would gain by having a nice new facility which many more people could enjoy. A more important example we have discussed is the so-called Precautionary Principle which demands that technological change be put under a microscope and only be allowed to proceed if people are satisfied that it is beneficial. Not only is this a manifestation of people's discomfort with change (for the status quo is the default), but further we can predict that people's inherent suspicion of change is going to bias any such analysis towards rejecting the new. Another case is what we have been talking about recently, changes due to new trading patterns such as outsourcing. The instinctive response is to oppose change and fight to preserve things the way they are. Global warming is another example. 99% of the articles about it talk about problems. And indeed, maybe it is true that the problems will outweigh the benefits. But I don't think it is going to be as one-sided as the media suggests. This week there was a new study about the northern ice cap shrinking, http://www.amap.no/acia/index.html . Some of the publicity mentioned the economic benefits from opening up the legendary Northwest Passage which could greatly reduce shipping time and costs. But most of the press was about the costs to the indigenous peoples whose permafrost was melting and whose land was being eroded by new wave action, along with animals having trouble adapting to the new conditions. While these negative effects should not be neglected, the positives have to be considered as well. You will never see a mainstream article about benefits of global warming which does not mention negatives; but you have seen many which talk about harm without saying anything about benefits. This further illustrates the inherent negative bias towards change. To some extent it is rational to be concerned about change, as it can be costly. There is always infrastructure in place which has adapted to present circumstances, and any change will require that infrastructure to be reconfigured, which may be very expensive. Moving Miami to another state if sea levels rise isn't going to be cheap. Yet I see one of the main messages of the Principles of Extropy as emphasizing the positive aspects of change. Throughout the Principles this sems to be an underlying element. Intelligent Technology, Self Transformation, Perpetual Progress, Practical Optimism, all describe the benefits of accepting, adapting to and indeed, embracing change. Extropian philosophy is an excellent antidote to the near-universal human tendency to fear and oppose change. Even when change is uncomfortable, the Principles advise us to find ways to look at the opportunities rather than to dwell on the difficulties we face. Extropianism may not be for everyone. There may always be only a small minority of people who are eager to embrace change along the lines suggested in the Principles of Extropy. But I hope that we on this list, who hopefully share broad agreement with these Principles, can try to free ourselves from the mindset of change as a negative. We should be looking forward to change, finding ways to structure our lives and our mental attitudes to embrace flexibility and adaptability. It's not always easy, but I believe that this kind of approach will be crucial to allow us to adapt to and take advantage of the even greater changes which will be coming in future decades. Hal From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Nov 13 00:45:47 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:45:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Virtual girlfriend 1.0 In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204111206151109e22e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041113004547.66470.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > The V-Girl(TM) Version 1.0 has several outstanding > and unique product > features: it uses artificial intelligence, text to > speech, real time > chat, sophisticated user profiling and user specific > content delivery, > high quality 3-D animations and graphics, context > sensitive functions > and menu icons, over 3000 different video and audio > streams, build in > user contests, games-in-game functions and offers > intelligent, > interactive product placement opportunities for > sponsors and > advertisers. > http://www.3g.co.uk/PR/November2004/8649.htm Uhh...right. Built in user contests? Games-in-games? Granted, real girls (and boys) already come with them, but not quite in the sense these are meant - and often with far more depth than is commercially available. But product placement opportunities is the real warning sign. If a real life person bombards you with love just to get you to give money to (and usually "join", as in giving your money exclusively to) his or her group, that's often known as a "cult" in the bad sense. From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 00:59:22 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:59:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: For Your Information In-Reply-To: <298610-2200411512174338138@M2W044.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <008d01c4c91c$03b81740$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > natashavita at earthlink.net > > The extropy-chat list is very clear about the manner in which we work > together to provide a venue for list members to engage in > conversation and debates about the future and Extropic transhumanist ideas... > > Natasha Is it my imagination, or has the ExI list become a kinder and gentler place in the last yr or so? I recall we used to have fairly nasty flame wars every few months. Now we go thru an especially contentious election season in the US and Australia, an ongoing and increasingly grim war, yet the tone is fairly reasonable most of the time. Friends, we are growing up. That being said, let us keep in mind that we are about the future. Let us avoid becoming too mainstream. spike From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sat Nov 13 02:54:14 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:54:14 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Europe VS America Message-ID: <41957756.C7C38CB@mindspring.com> The Dallas Morning News Editorial Commentary, 8 November 2004 By Darrell L. Bock Darrell L. Bock is Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary and is currently a guest of the German government on a Humboldt scholarship at the University of T?bingen. mailto: < DBockDTS at aol.com > DON'T DISMISS EUROPE'S OPINION OF US As an American who spent this election season living in the heart of Europe, it would be an understatement to say that Europeans wanted and expected Sen. John Kerry to win. Pre-election polls here put his support as high as 80 percent. Europeans believe President Bush did not tell the truth about the weapons in Iraq and that the war is a major mistake, inciting rather than quelling terrorism. Living here helps one to understand the visceral reaction. Europeans have been through two World Wars. Think of 9-11 multiplied over decades all over your country, and you will appreciate why Europeans recoil at the prospect of war and leaders seen as too eager to wage it. They also have a long history of interacting with Islam. That history spans centuries and has generated some experience with the religion. Within a decade, Turkey may become a member of the European Union, and many Turks live in Europe. More important, Europe is post-Christian, almost completely secular. Fewer than 5 percent of Europeans go to church or synagogue, a great contrast to the 40 percent to 50 percent in the United States. What religious sense that remains is little more than a residue of history. The British, for example, may call upon God to save the queen, but they no longer call upon God to bless Britain. Today, more Muslims in England attend weekly worship services than do Anglicans. The numbers are similar on the Continent. It is hard to overestimate how little Christianity has to do with public discourse here. Europeans also have a decisive legacy of religious warfare dating from the Crusades to the horrific Thirty Years War. The bloodshed in wars between Christians provided the seed for the Enlightenment, which took Europe down the path to secularism. The world wars of the last century also discredited in the public's mind the old European order, including the religious establishment. As a result of all this, Europeans do not understand the religious dimension in American politics and debate. They perceive our values debate as an expression of mere political conservatism or religious fundamentalism, to them a kind of mindless superstition. The greatest difference between Europe and America is likely the issue of religion and its relationship to the broader culture. In America, religion is more or less expected to play a role in our politics, even if it's only a bland sort of civic religiosity. The opposite is true in Europe. Recently a European Union minister, Rocco Buttiglione, a conservative Italian Catholic, expressed hesitation about gay marriage and the role of women in public life. In turn, the EU blocked him from serving as a cabinet member, causing the prospective EU president to withdraw the entire slate of candidates, and producing a crisis still to be resolved. And Pope John Paul II, a personal friend of Mr. Buttiglione's, lobbied hard to have Christianity noted as part of Europe's heritage in the EU Constitution, a historical fact that even an uninformed visitor to Europe's museums and urban centers would observe. He failed. In both cases, the Europeans are not attaining their own standards for a tolerant, politically engaged society. Europe cannot distinguish between political conservatives and moral conservatives. The two are not necessarily the same. Many Democrats who voted for Mr. Bush and past Republican candidates did so because they were cultural conservatives, more concerned about moral values related to nation, home and family than other issues. On Election Day, enough moral conservatives of both parties -- including a surprising number of Hispanics motivated by values concerns -- showed up to elect Mr. Bush. Not only does Europe not get this, neither do most Democrats. Are Europeans correct? That's beside the point. It is important to understand how our neighbors and historical allies perceive us, and vice versa. Many Americans do not care one whit what Europeans think. This is unwise. Like a spouse, it is important to understand why someone close to you sees things differently, even when one may not agree, especially if a potential partnership may allow both partners to accomplish shared goals. We need to do a better job of explaining to Europeans why these value issues also matter. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rob Solarion Northeast Texas -- "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 Sat Nov 13 04:49:27 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:49:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (UFO UpDate) Re: Kevin Randle? Message-ID: <41959257.6A001E5C@mindspring.com> From: Kevin Randle To: ufoupdates at virtuallystrange.net Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:11:46 EST Subject: Re: Kevin Randle? I have returned from my duty in Iraq and was released from active duty at the end of September... though we had things to clean up. I am now, again, a member of the Iowa Army National Guard and have been promoted to major. For those of you keeping score at home, the situation in Iraq bears little resemblence to the situation you see on television. We had the opportunity to watch the three network news broadcasts and found little in them that reflected our situation and sometimes wondered where they were. I have been taking it easy for the last few weeks, for those interested, and have yet to move back into the UFO arena, though I sometimes brush by it out of curiosity. For those interested, Jesse Marcel was recalled to active duty and now finds himself in Iraq. This is a stealth draft that has gotten little media attention. He is stationed inside the Sunni Triangle but not very close to some of the cities that you've seen on the news. For the Marcels, we see the father in the Pacific during World War II, Jesse Jr., around Vietnam and now in Iraq. Thanks for the concern about me. Kevin D. Randle -- "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 scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 13 07:49:32 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 08:49:32 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041112134833.01a82ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00d801c4c955$648d1ff0$34c11b97@administxl09yj> [Cramer] > I predict that a new generation of "Quantum Lawyers" > will begin to populate the physics literature with > arguments challenging what "is" is and claming > that the wounded interpretations never said that > interference should be completely absent in a quantum > which-way measurement. This seems perfect. Unfortunately the first 'lawyer' is Afshar. Essentially his experiment is based on the Greenberger-YaSin-Englert-Zeilinger-etc. relation V^2 + K^2 = 1, which says that the Visibility of interference fringes becomes more and more vanishing when the Knowledge of the 'which way' the particle went through becomes more and more definite. In general there is a smooth (also in experiments eh!) transition between the particle-like and the wave-like behaviour. So the orthodoxia just says that we cannot reveal a 'sharp' particle-like and a 'sharp' wave-like behaviour at the same time (for a single quantum). That is to say we cannot set V=1 and K=1 at the same time, in the above (uncertainty) relation. Afshar claims that he was able to reveal the 'sharp' particle-like and the 'sharp' wave-like behaviours 'at the same time' (= in the same experiment). He claims that in his experiment V=1 and K=1. Unfortunately in his experiment V<<1, by definition, since his little wires do not positively show interference fringes at all. That said, imo, Afshar experiment *is* great, because it shows that something unexpected is going on. It is the possibility of following the (causal, reasonable) course of quanta in space and time. And this is exactly what Bohr thought. 'However, since the discovery of the quantum of action, we know that the classical ideal cannot be attained in the description of atomic phenomena. In particular, any attempt at an ordering in space-time leads to a break in the causal chain, since such an attempt is bound up with an essential exchange of momentum and energy between the individuals and the measuring rods and clocks used for observation; and just this exchange cannot be taken into account if the measuring instruments are to fulfil their purpose. Conversely, any conclusion, based in an unambiguous manner upon the strict conservation of energy and momentum, with regard to the dynamical behaviour of the individual units obviously necessitates a complete renunciation of following their course in space and time'. [Bohr, Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature, pp. 97-8, Cambridge University Press, 1934] From Walter_Chen at compal.com Sat Nov 13 11:41:32 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:41:32 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF44@tpeex05> Good analysis. Does Afshar agree that his V<<1 only as you suggest? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 3:50 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar [Cramer] > I predict that a new generation of "Quantum Lawyers" > will begin to populate the physics literature with > arguments challenging what "is" is and claming > that the wounded interpretations never said that > interference should be completely absent in a quantum > which-way measurement. This seems perfect. Unfortunately the first 'lawyer' is Afshar. Essentially his experiment is based on the Greenberger-YaSin-Englert-Zeilinger-etc. relation V^2 + K^2 = 1, which says that the Visibility of interference fringes becomes more and more vanishing when the Knowledge of the 'which way' the particle went through becomes more and more definite. In general there is a smooth (also in experiments eh!) transition between the particle-like and the wave-like behaviour. So the orthodoxia just says that we cannot reveal a 'sharp' particle-like and a 'sharp' wave-like behaviour at the same time (for a single quantum). That is to say we cannot set V=1 and K=1 at the same time, in the above (uncertainty) relation. Afshar claims that he was able to reveal the 'sharp' particle-like and the 'sharp' wave-like behaviours 'at the same time' (= in the same experiment). He claims that in his experiment V=1 and K=1. Unfortunately in his experiment V<<1, by definition, since his little wires do not positively show interference fringes at all. That said, imo, Afshar experiment *is* great, because it shows that something unexpected is going on. It is the possibility of following the (causal, reasonable) course of quanta in space and time. And this is exactly what Bohr thought. 'However, since the discovery of the quantum of action, we know that the classical ideal cannot be attained in the description of atomic phenomena. In particular, any attempt at an ordering in space-time leads to a break in the causal chain, since such an attempt is bound up with an essential exchange of momentum and energy between the individuals and the measuring rods and clocks used for observation; and just this exchange cannot be taken into account if the measuring instruments are to fulfil their purpose. Conversely, any conclusion, based in an unambiguous manner upon the strict conservation of energy and momentum, with regard to the dynamical behaviour of the individual units obviously necessitates a complete renunciation of following their course in space and time'. [Bohr, Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature, pp. 97-8, Cambridge University Press, 1934] _______________________________________________ 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: From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 13 14:11:43 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:11:43 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF44@tpeex05> Message-ID: <007001c4c98a$cc219800$1dc11b97@administxl09yj> > Does Afshar agree that his V<<1 only as you suggest? > Walter. Well, S.Afshar is brilliant. But it is difficult to develope a consistent ontology wich is simpler and stronger than the orthodox QM, wich - in general - is based on observ-ables (correlations, operations, contexts) and not on be-ables (entities, correlata, hidden variables, etc.). (I wrote 'in general' because there are cases, and measurements, in which observ-ables and be-ables are the same thing, or, to say it in another way, pre-dictions or retro-dictions are possible, i.e. http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRA/v42/i9/p5720_1 http://physmag.h1.ru/bibliography/1_4.html ) So S.Afshar writes: "Am I right in saying that according to your view, there is negligible flux on the wires? If yes: 1) Then we have no choice but to declare that the cause of this lack of incident flux is destructive interference. There simply is no other process by which a certain regions of space (wires) do not receive flux, while we KNOW that regions close to the wires do (we see all the photons at the image plane). 2) If you dont agree with (1), then please tell me how you can use QM to show a particular region CONTINUALLY receives no flux, without assuming interference as the cause." Now the problem here is a typical problem by 'lawyers'. *Assuming* that interference is the cause of that negligible flux at the wires, before the 'welcher weg' ray optics apparatus, and assuming that there is an interference at the wires is not equivalent to *showing* interference fringes at the wires. Because in that expression V^2 + K^2 >/=1 the letter "V" is a *physical* measurement of visibility of fringes (math expression avoided here) and it is not a *meta-physical* assumption about the presence of interference fringes. So V << 1. In other words - as A.Zeilinger states it - a single quantum can just carry the information about its nature (particle-like, wave-like). But a single quantum carries a single bit of information. You can read this single bit of information just once. Not two times. Thus you can reveal the 'sharp' particle-like or the 'sharp' wave-like nature. Not both. (You can just reveal both natures at another epi-ontic level, the level of probabilistic knowledge. In this case you say that a single quantum is 40% 'particle' and 60% 'wave', as Wootters and Zurek showed in 1979). That said, imo, there is little doubt that there is an interference (let us say a "virtual" one) at those little wires. But this is a deduction, an inference, not a measurement. One of the reason why is difficult to kill Bohrian complementarity (different from the old duality of light, different from the Heisenberg-Jordan duality of light which is based on the dual *formalism*) is that there are many different complementarities. There is the classical wave/particle smooth complementarity (Walter, yes like the Yin-Yang). The more you reveal one, the less the other. http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/ There is a "circular" complemetarity by von Weizsaecker: between superposition of states and localization of the "entity". There is a Copenhagenist complemetarity: you cannot reveal both natures of the "entity" using just one set-up. You need a set-up for one nature, and a different one for the other nature. There is a complementarity between reversibility and irreversibility (collapse). There is a complementarity between continuity and discontinuity. There is a complementarity between separability and unitarity. There is a complementarity between distinguishability and non-distinguishability of paths. There is a complementarity "in time", meaning that a single quantum (a single photon) can interfere with itself "in time", provided you create two different paths, one shorter "in time" and one longer "in time", and provided the difference "in time" between these two paths is shorter than the uncertainty of arrival time of the single photon at the screen. (This case is similar to the case of a single photon emitted by two different sources - coherent or not - so that you cannot know which source emitted the photon, and you can combine the amplitude related to one source with the amplitude related to the other source, getting the experimental interference). There is the strongest kind of Bohrian complentarity saying that you cannot follow the (causal) course of a quantum through space-time. This is the most interesting one. "... we are presented with a choice of either tracing the path of the particle, or observing interference effects" writes N.Bohr in 'Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist', P. A. Schlipp Ed. (Library of Living Philosophers, Evanston, Illinois, 1949). It is the most interesting one because it is possible to argue that there is no "causal" course at all, since there is no time "in there", the only causal link being *our own* clock time, *our own* causal mind. s. "The important conclusion is that, while individual events just happen, their physical interpretation in terms of wave or particle might depend on the future; it might particularly depend on decisions we might make in the future concerning the measurement performed at some distant spacetime location in the future." - Anton Zeilinger From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 13 14:59:33 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:59:33 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF44@tpeex05> <007001c4c98a$cc219800$1dc11b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <00f801c4c991$62e80430$1dc11b97@administxl09yj> > The more you reveal one, the less the other. > http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/ Ops. The link should be http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/Harrison/Complementarity/Comp Copen.html See the Chinese traditional Yin-Yang Symbol, and related 'smooth transition', into Bohr's Coat of Arms. From amara.graps at gmail.com Sat Nov 13 15:08:36 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:08:36 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? Message-ID: megao at sasktel.net: >> Can someone have the content of their site blocked from the major search >> engines and deleted from the results of >> past successful search terms that have brought hits? naddy at mips.inka.de: >You can put up a /robots.txt and tell the spiders not to index your >site. The major search engines should honor that. True, they should. I am sufficiently annoyed with companies that don't adhere by netiquette's courtesies (i.e. respecting the wishes of the web site's robot.txt file), that I usually block their future access to my web site (using .htaccess) if I think that they've behaved badly. It's a small thing to do; single IPs probably don't matter, but at least I can annoy them in return, and it gives me small sense that I have a say in how I want my materials accessed. Amara From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Sat Nov 13 15:13:07 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:13:07 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8615A75D-3586-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 13 Nov 2004, at 16:08, Amara Graps wrote: > True, they should. I am sufficiently annoyed with companies that don't > adhere by netiquette's courtesies (i.e. respecting the wishes of the > web > site's robot.txt file), that I usually block their future access to my > web site (using .htaccess) if I think that they've behaved badly. Amara: How often does this happen? I thought that people were pretty good at following the robot.txt file. Are these spammers? best, patrick From megao at sasktel.net Sat Nov 13 16:13:37 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:13:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <419632B1.4030807@sasktel.net> What is interesting to me is how the search engines pick content to index. Understanding that can create a very private site which almost never shows up and yet is not restricted in an active sense. Alternatively, if the same content is presented differently it will be cross-indexed repeatedly. Incidentally, I see a lot of you guys did take a look at the site in question. If you simply post information like would be the case if your desk was left to pile up for a month or 2, it may be shunned by the search engines? The indexing then follows a course which looks for stadardization and order within the content? The thing that concerns me is how what I kept as a personal repository went from being able to be found utilizing virtually every unique keyword from its front page wording to virtually invisible except for 3 small portions. When I look for information I would like to think that a carefully planned search would find me everything linked to the web that I am looking for. Obviously this is not the case, and a significant potential problem . If the case in point I have created is not unique, the question then is. How much more content exists that is only to be found if one specifically knows the URL it is resident upon. Incidentally, I cloned the original site onto another server yesterday. The content of the 2 will diverge over time but what I wanted to see is if the search engines treat this new site any different from the original one. One thing I also did was to leave the archived content linked files to both sites resident only on the first site. When a link say brings up a picture, it will load from the first site and not be resident as a true copy on the second site. The statistical counter is loaded onto both sites and should show the use of files and uploading from the first via the second site. Amara Graps wrote: >megao at sasktel.net: > > >>>Can someone have the content of their site blocked from the major search >>>engines and deleted from the results of >>>past successful search terms that have brought hits? >>> >>> > >naddy at mips.inka.de: > > >>You can put up a /robots.txt and tell the spiders not to index your >>site. The major search engines should honor that. >> >> > >True, they should. I am sufficiently annoyed with companies that don't >adhere by netiquette's courtesies (i.e. respecting the wishes of the web >site's robot.txt file), that I usually block their future access to my >web site (using .htaccess) if I think that they've behaved badly. It's a >small thing to do; single IPs probably don't matter, but at least I can >annoy them in return, and it gives me small sense that I have a say in >how I want my materials accessed. > >Amara >_______________________________________________ >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: From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 18:11:40 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:11:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Walter_Chen at compal.com posted: >The Greatest Secret >by Darrell Daybre 2004 >*********************** >This process, which uses energy, is how everything is created in the >world, and to those "in the know", >is now considered to be ??the blueprint to how the universe works! Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the intellectual knowledge of it. One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 18:11:40 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:11:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Walter_Chen at compal.com posted: >The Greatest Secret >by Darrell Daybre 2004 >*********************** >This process, which uses energy, is how everything is created in the >world, and to those "in the know", >is now considered to be ??the blueprint to how the universe works! Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the intellectual knowledge of it. One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Nov 13 19:32:22 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:32:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> Hara Ra wrote: > Walter_Chen at compal.com posted: > >> The Greatest Secret >> by Darrell Daybre 2004 >> *********************** >> This process, which uses energy, is how everything is created in the >> world, and to those "in the know", >> is now considered to be ??the blueprint to how the universe works! > > > > Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, > may I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person > must discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about > enlightenment, all true enough, but the actual peformance of the act > is more than the intellectual knowledge of it. > > One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates > something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a > mish mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of > desires not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making > them conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or > psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to > become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. > > BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. I can't keep up. Is it "Energy", or "Raising our Vibrations", or "Quantum Potentiality" this year? I am so out of fashion. But more seriously, it seems to me this kind of thinking is often rooted in a strong preference for subjective interpretation, rather than a more encompassing, in my opinion, approach to understanding via an objective (or inter-subjective) point of view. Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? - Jef - Jef From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 13 19:42:57 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:42:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041113133921.01ae8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:32 AM 11/13/2004 -0800, Jef wrote: >Hara Ra wrote: > >> The Manifester creates something which meets All of One's Desire. > >Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me >wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? Sounds like Schucman's A COURSE IN MIRACLES to me, or something similar. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Nov 13 20:47:13 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:47:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanist villain in popular media Message-ID: <20041113204713.46087.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Spoilers for the movie "The Incredibles", in case you haven't seen it but were planning to... The movie's main villain, Syndrome, is motivated by revenge over being rejected by superheroes when he was a kid. However, his ultimate plan for revenge is interesting: rather than merely killing them all, he ultimately plans to sell his inventions that have given him superpowers - "Because, when everyone is super, no one will be." (His particular path towards that end is what makes him a villain, for instance by killing a bunch of superheroes to prove that his robots are superhero-proof. He also commits what could be considered a cliche error by creating an AI with unbound capability for learning and self-improvement then putting an artificial constraint on it, but forgetting to check that the AI can't find a way to defeat that constraint - in this case, by zapping the remote control that was to override the AI's control of its body.) There are probably other examples around, but here is a rather clear and direct example in recently (and perhaps temporarily) popular media. I wonder if we could, at least while this movie remains popular, explain our goals as being like Syndrome's, only without the evil. (And possibly without the "growing old" bit: Syndrome plans to sell his inventions once he's too old to strut his stuff, although we could translate that as "after we grow bored" or "after those who volunteer - including us - test it on themselves and prove it safe".) From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 21:24:10 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:24:10 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113131857.028fe000@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Thanks. Thought that would open a few eyes round extropy-chat ;) I am coming from direct core of personal subjective awareness which includes my shamanistic side, which is often intuitively useful. There is no conflict with the rational aspect, but the expanations are tedious and complex. Sorry, as long as I am not pesonally an Internet site, I can't provide useful pointers. You might try googling "rebirthing" but I haven't done so. >>Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may >>I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must >>discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all >>true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the >>intellectual knowledge of it. >> >>One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates >>something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish >>mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires >>not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them >>conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or >>psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to >>become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. >> >>BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > >Jef sez: >Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me >wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 21:24:10 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:24:10 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113131857.028fe000@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Thanks. Thought that would open a few eyes round extropy-chat ;) I am coming from direct core of personal subjective awareness which includes my shamanistic side, which is often intuitively useful. There is no conflict with the rational aspect, but the expanations are tedious and complex. Sorry, as long as I am not pesonally an Internet site, I can't provide useful pointers. You might try googling "rebirthing" but I haven't done so. >>Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may >>I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must >>discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all >>true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the >>intellectual knowledge of it. >> >>One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates >>something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish >>mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires >>not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them >>conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or >>psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to >>become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. >> >>BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > >Jef sez: >Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me >wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 21:27:09 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:27:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041113133921.01ae8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> <6.1.1.1.0.20041113133921.01ae8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113132513.02941188@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I only got about 1/3 through that one, and I don't recall much match there. At 11:42 AM 11/13/2004, Damien Broderick wrote: >At 11:32 AM 11/13/2004 -0800, Jef wrote: >>Hara Ra wrote: >> >>> The Manifester creates something which meets All of One's Desire. >> >>Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me >>wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? > >Sounds like Schucman's A COURSE IN MIRACLES to me, or something similar. > >Damien Broderick > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 21:27:09 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:27:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041113133921.01ae8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7EE32@tpeex05> <6.0.3.0.1.20041113100154.02914b40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <41966146.9080201@jefallbright.net> <6.1.1.1.0.20041113133921.01ae8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041113132513.02941188@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I only got about 1/3 through that one, and I don't recall much match there. At 11:42 AM 11/13/2004, Damien Broderick wrote: >At 11:32 AM 11/13/2004 -0800, Jef wrote: >>Hara Ra wrote: >> >>> The Manifester creates something which meets All of One's Desire. >> >>Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me >>wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? > >Sounds like Schucman's A COURSE IN MIRACLES to me, or something similar. > >Damien Broderick > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 13 22:54:34 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:54:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041111004820.01c36ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041107210021.0198f770@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <710b78fc04111022403ad07501@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041111004820.01c36ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Damien Broderick wrote: > Move to Mexico or India or Sri Lanka or Russia, etc. But that assumes > you'd manage the culture-shock, language gap, and perhaps more > importantly that the locals accept your presence, your wicked Western > ways, your godlessness, the job you've filched from their own bright > kid, etc. And perhaps the health services aren't too crash-hot. While I haven't lived in a really poor country, I did spend 3 years in the middle-income Brazil. The local culture was not too hard, an interesting mix of european and japanese culture, with way more tolerance than any european country I know. Health services in Brazil were definitely better than in the US... 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 Walter_Chen at compal.com Sun Nov 14 07:02:08 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:02:08 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF45@tpeex05> Thanks for a good summary and some good references: **************************************** One example from Bohr: Life: a form through which matter streams. Life: a collection of matter. ***************************************** We customarily think of the outside world as separate from ourselves, and the boundary between the two is the surface of our skin. However, think of a blind person who gets around with the assistance of a cane. In time that person will probably treat the cane as part of his or her body, and will think of the outside world as beginning just at the tip of the cane. Now imagine the blind man's sense of touch extending out of the tip of the cane and into the roadway itself. Imagine it extending further, down the block, into the countryside, to the whole world. There is no point where the blind man ends and the world begins. Similarly, we can not say which is the system and which is us observing it. This is the heart of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. ************************************** So I always think the so-called grand unified theory of 4 forces is really missing some very important ingredients consisting of life or consciousness. There is really something missing. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 11:00 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar > The more you reveal one, the less the other. > http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/ Ops. The link should be http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/GeneralInterest/Harrison/Complementarity/Comp Copen.html See the Chinese traditional Yin-Yang Symbol, and related 'smooth transition', into Bohr's Coat of Arms. _______________________________________________ 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: From Walter_Chen at compal.com Sun Nov 14 11:23:53 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:23:53 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF46@tpeex05> Can you explain more about what you said? --- the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Hara Ra Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 5:24 AM To: ExI chat list Cc: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life Thanks. Thought that would open a few eyes round extropy-chat ;) I am coming from direct core of personal subjective awareness which includes my shamanistic side, which is often intuitively useful. There is no conflict with the rational aspect, but the expanations are tedious and complex. Sorry, as long as I am not pesonally an Internet site, I can't provide useful pointers. You might try googling "rebirthing" but I haven't done so. >>Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may >>I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must >>discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all >>true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the >>intellectual knowledge of it. >> >>One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates >>something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish >>mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires >>not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them >>conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or >>psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to >>become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. >> >>BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > >Jef sez: >Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me >wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== _______________________________________________ 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: From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Nov 14 11:46:25 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 12:46:25 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Light, By M. John Harrison Message-ID: <470a3c5204111403464feef3e5@mail.gmail.com> The author of "The Centauri Device" has crafted an ambitious, accomplished space opera split into three strands of plot whose connections become apparent only late in the game. In modern-day England, physicist Michael Kearney searches for the key to quantum computing while maintaining an intermittent career as a serial killer. Four hundred years hence, Seria Mau Genlicher pilots her ship, the White Cat, through intergalactic space, depending on the quantum Kearney-Tate drive to navigate between the stars unhindered by the effects of relativity. At the same time, a "twink" named Ed Chianese finds his addictive virtual-reality dreams rudely interrupted and all his considerable debts suddenly due. The final chapters of "Light" are a marvel of transcendence, reconciliation and redemption. This is surely one of the best novels of the year, irrespective of genre. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/14/RVGPN9LSDK1.DTL From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 11:59:38 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 03:59:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] teacher unions a bugbear? Message-ID: <20041114115938.13565.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Too much emphasis is placed on the role of teachers' unions in educational mediocrity. I think the blame lies mostly with parents, who don't have enough time to monitor public education, defaulting to teachers and their unions. And maybe, just maybe, the parents don't particularly want their children to be more educated than themselves. Naturally, there is no way to research this as parents aren't going to admit such; but when you have an educational system with such a high level of illiteracy one might be excused in thinking there's more to the problem than merely teachers' unions. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 14 12:49:37 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 12:49:37 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? In-Reply-To: <419632B1.4030807@sasktel.net> References: <419632B1.4030807@sasktel.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 10:13:37 -0600, Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote: > What is interesting to me is how the search engines pick content to index. > Understanding that can create a very private site which almost never shows > up and yet is not restricted in an active sense. > Alternatively, if the same content is presented differently it will be > cross-indexed repeatedly. > Hi, I had a look at the html source code of your site. I think you've had a bit of editing trouble. Shouldn't the very first line of code be :- etc. Missing out the html tag might cause lots of problems. No?? BillK From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 13:41:09 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 05:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] national interest In-Reply-To: <20041114132745.87501.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041114134109.34975.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Notice in the seventh paragraph of this article the author dismisses other nations taking advantage of lower energy prices caused by America's future reduction in foreign energy consumption as "scavengers". In other words: countries other than the author's own pursuing the economic national interest is supposedly a scavenger. http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200411120830.asp __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From amara.graps at gmail.com Sun Nov 14 13:48:15 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:48:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? In-Reply-To: <8615A75D-3586-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> References: <8615A75D-3586-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:13:07 +0100, Patrick Wilken wrote: > > On 13 Nov 2004, at 16:08, Amara Graps wrote: > > True, they should. I am sufficiently annoyed with companies that don't > > adhere by netiquette's courtesies (i.e. respecting the wishes of the > > web > > site's robot.txt file), that I usually block their future access to my > > web site (using .htaccess) if I think that they've behaved badly. > > Amara: > > How often does this happen? I don't know the true frequency because I check my logs randomly, and I don't always check if the cases when a person downloaded my web site (~1000 files!) whether there was a check on the robot.txt file first. Both situations will cause me to bar future entry to my web site via .htaccess (the reason for the second, is that I think it's rude, the reason for the first is that I think that they are spammers, and spammers have caused me no end of grief these last years) So my best guess for how often a robot ignores my robots.txt file is a couple of times per month. Amara From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 13:57:37 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 05:57:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] pardon Message-ID: <20041114135737.41282.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> last sentence should read: "...are supposedly 'scavengers' " Such botched grammar derives from a public school education. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 14 17:10:02 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 11:10:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Light, By M. John Harrison In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204111403464feef3e5@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c5204111403464feef3e5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041114110627.01b901f0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> [FWIW, here's my own review from LOCUS:] Half a century ago, sf satirists parodied a brainless future where people handed over tedious choices to machines but failed to rue their decision because the marrow was leached from their lives. Ironic, then, that the same fate encroaches upon sf itself. Shelves are crammed with what we might call Stepford Sci-Fi. That mightn?t matter?-people have a right to their denatured comfort food?-if publishing conglomerates? accountancy programs leave enough lebensraum for challenging books, the rich meat, texts that don?t give up their meaning in a single glazed pass. True, such books have not yet all gone, but they struggle, at least in the USA, against strangling odds. That numbing grip can be seen in the slowed or blocked passage into American editions of many fine novels from the UK. Charles Stross, currently a darling of reviewers, took years to get his novels into print. Iain M. Banks, Ken MacLeod, M. John Harrison, others?-you had to wonder if the British specificity of their locales (even their galactic locales), their independent accents, made such work abominable to readers who mistook their own backyards for the cosmos. So we have the extraordinary sight of Harrison?s Tiptree award-winning novel from 2002 only just now arriving in a (handsome) Bantam trade paperback, although without the nifty chapter-head flourishes of the Gollancz edition. The Tiptree judges (whose remit is to find the year?s premier work exploring gender issues in sf and fantasy) declared it `rich, horrible, sad, and absurd,? a novel that `says a lot about how the body and sex inform one's humanity. It will reward rereading.? Indeed, it almost demands rereading. Now, finally, most sf readers get a chance at their first look at it. I suspect many will recoil in revulsion, or at the demands it imposes. Worse yet, the redeeming feature for some will be Harrison?s consummately wrought space battles, fought in infinitesimal fractions of a second by a brutally truncated woman starship captain wedded to her ancient sentient K-ship White Cat. These scenes are genuinely prodigious, intense genre textuality at full throttle yet shaped with a pre-Raphaelite tenderness. But Harrison is deconstructing exactly the visceral, stoned excitement we gain from such scenes; he is showing us the bitter emptiness at the core of K-captain Seria Mau Genlicher slaughtering people out of the leached yearning of her own void. "Out in the flat gray void beyond, a huge actinic flare erupted. In an attempt to protect its client hardware, the White Cat's massive array shut down for a nanosecond and a half. By this time, the ordnance had already cooked off at the higher wavelengths. X-rays briefly raised the temperature in local space to 25,000 degrees Kelvin, while the other particles blinded every kind of sensor, and temporary sub-spaces boiled away from the weapons-grade singularity as fractal dimensions. Shockwaves sang through the dynaflow medium like the voices of angels, the way the first music resonated through the viscous substrate of the early universe before proton and electron recombined." One benefit of such a protracted delay in US release is that, in the epoch of the blog, we have access to Harrison?s own mordant, rich commentary on his intentions in creating this lapidary work of art. It is not especially surprising that a working draft title was Empty Space. What fills the novel to flooding is the paradoxical fullness and emptiness of space: the foamed, invisible dazzle of quantum virtual particles rushing in and out of reality, sustaining our apparent solidity. At the core of the narrative is the Kefahuchi Tract, fecund waste land boundary of the black hole seething in its infinitely dense vacancy at the heart of the galaxy. On its shores, its Beach, are the derelict traces of extinct species drawn to its transfinite, transgressive promise: whole abandoned star-plying planets, great enigmatic machines. Everywhere in this cosmic absence and emptiness is always more, and then, as Harrison insists, always more after that. His serial killer mathemagician, the obsessed and terror-haunted Michael Kearney, plunged dizzyingly as a child into the fractal endlessness of the sea?s edge, an aperture of insight that finally gives humanity faster than light travel. Ed Chianese, the book?s third chief player, is client and then tormenter and cuckolder of a mock human New Man named, absurdly, Tig Vesicle. `Chinese Ed? retreats from the intoxicating confusion and fertility of his and Seria?s 25th century interstellar world (pursued by the standover Cray Sisters, a British joke perhaps opaque to outsiders) into a VR cartoon of noir mean streets. Ed the twink, as usual in such picaresques, is being educated: like some zany in a Phil Dick Ace double, he is being programmed as a medium, a precog, a shaman of the Tract. But in the cauldron of this simmering bouillabaisse of broken people, other fishies mingle, flesh peeling from their hearts, perhaps curing their egregious and haunted lovers. Kearney?s waif wife Anna, in her abiding sexual solicitude, her regaining of her self, is not a character one would find in Stepford Sci-Fi. Nor is the great-limbed Annie, Ed?s simple-minded rickshaw girl saint. (I?m less sure about W. Anker, Seria?s bully boy thrillseeker and victim.) It would be easy to read this casting of characters as mean-spirited, even misogynist; that would miss the point utterly, as the Tiptree judges understood. But so, too, would the temptation to see Light as just a recuperation for the 21st century of, say, Alfred Bester?s The Stars My Destination, for all that Kearney cries out like synaesthetic Gully Foyle, in the moment of his apotheosis: "`Too bright,? he said The light roared in on him unconfined: he felt it on his skin, he heard it as a sound The vacuum around him smelled of lemons. It looked like roses." And the Shrander, the awful horse-skull entity in its maroon wool winter coat haunting his blighted trajectory to heaven, explains: `Everywhere you look it unpacks to infinity. What you look for, you find.? It?s like that with Harrison?s marvelous novel, indeed his entire oeuvre, which constitutes a reproach to the McSci-Fi racks and a healing proof that the form of science fiction is not exhausted after all. More, and then always more after that. ================= Damien Broderick From megao at sasktel.net Sun Nov 14 19:33:33 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:33:33 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Satan's Rapture site = light sunday entertainment? Message-ID: <4197B30D.9060809@sasktel.net> http://www.satansrapture.com/ From scerir at libero.it Sun Nov 14 20:02:31 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:02:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF45@tpeex05> Message-ID: <009e01c4ca84$e04971e0$bcc71b97@administxl09yj> > So I always think the so-called grand unified theory > of 4 forces is really missing some very important > ingredients consisting of life or consciousness. > There is really something missing. > Walter. If you mean than man is older than science, you are right. And if you mean that in "Nature" almost everything can be seen as a transition between two boundary conditions (birth/death; preselection/postselection; past/future; etc.) that is possible. But if you wish to inject life and consciousness into measurements which are performed by robots (at Cern), or by dogs (down the road), or by nobody (zillions of seconds ago), you are wrong, imo. And if you wish to inject life and consciousness into equations you must be an artist. s. Ok, sometimes you can read bad things written by bad scientist, such as Niels Bohr. "For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory regarding the limited applicability of such customary idealisations, we must in fact turn to quite other branches of science, such as phychology, or even to that kind of epistemological problems with which already thinkers like BUDDHA and LAO TSE have been confronted, when trying to harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of existence" - Niels Bohr (Biology and Atomic Physics, Bologna 1938) "Incidentally, medical use of psychoanalytical treatment in curing neurosis may be said to restore balance in the content of the memory of the patient by bringing him new conscious experience rather than by helping him to fathom the abysses of his subconsciousness" - Niels Bohr, "Unity of Knowledge" - Address delivered at a Conference celebrating the Bicentennial of Columbia Univesity, N.Y., on 28 October 1954 - Doubleday & Co., N.Y., 1954. From scerir at libero.it Sun Nov 14 20:17:42 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:17:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] feathers References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF45@tpeex05> <009e01c4ca84$e04971e0$bcc71b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <00ad01c4ca86$ffbea890$bcc71b97@administxl09yj> I remember the 750cc Norton "Atlas" had a great frame, called "featherbed" http://www.umgweb.com/member1/bnormis1.htm#Nortonatlas but this stuff below is about a train http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/11/5 From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Nov 14 21:44:36 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:44:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF46@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF46@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041114134038.0290e5e0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> When all of your aspects are in true agreement, and you are truly aware of them, actions and changes happen automatically and with no effort. Others may see this as energetic, your experience is restful and refreshing. Kinda like that 'perfect stroke' in tennis or golf combined with a fizzy shot of energy drink. Some of you may have had more extended kinds of this with sacred medicines. At 03:23 AM 11/14/2004, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: >Can you explain more about what you said? >--- the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > >Thanks. > >Walter. >--------- > >-----Original Message----- >From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] >On Behalf Of Hara Ra >Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 5:24 AM >To: ExI chat list >Cc: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life > >Thanks. Thought that would open a few eyes round extropy-chat ;) > >I am coming from direct core of personal subjective awareness which >includes my shamanistic side, which is often intuitively useful. There is >no conflict with the rational aspect, but the expanations are tedious and >complex. Sorry, as long as I am not pesonally an Internet site, I can't >provide useful pointers. You might try googling "rebirthing" but I haven't >done so. > > >>Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may > >>I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must > >>discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all > >>true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the > >>intellectual knowledge of it. > >> > >>One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates > >>something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish > >>mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires > >>not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them > >>conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or > >>psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to > >>become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. > >> > >>BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > > > >Jef sez: > > >Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me > >wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? > >================================== >= Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = >= harara at sbcglobal.net = >= Alcor North Cryomanagement = >= Alcor Advisor to Board = >= 831 429 8637 = >================================== > >_______________________________________________ >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 ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Nov 14 21:44:36 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:44:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF46@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF46@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041114134038.0290e5e0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> When all of your aspects are in true agreement, and you are truly aware of them, actions and changes happen automatically and with no effort. Others may see this as energetic, your experience is restful and refreshing. Kinda like that 'perfect stroke' in tennis or golf combined with a fizzy shot of energy drink. Some of you may have had more extended kinds of this with sacred medicines. At 03:23 AM 11/14/2004, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: >Can you explain more about what you said? >--- the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > >Thanks. > >Walter. >--------- > >-----Original Message----- >From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] >On Behalf Of Hara Ra >Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 5:24 AM >To: ExI chat list >Cc: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] The Greatest Secret of life > >Thanks. Thought that would open a few eyes round extropy-chat ;) > >I am coming from direct core of personal subjective awareness which >includes my shamanistic side, which is often intuitively useful. There is >no conflict with the rational aspect, but the expanations are tedious and >complex. Sorry, as long as I am not pesonally an Internet site, I can't >provide useful pointers. You might try googling "rebirthing" but I haven't >done so. > > >>Currently being in the midst of events which can be seen in this way, may > >>I remark that there is an unteachable aspect, which each person must > >>discover for themselves. It's like reading texts about enlightenment, all > >>true enough, but the actual peformance of the act is more than the > >>intellectual knowledge of it. > >> > >>One thing, though, is worth pointing out. The Manifester creates > >>something which meets All of One's Desire. The reason most of get a mish > >>mash jumble as a result comes from the unconscious harboring of desires > >>not known to the Ego. Finding these hidden beasties and making them > >>conscious is a long path, whether through spiritual practice or > >>psychology. Coming to the absolute Integrated Self allows the power to > >>become visible, and in a way which is truly wholly beneficial. > >> > >>BTW, the phrase "which uses energy" is a severe error. > > > >Jef sez: > > >Hara Ra, your posts display considerable wisdom, but this one makes me > >wonder where you're coming from. Can you provide any links or pointers? > >================================== >= Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = >= harara at sbcglobal.net = >= Alcor North Cryomanagement = >= Alcor Advisor to Board = >= 831 429 8637 = >================================== > >_______________________________________________ >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 ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Nov 14 23:44:57 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:44:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041105154424.4540.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041114234457.66617.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Sorry for the late reply... --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > > Okay...so how do you prevent managers from > cashing > > > > out the company between reports and leaving > > > > shareholders with an empty bag? > > > > > > If the managers obtain their stock via employee > > > purchase or options > > > programs, they would be required to only buy or > sell > > > stock in the month > > > or two AFTER the annual or bi-annual report is > > > released. > > > > Which requires government regulation to enforce. > > Not necessarily. Stockholders could simply vote to > mandate it as > company policy, insurance providers could mandate > it, etc.. True. But that assumes you don't have most or all companies set up to discourage said policies by their initial managers, there is no constantly regenerating population of very shortsighted insurance companies that don't bother mandating it (say, insurance companies set up by the same managers), and so forth. > > > Anyone who > > > purchases stock on the open market could buy and > > > sell whenever they > > > want. > > > > What of managers who more literally "cash out" the > > company by rigging their compensation, then > resigning > > just before the report to the board is due, but > never > > own (or don't care about) shares in the company? > > Managers compensation is approved by the company > board of directors. If > management is rigging the board, then the > stockholders are asleep at > the wheel. It would seem that, at least in our current government, most stockholders perceive that their efforts are better spent on their own efforts than on managing their various investments. They see government enforcement of good management practices as a commons that few individuals would pay to maintain, but which benefits all (or, at least, most). From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 00:20:49 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:20:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian Scorecard In-Reply-To: <20041108183327.22788.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041115002049.77417.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > China is seeing that US military forces are > currently at their limits > in the Iraq deployment and cannot handle a second > regional or major war > without a nationwide draft and significant lag time > for training > draftees. > Some troop planes and ships may simply redeploy > directly to Taiwan from > Iraq, setting up a rear logistical and command area > in Guam. Better yet... "Hi, Iran? We're pulling out of Iraq now. You're going to let us march right through - no, you're *going* to let us march right through, and if you resist we'll roll over you on the way. We won't stay long; we'll just hop over to Afghanistan and maybe knock a few warlords there en route to China's back door. Let's see how China likes fighting the same forces on two fronts, especially if we treat their peasants - ah, sorry, the residents of their impoverished and politically disenfranchised regions - far better than the Chinese government has, and start getting their farmers used to fair market Western prices for food instead of the chump change they've been getting so far. Oh, and Russia might love the chance to prove it's still got a very strong military force, especially if we helped with some of their bills." China's leaders can see this too, so I doubt Taiwan will be attacked in 2005. From eliasen at mindspring.com Mon Nov 15 02:21:02 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:21:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? In-Reply-To: References: <8615A75D-3586-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <4198128E.4050603@mindspring.com> Amara Graps wrote: >>On 13 Nov 2004, at 16:08, Amara Graps wrote: >> >>>True, they should. I am sufficiently annoyed with companies that don't >>>adhere by netiquette's courtesies (i.e. respecting the wishes of the >>>web >>>site's robot.txt file), that I usually block their future access to my >>>web site (using .htaccess) if I think that they've behaved badly. >> >>Amara: >> >>How often does this happen? > > I don't know the true frequency because I check my logs randomly, > and I don't always check if the cases when a person downloaded my web > site (~1000 files!) whether there was a check on the robot.txt file > first. Both situations will cause me to bar future entry to my web site > via .htaccess (the reason for the second, is that I think it's rude, the > reason for the first is that I think that they are spammers, and > spammers have caused me no end of grief these last years) > > So my best guess for how often a robot ignores my robots.txt file is a > couple of times per month. Thankfully, I don't see anything like this. I wonder if there's a problem in the syntax of your robots.txt file? That's usually the root of the problem. You can check your file in several places, including: http://tool.motoricerca.info/robots-checker.phtml http://www.searchengineworld.com/cgi-bin/robotcheck.cgi http://www.sxw.org.uk/computing/robots/check.html From a quick eyeballing, your robots.txt file has several errors, including the use of wildcards in Disallow fields, and fields that do not begin with a slash. URLs that are not sufficiently canonicalized are another problem. (Referring to the same file different ways.) I have several hundred thousand files accessible from my web server, (many of them documentation for other peoples' software,) blocked by a robots.txt file. Over the past 2 years, since I got my robots.txt file right, I've not had a single robot try to index all of this content. Robots that try to index gigabytes of documentation that's available in a lot of places don't tend to crawl too far. -- 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 Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Nov 15 04:21:54 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:21:54 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> I am still not sure who will be right eventually. Basically I mean there should be something else as fundamental as the 4 forces at the beginning of the universe such that I can feel this world and my existence now. (Sorry, if people think this is just crap.) Have you tried the book from Norman Friedman? Bridging Science and Spirit: Common Elements in David Bohm's Physics, the Perennial Philosophy and Seth. ******************************************** For centuries, humankind has tried to navigate between scientific and spiritual conceptions of reality, often without much success. In the resultant confusion, scientists, philosophers, and theologians have pondered and argued -- yet the separation remains. Norman Friedman correlates the quantum physics of David Bohm with the Perennial Philosophy described by Aldous Huxley and the spiritual insights of the channeled entity known as Seth, to show how a single reality emerges from seemingly contradictory perspectives -- a brilliant synthesis. ******************************************** I haven't had a chance to read it. But would like to know any insights from this book. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 4:03 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar > So I always think the so-called grand unified theory > of 4 forces is really missing some very important > ingredients consisting of life or consciousness. > There is really something missing. > Walter. If you mean than man is older than science, you are right. And if you mean that in "Nature" almost everything can be seen as a transition between two boundary conditions (birth/death; preselection/postselection; past/future; etc.) that is possible. But if you wish to inject life and consciousness into measurements which are performed by robots (at Cern), or by dogs (down the road), or by nobody (zillions of seconds ago), you are wrong, imo. And if you wish to inject life and consciousness into equations you must be an artist. s. Ok, sometimes you can read bad things written by bad scientist, such as Niels Bohr. "For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory regarding the limited applicability of such customary idealisations, we must in fact turn to quite other branches of science, such as phychology, or even to that kind of epistemological problems with which already thinkers like BUDDHA and LAO TSE have been confronted, when trying to harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of existence" - Niels Bohr (Biology and Atomic Physics, Bologna 1938) "Incidentally, medical use of psychoanalytical treatment in curing neurosis may be said to restore balance in the content of the memory of the patient by bringing him new conscious experience rather than by helping him to fathom the abysses of his subconsciousness" - Niels Bohr, "Unity of Knowledge" - Address delivered at a Conference celebrating the Bicentennial of Columbia Univesity, N.Y., on 28 October 1954 - Doubleday & Co., N.Y., 1954. _______________________________________________ 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: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 15 05:20:26 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:20:26 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041114231453.01bd95f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:21 PM 11/15/2004 +0800, Walter Chen wrote of the alleged: >spiritual insights of the channeled entity known as Seth Walter, surely you must have realized by now that you're asking this question on the one list on the planet least likely to give you a sympathetic hearing and answer (well, aside from CSICOP, maybe). Most of us would start from the assumption that Seth and channeling are completely delusional bullshit, if not outright chicanery. Even if channeling is regarded as a source of metaphor, why retreat to such bogus sources when the world is filled with brilliant minds trying to understand reality with their eyes wide open? Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 15 05:52:48 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:52:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] category 6 In-Reply-To: <4197B30D.9060809@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <007101c4cad7$5c572190$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Please, can someone explain why this trial of that rich guy who slew his very pregnant wife in Taxifornia is getting so much press? What new legal ground is being broken here that makes this case worth all the ink that is being spilled on it? Is it just that the OJ Simpson trial sold so many papers that the news people needed something like that again? In any nation this size, surely spouses slay each other on about a weekly or monthly basis. What is the deal on this one case? Why the breathless interest? Secondly, we know that there are arbitrarily many formulaic global warming disaster movies coming out on a regular basis. There is one playing in the background right now: Category 6, Day of Destruction. Lots of wind, stuff getting wrecked. My questions are: how did the formula come to include a rebellious teenager and a father trying to cope? Why are all bosses on those movies total jerks? Most bosses I know are decent types. Is there any limit to how fast they can depict global climate change in order to create drama? We saw a decade, then a year, now a week. Can they depict climate change in a day? How about a minute? Can we have global warming occur in a few seconds? What is the actual limit, as we allow silliness to approach infinity? spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 15 05:54:42 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:54:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF56@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF56@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041114234937.01bdffe8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Hi Walter At 01:49 PM 11/15/2004 +0800, you wrote: >As I said, I am still not sure who will be right eventually. That's all very well, but the question remains: why are you posting this kind of thing on the extropy list, where almost everyone works from the assessment that Seth and such sources are mind-deadening nonsense? (Hara Ra might be an exception in this widespread opinion.) Do you feel the same way about creationism, for example, or vitalism, or personal guardian angels, and if you did would you be posting about it to extropy-chat? There's a thin line between honest open-minded questioning and trolling. Damien Broderick From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 15 06:11:33 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:11:33 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041114234937.01bdffe8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF56@tpeex05> <6.1.1.1.0.20041114234937.01bdffe8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041114221045.02941a20@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Hara Ra thinks Seth is crap. At 09:54 PM 11/14/2004, you wrote: >Hi Walter > >At 01:49 PM 11/15/2004 +0800, you wrote: > >>As I said, I am still not sure who will be right eventually. > >That's all very well, but the question remains: why are you posting this >kind of thing on the extropy list, where almost everyone works from the >assessment that Seth and such sources are mind-deadening nonsense? (Hara >Ra might be an exception in this widespread opinion.) Do you feel the same >way about creationism, for example, or vitalism, or personal guardian >angels, and if you did would you be posting about it to extropy-chat? >There's a thin line between honest open-minded questioning and trolling. > >Damien Broderick > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Nov 15 06:14:10 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:14:10 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] category 6 References: <007101c4cad7$5c572190$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <001001c4cada$53572d80$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Spike" > Please, can someone explain why this trial of that > rich guy who slew his very pregnant wife in Taxifornia > is getting so much press? What new legal ground is > being broken here that makes this case worth all the > ink that is being spilled on it? Is it just that the > OJ Simpson trial sold so many papers that the news > people needed something like that again? In any > nation this size, surely spouses slay each other > on about a weekly or monthly basis. What is the > deal on this one case? Why the breathless interest? I don't know (and have been trying to understand why). I suspect it has something to do with media ratings and people's appetite for such things. Hasn't there *already* been a made-for-TV movie about this case, months before the verdict? Joan Ryan from the SF Chronicle had this to say (although the column didn't add much to my understanding of this case).: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/11/14/BAGGI9RE3M1.DTL&type=printable Olga From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Nov 15 06:43:34 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:43:34 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF57@tpeex05> I think it's very good to hear different comments from different people in this list (suppose most are interested in becoming transhumanists). But I would try to avoid hot debates that I think won't make much progress (for example, when voting for Bush or Kerry, there is really no truth to say who must be right). I don't believe in the Creator or God because I haven't found a satisfactory reason. But it also can not satisfy me if you say pure 4 physical forces alone can evolve into such complicated world and thoughtful human beings like you and me. Maybe technology is not the best way to transcend the human limits. And I don't understand why Seth-related stuff is nonsense. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: Damien Broderick [mailto:thespike at satx.rr.com] Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 1:55 PM To: Walter_Chen at compal.com; 'ExI chat list' Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense Hi Walter At 01:49 PM 11/15/2004 +0800, you wrote: >As I said, I am still not sure who will be right eventually. That's all very well, but the question remains: why are you posting this kind of thing on the extropy list, where almost everyone works from the assessment that Seth and such sources are mind-deadening nonsense? (Hara Ra might be an exception in this widespread opinion.) Do you feel the same way about creationism, for example, or vitalism, or personal guardian angels, and if you did would you be posting about it to extropy-chat? There's a thin line between honest open-minded questioning and trolling. Damien Broderick -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 07:03:50 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:03:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] category 6 In-Reply-To: <007101c4cad7$5c572190$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041115070350.46359.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > Is it just that > the > OJ Simpson trial sold so many papers that the news > people needed something like that again? That pretty much seems to be it, as far as I can tell. > Secondly, we know that there are arbitrarily many > formulaic global warming disaster movies coming out > on a regular basis. There is one playing in the > background right now: Category 6, Day of > Destruction. > Lots of wind, stuff getting wrecked. Lots of bad science. For instance, a major energy company using computer security so weak that, in reality, not even the most sleazy shoestring energy company would dare try cutting corners like that. Also see wind turbines right next to freeways. (In California at least, and maybe elsewhere, terrain that is optimal for wind turbines - ridgelines and the like - is suboptimal for roads of any kind. Turbines are thus naturally best placed far away from any roads, with manual access so infrequent that it makes more sense to drive up to them with offroad vehicles than to build and maintain access roads that go within a tower's length of the towers.) And so forth. > My questions > are: > how did the formula come to include a rebellious > teenager and a father trying to cope? Just a guess, but - in times of disaster, respect for competent, organized authority can increase your and others' chances for survival. Parents are an iconic authority figure, and action hero type stuff (like a rescue worker's job) was stereotypically masculine. ("Was", because one sees an increasing number of female action heroes these days.) > Why are > all bosses on those movies total jerks? Most bosses > I know are decent types. Stereotypes, again. Incompetent authorities are another cause of lowered survival rates in times of crisis - and thus, contribute to drama (sometimes at the expense of plausibility, if taken to the extreme). > Is there any limit to > how fast they can depict global climate change in > order to create drama? We saw a decade, then a > year, > now a week. Can they depict climate change in a > day? > How about a minute? Can we have global warming > occur > in a few seconds? What is the actual limit, as we > allow silliness to approach infinity? Remember the Genesis Device from one of the early Star Trek movies? That completely terraformed a planet in a matter of minutes, IIRC. Similar "warnings" about science gone wrong (say, green goo designed to fix the environment but inevitably going horribly wrong) could be packaged as transforming the Earth in even less time. Remember that it only takes a second or so for a signal to travel around the world - and that's using our computer networks, not taking the orbital path or going straight through the Earth. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 07:40:32 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:40:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Medical ethics In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20041108174851.02efba60@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <20041115074032.42724.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Lubkin wrote: > My daughter, a fourth-generation sf reader, has a > term paper coming up on > medical ethics. Noting the card-carrying and de > facto philosophers in our > community, I thought I'd ask for links to sites and > printed works that you > have found well-written and thoughtful (non-fiction > or sf). > > Unfortunately, she is not free to choose any topic > within medical ethics. > The paper must deal with reproductive medicine > (including surrogacy), AIDS, > or cloning, but she may want to read works on other > areas on her own. Where I've seen reproductive cloning touched on in science-compatible fiction, it's usually fallen into one of three camps: * A means of creating identical twins/triplets/etc. * A means of creating children very similar to their parent. (One example is the backstory behind SJ Games' OGRE universe, where Japan has reverted to its WWII-era imperial ambitions. Some of the top officials are deemed too important to be distracted by marriages to obtain offspring, while for others a source of compatible parts is desired should their organs fail - and children are expected to give everything possible to support their ancestors. In both cases, clones are allowed.) * A means of creating blank bodies, when combined with accelerated aging (to force a body through puberty in much less than 20 years) and some method of mind transfer (which probably puts this camp's proposed technology well beyond what your daughter would want to cite for her essay, except as a possible far future goal). In each case, the decision to clone is made without input from the person-to-be - and has to be, since a non-entity (or more precisely, a not-yet-entity) is by definition unable to do anything, including give input. She might want to make an analogy to Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, wherein the debate over food animals was resolved by creating a species that wanted to be eaten and could say so in no uncertain terms. Likewise, there have been many instances of humans born and raised for a certain purpose, and when the time came quite voluntarily serving that purpose. (Yes, there are always rebels, but in most cases most such people have not rebelled. Otherwise, no society would have tried this practice for long.) Even if embryos do have souls, what does it say when they are destroyed for no gain rather than letting their very brief lives at least serve some purpose (even just serving in an experiment to further the health of people they'll never meet)? Googling on relevant topics might also produce a few good hits. For instance, "artificial wombs" produced http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/genbio/biolink/student/olc2/g-bioe-17.htm and http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/phil/blphil_ethbio_wombs.htm . (But, of course, these links need to be reviewed to see if they're any good; these are two that I reviewed that seem to present a rather balanced picture. There were other results that were somewhat hysterical.) From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 15 07:52:20 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:52:20 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> Message-ID: <005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> > Basically I mean there should be something else > as fundamental as the 4 forces at the beginning > of the universe such that I can feel this world > and my existence now. > Walter The (remote, eh) possibility that the state of the universe is a function both of some initial boundary condition and of some (*whatever*) final boundary condition, cannot be ruled out. In this case that "something else as fundamental as" could have some meaning (but different and less subjective). See, in example, Sommers here http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9404022 From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 15 09:32:03 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:32:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth, 4 forces and urk In-Reply-To: <005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> <005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115011938.02925158@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Regarding both commments: 1) What you see on the screen does not look like the inside of the box. Computers, cars, brains, URLs 2) Evolution somehow created "feelings" for mammals. The result is better survival, for mammals. Deep feelings of connection with the all of it, probably a modification of mother/child bonding, serves survival. What this has to do with the 4 physical forces is hardly relevant. What we see on the screen is obviously some function of the 4 forces, with a whole lotta complexity. cars, brains, URLs too. 3) Even if we ever determine the relation between the initial BCs and final BCs, there is still the problem of observability. Note each cm^3 of air has 10^19 molecules in it, and any way of finding out the details will change them beyond recovery. Can you spell 'heisenberg'? 4) Once we know brain mechanics in nanosystemic detail, feeling 'godly' or 'connected' will be just one of the "Control Menu" options we will all have. And a whole lot more options which I cannot begin to imagine. 5) After the Dewar (cryonics), my intention is to be an artist in perception, inner and outer, with a focus on positive states including those of the mystical. At 11:52 PM 11/14/2004, you wrote: > > Basically I mean there should be something else > > as fundamental as the 4 forces at the beginning > > of the universe such that I can feel this world > > and my existence now. > > Walter > >The (remote, eh) possibility that the state of the >universe is a function both of some initial >boundary condition and of some (*whatever*) final >boundary condition, cannot be ruled out. In this >case that "something else as fundamental as" could >have some meaning (but different and less subjective). >See, in example, Sommers here >http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9404022 > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 15 09:40:01 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:40:01 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF57@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF57@tpeex05> Message-ID: On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:43:34 +0800, walter_chen wrote: > > But it also can not satisfy me if you say pure 4 physical forces alone can > evolve into > such complicated world and thoughtful human beings like you and me. > Maybe technology is not the best way to transcend the human limits. > And I don't understand why Seth-related stuff is nonsense. > If you *really* don't know why channeling is nonsense (or fraud) read: Demon-Haunted World by CARL SAGAN, ANN DRUYAN Carl Sagan muses on the current state of scientific thought, which offers him marvelous opportunities to entertain us with his own childhood experiences, the newspaper morgues, UFO stories, and the assorted flotsam and jetsam of pseudoscience. Along the way he debunks alien abduction, faith-healing, and channeling; refutes the arguments that science destroys spirituality, and provides a "baloney detection kit" for thinking through political, social, religious, and other issues. Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time by Michael Schermer Review BillK From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Nov 15 10:14:58 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:14:58 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Australia really is a different democracy from America Message-ID: <345F6EA2-36EF-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2968938.stm From amara at amara.com Mon Nov 15 10:37:50 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:37:50 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Identity Erasure? or faulty platforms? Message-ID: Dear Alan, Thanks for the corrections. Yes, I made changes to my robots.txt file one week ago, for the first time itemizing in particular ways, so particular directories are included/excluded, so I'm not surprised I made mistakes. I have too many directories and files and I'm learning by example. Before that (and for the last 8 years) my robots.txt had only this: User-agent: * Disallow: / (in other words, no indexing of my site permitted). There are no mistakes on these two lines. Some robots did ignore this in the last 8 years, I'm certain. Amara From zero.powers at gmail.com Mon Nov 15 11:09:24 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:09:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' Message-ID: <7a3217050411150309243d1715@mail.gmail.com> "[World News]: London, Nov 15 : "God genes" are responsible for creating religious fanatics, says new scientific research - much to the chagrin of church representatives. The findings of Dean Hamer, director of the US National Cancer Institute's Gene Structure and Regulation Unit, also claim that Jesus, the Buddha and Prophet Mohammed are likely to have carried the gene." If this is true, the chances of us ever wiping out the FTB's would appear to be very remote indeed. Sad. http://www.newkerala.com/news-daily/news/features.php?action=fullnews&id=42662 From zero.powers at gmail.com Mon Nov 15 11:16:39 2004 From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:16:39 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <7a32170504111503163786be29@mail.gmail.com> Hmm. I can't speak for any other state, and not that I have any *personal* experience in the area..., but X-rated stuff is perfectly legal to sell buy and sell here in California. L.A.'s San Fernando Valley is the porn capital of the world, and is chock full of "Adult" video and book stores. Uh, or so I hear... On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:52:53 +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: > > X-rated material is, of course, illegal to sell in all states so > everyone has to buy from canberra, and don't try to host it anywhere in > australia. From neptune at superlink.net Mon Nov 15 11:53:02 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:53:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Robots Cheaper For Floor Cleaning Message-ID: <006b01c4cb09$a98f46e0$19893cd1@pavilion> http://www.spacedaily.com/news/robot-04zt.html From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 15 11:51:52 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:51:52 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? Message-ID: <470a3c520411150351725de71d@mail.gmail.com> Very interesting article on Silicon.com (found via KurzweilAI): Kevin Warwick, professor of cybernetics at Reading University, warned the day will come when computer viruses can infect humans as well as PCs. "We're looking at software viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same," he said. "The security problems [will] be much, much greater... they will have to become critical in future." If humans were networked, the implications of being hacked would be far more serious and attitudes towards hackers would be radically changed, he added. "For those of you that want to stay human... you'll be a subspecies in the future," he said. Warwick believes that there are advantages for a human being to be networked to a computer. Networking a human brain would mean an almost "infinite knowledge base", he said, adding it would be akin to "upgrading humans... giving us abilities we don't already have". http://www.kurzweilai.net/news/frame.html?main=/news/news_single.html?id%3D3958 http://networks.silicon.com/webwatch/0,39024667,39125887,00.htm From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Mon Nov 15 15:54:48 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:54:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: Your wheat-to-apples analogy doesn't work because you are placing one value on the items before the trade and then a different value after the trade (i.e. if wheat is worth more than an apple then why are they trading 1 for 1). Stick to currency exchange for trade and it stays simpler. After all the whole point of currency is that it is divorced from any specific item and can apply value for any trade good. BAL >From: hal at finney.org ("Hal Finney") >To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:08:06 -0800 (PST) > >Adrian Tymes writes: > > The problem is that a nation is not just one person. > > Let's say you have two people, one of whom gets 2 > > coins for a unit of wheat, and the other of whom > > consumes wheat at a certain rate. Now introduce a > > third person, who can provide a unit of wheat for only > > one coin. Trading with the less expensive wheat > > producer increases the wheat consumer's wealth by one > > coin per unit of wheat, and the less expensive wheat > > producer's wealth by the same - but it decreases the > > more expensive wheat producer's wealth by two coins > > per unit of wheat that would have been consumed. > >You can't eat coins. Let's suppose they are apples. You start off with >two people, an apple grower and a wheat grower. The wheat grower gets two >apples for a unit of wheat. Now introduce a foreign guy who will provide >a unit of wheat for only one apple. So the apple grower switches to him. >He can now pay one apple for a unit of wheat. > >The net result is that before the foreigner came in, after an exchange, >the apple grower had 1 unit of wheat and the wheat grower had two apples. >After we introduce the foreign guy and do an exchange, the apple grower >has 1 apple and 1 unit of wheat, and the wheat grower has 1 unit of wheat. >Before trade, together they had 1 wheat and 2 apples; after trade, >they have 1 apple and 2 wheats. Trade cost them an apple and gained >them a wheat. But wheat is worth more to them than apples (otherwise >they would not have previously had a price of two apples per wheat), >so it is a net gain, consistent with my argument. > > > However, the more expensive wheat producer is now > > free to do something else - like, say, refine the > > one-coin-per-unit wheat into bread worth at least > > three coins per unit. > >And that makes it even better. > >Hal >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Mon Nov 15 16:02:39 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:02:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' Message-ID: Of course as far as anything, outsourcing can be done properly or poorly. It does not always benefit a company to outsource, but it frequently does. As for people being layed off, etc for "retraining". While it is true that the individuals layed off can't buy more stuff, others who are benefiting from outsourcing can. This is why wealth has grown as globalization increased over the past 50 years even as industries such as manufacturing employed fewer and fewer people. Outsourcing hurts some people. But on the whole (and especially over time) it helps out economies. Of course, once I get outsourced I may become irrational. Of course the real world is not simple, but I try to keep my examples simple as I am not an economist. BAL >From: Samantha Atkins >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:57:48 -0800 > >Brian Lee wrote: > >>Outsourcing benefits the entire economy. Of course some neighbors will >>lose jobs, but on the whole everyone benefits from low cost goods and can >>buy more other stuff while some people lose jobs, transfer jobs, learn new >>stuff, whatever. > > > >Intelligent transfer of jobs to areas where the same quality work can be >done more cheaply makes sense. However, what we have now is often not very >intelligent. Out-sourcing has become a panacea for many public software >companies. Wall Street and other financial players nearly make it a >requirement or at least ask for a strong why-not. It is not intelligent >when companies assume that the code is all and can be picked up by any >reaonsably competent software team successfully and relatively painlessly. >This is very seldom the case. The code has its own inertia and quirks that >the current onsite developers understand. The onsite developers, if they >include the architects of the code, have considerable business and >technical knowledge relevant to the code in question that can seldom be >properly captured for transfer in a reasonably complete manner. Even for >QA only transfers it is not uncommon to experience delays of 6 - 9 months >before an offshore team is fully up to speed and workable processes in >place. So this is a far cry from a panacea as many companies learn >painfully. > >Folks can't "buy more stuff" if they have no income for significant periods >of time while they are attempting to "learn new stuff". The real world >is not so simple. > >- samantha > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 15 16:36:10 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:36:10 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth, 4 forces and urk References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05><005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> <6.0.3.0.1.20041115011938.02925158@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000f01c4cb31$37a2aae0$94b31b97@administxl09yj> From: "Hara Ra" > 3) Even if we ever determine the relation > between the initial BCs and final BCs, > there is still the problem of observability. > Note each cm^3 of air has 10^19 molecules in it, > and any way of finding out the details will change > them beyond recovery. Can you spell 'heisenberg'? Not sure I get your point. But even when HUP has a physical meaning (that is not always, see *) if we really need to know the 'true' state of a physical system (not just in the trivial case in which the physical system is already in an eigenstate) we can measure it. The 'weak measurement' technique exploits quantum uncertainty. In this case quantum detectors are so weakly linked to the experiment that any measurement moves the detector's pointer by less than the level of uncertainty. There is a price to pay for these delicate readings, they are inaccurate. But while this might appear to make the whole process pointless, when repeated many times, the average of these weak measurements approximates to the 'true' value of the observable to be measured. (But what is the 'urk' in the subject line?). s. * In general given a pair of non-commuting observables A and B, belonging to an Hilbert space H, the quantity delta A delta B can either vanish, or become arbitrarily close to zero, if at least one of the two observables (A or B) is bounded. Suppose B is the bounded observable and suppose A possesses a discrete eigenvalue. In this case the variance of the observable A becomes null in correspondence of the proper eigenvector associated to the discrete eigenvalue and the indeterminacy relation assumes the form 'delta A delta B = zero' since delta B is always finite for a bounded B. Not to mention here the 'delta E delta t' relation, in which 'delta t' is about 'our' clock time and 'delta E' is about 'its' energy! From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 16:42:43 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:42:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <7a32170504111503163786be29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041115164243.52678.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> You cannot buy porn just anywhere in California, like you can get cigarettes & beer at 7-11, because most Americans are prudes. You can buy all the beer you want and vomit on the sidewalk, but porn is considered indecent. Zero Powers wrote:Hmm. I can't speak for any other state, and not that I have any *personal* experience in the area..., but X-rated stuff is perfectly legal to sell buy and sell here in California. L.A.'s San Fernando Valley is the porn capital of the world, and is chock full of "Adult" video and book stores. Uh, or so I hear... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Nov 15 16:57:16 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:57:16 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041115164243.52678.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041115164243.52678.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6793F700-3727-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 15 Nov 2004, at 17:42, Al Brooks wrote: > You cannot buy porn just anywhere in California, like you can get > cigarettes?& beer at 7-11, because most Americans are prudes. As interesting (and inaccurate) as this point is, I am have to say that when I lurked here in the early 1990s there was more interesting discussion going on. Is this list now about discussing anything by anyone at all? I am afraid that in order to raise the quality of list on my machine I am going to have to start doing some heavy filtering of individual posters, which is really too bad as I am sure that they have something interesting to say some of the time. best, patrick From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 15 17:06:57 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:06:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Bush Cabinet Resignations Message-ID: <080d01c4cb35$84bef9b0$deebfb44@kevin> Colin Powell is resigning. http://www.cnn.com/ Does anyone know what is going on here? Four more of his cabinet are resigning as well. I think that makes 6. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 17:09:14 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:09:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <6793F700-3727-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041115170914.63736.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> okay, okay, Patrick, you win. I'll drop it-- yet please remember you brought up the topic of porn in California, with a heavy emphasis on San Fernando valley. Not that you would know anything about it of course. Patrick Wilken From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Nov 15 17:12:30 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:12:30 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041115170914.63736.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041115170914.63736.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8825176D-3729-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Actually Al I didn't bring up the topic of porn in California. best, patrick On 15 Nov 2004, at 18:09, Al Brooks wrote: > okay, okay, Patrick, you win. I'll drop it-- yet please remember you > brought up the topic of porn in California, with a heavy emphasis on > San Fernando valley. Not that you would know anything about it of > course. > > Patrick Wilken As interesting (and inaccurate) as this point is, I am have to say that > when I lurked here in the early 1990s there was more interesting > discussion going on. Is this list now about discussing anything by > anyone at all? I am afraid that in order to raise the quality of list > on my machine I am going to have to start doing some heavy filtering > of > individual posters, which is really too bad as I am sure that they have > something interesting to say some of the time. > best, patrick > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 17:15:30 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:15:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Bush Cabinet Resignations In-Reply-To: <080d01c4cb35$84bef9b0$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041115171530.69194.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> I heard many of the cabinet members are tired of the pressures; Condi Rice wants to go back to academia, so she can get huge honorariums for lectures wherein she doesn't reveal much. Politicos save the good stuff for their books. http://www.cnn.com/ Does anyone know what is going on here? Four more of his cabinet are resigning as well. I think that makes 6. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Nov 15 17:19:20 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:19:20 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth, 4 forces and urk Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5B@tpeex05> We are talking about how the big bang could evolve into the current complicated world and human beings, right? So can you use some current concrete examples to explain? For example, the final BCs here should be like ??? of now? Is this somewhat like the so-called Intelligent Design? Is there still the observability problem if the universe can evolve into *current* state? Thanks. Walter. ---------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:36 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seth, 4 forces and urk From: "Hara Ra" > 3) Even if we ever determine the relation > between the initial BCs and final BCs, > there is still the problem of observability. > Note each cm^3 of air has 10^19 molecules in it, > and any way of finding out the details will change > them beyond recovery. Can you spell 'heisenberg'? Not sure I get your point. But even when HUP has a physical meaning (that is not always, see *) if we really need to know the 'true' state of a physical system (not just in the trivial case in which the physical system is already in an eigenstate) we can measure it. The 'weak measurement' technique exploits quantum uncertainty. In this case quantum detectors are so weakly linked to the experiment that any measurement moves the detector's pointer by less than the level of uncertainty. There is a price to pay for these delicate readings, they are inaccurate. But while this might appear to make the whole process pointless, when repeated many times, the average of these weak measurements approximates to the 'true' value of the observable to be measured. (But what is the 'urk' in the subject line?). s. * In general given a pair of non-commuting observables A and B, belonging to an Hilbert space H, the quantity delta A delta B can either vanish, or become arbitrarily close to zero, if at least one of the two observables (A or B) is bounded. Suppose B is the bounded observable and suppose A possesses a discrete eigenvalue. In this case the variance of the observable A becomes null in correspondence of the proper eigenvector associated to the discrete eigenvalue and the indeterminacy relation assumes the form 'delta A delta B = zero' since delta B is always finite for a bounded B. Not to mention here the 'delta E delta t' relation, in which 'delta t' is about 'our' clock time and 'delta E' is about 'its' energy! _______________________________________________ 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: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 17:20:03 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:20:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <8825176D-3729-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041115172004.58950.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> It was the guy in Canberra or somewhere else down under who brought up the topic. You win again, you're always in the right. Silly me. Patrick Wilken wrote: Actually Al I didn't bring up the topic of porn in California. best, patrick --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 15 18:10:27 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:10:27 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <7a3217050411150309243d1715@mail.gmail.com> References: <7a3217050411150309243d1715@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115120904.01abf1e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:09 AM 11/15/2004 -0800, Zero wrote: >If this is true, Ahem. Try these sensible reviews, from amazon: ============== The God Gene : How Faith is Hardwired into our Genes by Dean Hamer From Publishers Weekly This book's title is more rhetorical effect than factual accuracy: Hamer, who discovered the controversial "gay gene" in the 1990s, reports that he has now found a gene that may correlate in some people with their level of spirituality?not with belief in a being we would call God or with the performance of traditional religious practices, but with what psychiatrist Robert Cloninger called "self-transcendence." This trait is a capacity to feel at one with all life and with the universe as a whole, and Cloninger measured it with personality testing. The so-called "God gene" is a particular location in the human genome known as VMAT2, which affects the brain's neurotransmitters. Hamer admits that the gene probably accounts for less than 1% of the total variance in human spirituality. The book's later chapters become still more speculative, as Hamer, a molecular biologist at the National Cancer Institute, considers the scanty evidence of health benefits of spirituality, which would make faith an adaptive evolutionary trait. Hamer emphasizes that the existence of a "God gene" would neither prove nor disprove the reality of God. However, this gracefully written book may intrigue people of all faiths?or no faith?who wonder about the ultimate connection between science and religion. Copyright ? Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. From Scientific American By page 77 of The God Gene, Dean H. Hamer has already disowned the title of his own book. He recalls describing to a colleague his discovery of a link between spirituality and a specific gene he calls "the God gene." His colleague raised her eyebrows. "Do you mean there's just one?" she asked. "I deserved her skepticism," Hamer writes. "What I meant to say, of course, was 'a' God gene, not 'the' God gene." Of course. Why, the reader wonders, didn't Hamer call his book A God Gene? That might not have been as catchy, but at least it wouldn't have left him contradicting himself. Whatever you want to call it, this is a frustrating book. The role that genes play in religion is a fascinating question that's ripe for the asking. Psychologists, neurologists and even evolutionary biologists have offered insights about how spiritual behaviors and beliefs emerge from the brain. It is reasonable to ask, as Hamer does, whether certain genes play a significant role in faith. But he is a long way from providing an answer. Hamer, a geneticist at the National Cancer Institute, wound up on his quest for the God gene by a roundabout route. Initially he and his colleagues set out to find genes that may make people prone to cigarette addiction. They studied hundreds of pairs of siblings, comparing how strongly their shared heredity influenced different aspects of their personality. In addition to having their subjects fill out psychological questionnaires, the researchers also took samples of DNA from some of them. Hamer then realized that this database might let him investigate the genetics of spirituality. He embarked on this new search by looking at the results of certain survey questions that measured a personality trait known as self-transcendence, originally identified by Washington University psychiatrist Robert Cloninger. Cloninger found that spiritual people tend to share a set of characteristics, such as feeling connected to the world and a willingness to accept things that cannot be objectively demonstrated. Analyzing the cigarette study, Hamer confirmed what earlier studies had found: heredity is partly responsible for whether a person is self-transcendent or not. He then looked at the DNA samples of some of his subjects, hoping to find variants of genes that tended to turn up in self-transcendent people. His search led him to a gene known as VMAT2. Two different versions of this gene exist, differing only at a single position. People with one version of the gene tend to score a little higher on self-transcendence tests. Although the influence is small, it is, Hamer claims, consistent. About half the people in the study had at least one copy of the self-transcendence-boosting version of VMAT2, which Hamer dubs the God gene. Is the God gene real? The only evidence we have to go on at the moment is what Hamer presents in his book. He and his colleagues are still preparing to submit their results to a scientific journal. It would be nice to know whether these results can withstand the rigors of peer review. It would be nicer still to know whether any other scientists can replicate them. The field of behavioral genetics is littered with failed links between particular genes and personality traits. These alleged associations at first seemed very strong. But as other researchers tried to replicate them, they faded away into statistical noise. In 1993, for example, a scientist reported a genetic link to male homosexuality in a region of the X chromosome. The report brought a huge media fanfare, but other scientists who tried to replicate the study failed. The scientist's name was Dean Hamer. To be fair, it should be pointed out that Hamer offers a lot of details about his study in The God Gene, along with many caveats about how hard it is to establish an association between genes and behavior. But given the fate of Hamer's so-called gay gene, it is strange to see him so impatient to trumpet the discovery of his God gene. He is even eager to present an intricate hypothesis about how the God gene produces self-transcendence. The gene, it is well known, makes membrane-covered containers that neurons use to deliver neurotransmitters to one another. Hamer proposes that the God gene changes the level of these neurotransmitters so as to alter a person's mood, consciousness and, ultimately, self-transcendence. He goes so far as to say that the God gene is, along with other faith-boosting genes, a product of natural selection. Self-transcendence makes people more optimistic, which makes them healthier and likely to have more kids. These speculations take up the bulk of The God Gene, but in support Hamer only offers up bits and pieces of research done by other scientists, along with little sketches of spiritual people he has met. It appears that he has not bothered to think of a way to test these ideas himself. He did not, for example, try to rule out the possibility that natural selection has not favored self-transcendence, but some other function of VMAT2. (Among other things, the gene protects the brain from neurotoxins.) Nor does Hamer rule out the possibility that the God gene offers no evolutionary benefit at all. Sometimes genes that seem to be common thanks to natural selection turn out to have been spread merely by random genetic drift. Rather than address these important questions, Hamer simply declares that any hypothesis about the evolution of human behavior must be purely speculative. But this is simply not true. If Hamer wanted, he could have measured the strength of natural selection that has acted on VMAT2 in the past. And if he did find signs of selection, he could have estimated how long ago it took place. Other scientists have been measuring natural selection this way for several years now and publishing their results in major journals. The God Gene might have been a fascinating, enlightening book if Hamer had written it 10 years from now--after his link between VMAT2 and self-transcendence had been confirmed by others and after he had seriously tested its importance to our species. Instead the book we have today would be better titled: A Gene That Accounts for Less Than One Percent of the Variance Found in Scores on Psychological Questionnaires Designed to Measure a Factor Called Self-Transcendence, Which Can Signify Everything from Belonging to the Green Party to Believing in ESP, According to One Unpublished, Unreplicated Study. From scerir at libero.it Mon Nov 15 18:28:03 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:28:03 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth, 4 forces and urk References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5B@tpeex05> Message-ID: <001901c4cb40$d852d870$99c41b97@administxl09yj> > We are talking about how the big bang could evolve > into the current complicated world and human beings, > right? The original line was Cramer & Afshar. I do not know anything about Seth, etc. > So can you use some current concrete examples > to explain? How human beings evolve from a supposed initial state at entropy = zero? No. I can just suppose that perfect order in unstable. Eve, the snake, and all that. > For example, the final BCs here should be like? I do not know. Reality is a bit veiled. > Is this somewhat like the so-called Intelligent > Design? Dunno what it is. > Is there still the observability problem > if the universe can evolve into *current* state? > Walter. There are fundamental no-go theorems and principles, like HUP/Complementarity, no-signaling, no-cloning, no-deleting, etc. Someone (Antony Valentini i.e.) thinks they are not fixed once for all times. s. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 20:05:01 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:05:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Bush Cabinet Resignations In-Reply-To: <080d01c4cb35$84bef9b0$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041115200501.2382.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Colin Powell is resigning. > > http://www.cnn.com/ > > Does anyone know what is going on here? Four more of > his cabinet are resigning as well. I think that > makes 6. Powell was expected, after his disagreements with Bush. Ashcroft was a bit of a surprise, but may stem from certain potential voters expressing major concern during the campaign with how the DoJ had been trampling their civil liberties, causing Bush to take an honest look* at what Ashcroft's been pulling while Bush was focussed on Iraq. (When else would Bush actually listen to the voters, instead of having their concerns filtered through the Cabinet?) I'm not sure about the others, but I would not be surprised if they were a combination of similar factors. * For all his faults, Bush is usually capable of performing honorably when he has the correct facts in front of him. The main problem appears to be that, the way he sets up his environment, he is often given false or misleading information, not to mention that he inspires actions he himself would not back. (For instance, it does not appear that the move by his diplomats to get stem cell research outlawed via UN treaty is being done with his blessing, even if said diplomats think he would be in favor of it. Bush might not even be aware that this is happening, and think that people hysterically exaggerate when they accuse him of trying to outlaw stem cell research when all he did was ban federal funding of it.) This does not excuse the results, BTW, just explains how they came to be. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 20:33:17 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:33:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: <470a3c520411150351725de71d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041115203318.87649.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Very interesting article on Silicon.com (found via > KurzweilAI): Kevin > Warwick, professor of cybernetics at Reading > University, warned the > day will come when computer viruses can infect > humans as well as PCs. > "We're looking at software viruses and biological > viruses becoming one > and the same," he said. Umm...no. Biological viruses require a physical presence to infect; software viruses do not, being pure information. That said, it might possible for poorly-coded network interfaces to start feeding bogus information to their humans. But one suspects that the security measures required for a network interface that is intimately linked to human brains would be on par with the security measures in place at electric substations controllable over the Internet - very very few of which have been hacked successfully, despite their much higher value than the almost disposable computers that do get regularly hacked. Or perhaps Mr. Warwick has just discovered, and been confused by, the concept of "memes". From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 20:57:25 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:57:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <7a3217050411150309243d1715@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041115205725.12852.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Zero Powers wrote: > "[World News]: London, Nov 15 : "God genes" are > responsible for > creating religious fanatics, says new scientific > research - much to > the chagrin of church representatives. The findings > of Dean Hamer, > director of the US National Cancer Institute's Gene > Structure and > Regulation Unit, also claim that Jesus, the Buddha > and Prophet > Mohammed are likely to have carried the gene." > > If this is true, the chances of us ever wiping out > the FTB's would > appear to be very remote indeed. Sad. ...what about the possibility for biological weapons designed to target everyone with - or everyone without - this gene? (Fundies might target everyone without it, accepting that pious members of other religions might be spared "but they worship God in their own ways", and accepting that "less faithful" members of their own religion would also be affected. OTOH, if the rabidly faithful were incapacitated - not killed, but clearly not blessed - en masse around their holy days...) To be clear, I'm not actually suggesting the above as something to do. Just pointing out how (and why) certain people might abuse this. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 21:16:18 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:16:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <41940F51.7000805@mac.com> Message-ID: <20041115211618.83973.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Extropy Investment Fund sounds like a great idea. > Is anyone setting > such up? http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/futuretag/ was recently set up with members of ExI and the WTA to discuss how to do transhumanist consulting. Might this be close enough? From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 22:06:24 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:06:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years' In-Reply-To: <20041111220806.7AA1F57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041115220624.5213.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > You can't eat coins. Let's suppose they are apples. > You start off with > two people, an apple grower and a wheat grower. The > wheat grower gets two > apples for a unit of wheat. Now introduce a foreign > guy who will provide > a unit of wheat for only one apple. So the apple > grower switches to him. > He can now pay one apple for a unit of wheat. > > The net result is that before the foreigner came in, > after an exchange, > the apple grower had 1 unit of wheat and the wheat > grower had two apples. > After we introduce the foreign guy and do an > exchange, the apple grower > has 1 apple and 1 unit of wheat, and the wheat > grower has 1 unit of wheat. > Before trade, together they had 1 wheat and 2 > apples; after trade, > they have 1 apple and 2 wheats. Trade cost them an > apple and gained > them a wheat. But wheat is worth more to them than > apples (otherwise > they would not have previously had a price of two > apples per wheat), > so it is a net gain, consistent with my argument. Ah, but now wheat is of equal value to apples, since they can be traded one for one. And you forget to account for the foreign producer's wheat and apple stock: it isn't that the closed system became open, but rather that the closed system now encompasses a larger number of actors. > > However, the more expensive wheat producer is now > > free to do something else - like, say, refine the > > one-coin-per-unit wheat into bread worth at least > > three coins per unit. > > And that makes it even better. Again, that's what really causes wealth to be created. From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 22:37:45 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:37:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: <20041115203318.87649.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041115203318.87649.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Well, I think the idea is that eventually computer/human interfaces will consist of some sort of data-port that connects directly into the human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses could indeed have a deleterious effect on humans. On Nov 15, 2004, at 3:33 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Very interesting article on Silicon.com (found via > KurzweilAI): Kevin > Warwick, professor of cybernetics at Reading > University, warned the > day will come when computer viruses can infect > humans as well as PCs. > "We're looking at software viruses and biological > viruses becoming one > and the same," he said. Umm...no. Biological viruses require a physical presence to infect; software viruses do not, being pure information. That said, it might possible for poorly-coded network interfaces to start feeding bogus information to their humans. But one suspects that the security measures required for a network interface that is intimately linked to human brains would be on par with the security measures in place at electric substations controllable over the Internet - very very few of which have been hacked successfully, despite their much higher value than the almost disposable computers that do get regularly hacked. Or perhaps Mr. Warwick has just discovered, and been confused by, the concept of "memes". _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 15 22:51:01 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:51:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041115225101.96909.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Well, I think the idea is that eventually > computer/human interfaces > will consist of some sort of data-port that connects > directly into the > human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses > could indeed have a > deleterious effect on humans. Yes, but this is not "computer viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same" even if they can affect the same target. From natashavita at earthlink.net Mon Nov 15 22:51:12 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:51:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Complex Adaptive Systems Message-ID: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> As many of you know, I am back in school getting an MS while I prepare for a PhD program. This week, we have been talking about complex adaptive systems, and their use by futurists in understanding and explaining "accelerating change) (FM-2030 term). I have spent the greater portion of the day goggling CAS and looking for the next steps of this theory and practice, not just in relation to complexity, but also other areas of change. Haven't found anything. While biology is an appropriate and well-seasoned metaphor/analogy to use, could it be overused? Because I do not believe in stasis, I wonder what has evolved out of complexity theory, cybernetics and CAS. Does anyone have ideas? Thanks, Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 23:12:36 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:12:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: <20041115225101.96909.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041115225101.96909.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Why not? A virus, whether biological or computer-based, is really just a logic machine. Such a virus would be able to cross from a digital logic medium to a biological one. The effects of such a virus would differ depending on whether the virus is currently infecting a biological-system or a computer, but this is very much like biological viruses when they pass across species. On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Well, I think the idea is that eventually > computer/human interfaces > will consist of some sort of data-port that connects > directly into the > human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses > could indeed have a > deleterious effect on humans. Yes, but this is not "computer viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same" even if they can affect the same target. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 23:15:31 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:15:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Bush Cabinet Resignations In-Reply-To: <20041115200501.2382.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041115231531.3333.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Condi Rice is rumored to be tired of her position, she apparently wants to be a university president or professor. After Powell and Rice are gone it is back to a caucasian executive cabinet-- you know, the normal order of things. Adrian Tymes wrote: --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Colin Powell is resigning. > > http://www.cnn.com/ > > Does anyone know what is going on here? Four more of > his cabinet are resigning as well. I think that > makes 6. Powell was expected, after his disagreements with Bush. Ashcroft was a bit of a surprise, but may stem from certain potential voters expressing major concern during the campaign with how the DoJ had been trampling their civil liberties, causing Bush to take an honest look* at what Ashcroft's been pulling while Bush was focussed on Iraq. (When else would Bush actually listen to the voters, instead of having their concerns filtered through the Cabinet?) I'm not sure about the others, but I would not be surprised if they were a combination of similar factors. * For all his faults, Bush is usually capable of performing honorably when he has the correct facts in front of him. The main problem appears to be that, the way he sets up his environment, he is often given false or misleading information, not to mention that he inspires actions he himself would not back. (For instance, it does not appear that the move by his diplomats to get stem cell research outlawed via UN treaty is being done with his blessing, even if said diplomats think he would be in favor of it. Bush might not even be aware that this is happening, and think that people hysterically exaggerate when they accuse him of trying to outlaw stem cell research when all he did was ban federal funding of it.) This does not excuse the results, BTW, just explains how they came to be. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Mon Nov 15 23:27:11 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:27:11 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Complex Adaptive Systems In-Reply-To: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041115172025.039f85c8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Natasha, You might find the following short book useful. I have a copy in our library. See me after school. ;-) Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity, by John Holland. this is one of the best books to get an understanding of complex adaptive systems (cas) and the use of software agents. Holland is a leader in the emerging field of complexity studies but makes no unrealistic claims for his work. As he remarks, there is not yet a real theory of complex adaptive systems. This book lays some foundations and steps towards a general theory after showing the results of his experiments with Echo. As the theory of cas is developed, we may better understand how complexity arises in economies and other systems without central control. Also, these articles might help: Strategy at the Edge of Chaos McKinsey Quarterly by Eric D. Beinhocker http://www.manyworlds.com/index.asp?from=CO&coid=CO020420000003373 Complexity Gains Momentum Catalyst by John Thackray http://www.manyworlds.com/index.asp?from=CO&coid=CO6270319303814 Excerpt from my review: Existing practical applications of CAS models are not hard to find: Traffic simulations, design of public spaces accounting for crowd behavior, factory production scheduling, adaptive supply chain networks, robust strategy formulation, simulations of customer behavior, and social network analysis (SNA). One of the leading business complexity practitioners, BiosGroup, helped Southwest Airlines redesign cargo handling processes, saving 30 percent in costs and 70 in time, and has helped Nasdaq anticipate the aggregate effects of thousands of traders reacting in various scenarios. Businesses may eventually benefit from Wall Street interest in understanding economic cycles by better anticipating major shifts. Onward! Max At 04:51 PM 11/15/2004, you wrote: >As many of you know, I am back in school getting an MS while I prepare for >a PhD program. > >This week, we have been talking about complex adaptive systems, and their >use by futurists in understanding and explaining "accelerating change) >(FM-2030 term). I have spent the greater portion of the day goggling CAS >and looking for the next steps of this theory and practice, not just in >relation to complexity, but also other areas of change. Haven't found >anything. > >While biology is an appropriate and well-seasoned metaphor/analogy to use, >could it be overused? Because I do not believe in stasis, I wonder what >has evolved out of complexity theory, cybernetics and CAS. > >Does anyone have ideas? > >Thanks, >Natasha > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >mail2web - Check your email from the web at >http://mail2web.com/ . > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _______________________________________________________ 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 ________________________________________________________________ Director of Content Solutions, ManyWorlds Inc.: http://www.manyworlds.com --- Thought leadership in the innovation economy m.more at manyworlds.com _______________________________________________________ From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Nov 15 23:32:21 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:32:21 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5D@tpeex05> I don't particularly believe in channeling in general. But for Seth in particular, Jane Roberts had written over 30 books. It's difficult to say it's just nonsense. Some of her ideas are very interesting. Maybe this is also the Principle of Complementarity: Some people believe, some people don't. For me, I just try to digest and reason what I think is good. For example, ******************************************* The Unknown? Reality, Vol. 1 by Jane Roberts In this mind-stretching journey into the very frontiers of consciousness, Seth continues his discussions of the multidimensional nature of the human soul. In Seth Speaks, Seth introduced the concept of ?probable realities,? in which all possible choices are fully experienced by other portions of the self. Now, in this first volume of The ?Unknown? Reality, Seth explains the dazzling labyrinths of unseen probabilities involved in any decision, and how our awareness of these can enrich the waking life we know. In a fascinating exploration of the cosmic web of our existence, Seth reveals: the purpose of dreams, and how they are often fulfilled unconsciously consciousness units? (CUs), electromagnetic energy units? (EEs), as the building blocks of our entire universe misconceptions about death and the afterlife how different probable realities intersect and influence one another the relationship between physical health and inner reality explorers of the unknown reality ?the dream-art scientist, true mental physicist, complete physician; as dream-art disciplines for incorporating the ?blueprints? for reality into physical reality a series of exercises to help you discover the unknown portions of your greater identity ?The Seth books present an alternate map of reality with a new diagram of the psyche ... useful to all explorers of consciousness.? Deepak Chopra, M.D., author of Ageless Body, Timeless Mind **************************************************** Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 5:40 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:43:34 +0800, walter_chen wrote: > > But it also can not satisfy me if you say pure 4 physical forces alone can > evolve into > such complicated world and thoughtful human beings like you and me. > Maybe technology is not the best way to transcend the human limits. > And I don't understand why Seth-related stuff is nonsense. > If you *really* don't know why channeling is nonsense (or fraud) read: Demon-Haunted World by CARL SAGAN, ANN DRUYAN Carl Sagan muses on the current state of scientific thought, which offers him marvelous opportunities to entertain us with his own childhood experiences, the newspaper morgues, UFO stories, and the assorted flotsam and jetsam of pseudoscience. Along the way he debunks alien abduction, faith-healing, and channeling; refutes the arguments that science destroys spirituality, and provides a "baloney detection kit" for thinking through political, social, religious, and other issues. Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time by Michael Schermer Review BillK _______________________________________________ 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: From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 23:32:34 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:32:34 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Complex Adaptive Systems In-Reply-To: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> Message-ID: Well, in terms of Complex Adaptive System use outside of biology, an excellent application would be Kevin Kelly's book Out Of Control in it's discussion of economics. Rheingold's book Smart Mobs is in a similar vein as applied to group behaviors and communication. Also, complex adaptive systems feature heavily in artificial life, cellular automatons, etc. Now that i think about it, Wolfram's work (A New Kind of Science) has a lot of relevance to the use and explanation of CAS's. Cheers, Nige. On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:51 PM, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: As many of you know, I am back in school getting an MS while I prepare for a PhD program. This week, we have been talking about complex adaptive systems, and their use by futurists in understanding and explaining "accelerating change) (FM-2030 term). I have spent the greater portion of the day goggling CAS and looking for the next steps of this theory and practice, not just in relation to complexity, but also other areas of change. Haven't found anything. While biology is an appropriate and well-seasoned metaphor/analogy to use, could it be overused? Because I do not believe in stasis, I wonder what has evolved out of complexity theory, cybernetics and CAS. Does anyone have ideas? Thanks, Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 15 23:58:18 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:58:18 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cockrobches Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115175626.019afd68@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11399015%255E601,00.html IT behaves like a cockroach. It smells like a cockroach. It is accepted by other cockroaches. But it is not a cockroach. It is a robot and scientists say its invention is a breakthrough in mankind's struggle to control the animal kingdom. The robot, InsBot, developed by researchers in France, Belgium and Switzerland, is capable of infiltrating a group of cockroaches, influencing them and altering their behaviour. Within a decade, its inventors believe, it will be leading the unwanted pests out of dark kitchen corners, to where they can be eliminated. But this is only the first of the applications for a pioneering program that has scientists dreaming out loud. They say they will soon be using robots to stop sheep jumping off cliffs and to encourage chickens to take exercise. The initial task, carried out by the Centre for Research on the Cognition of Animals in Toulouse, France, was to analyse cockroach behaviour. A student spent three years filming the insects and making a computer program that reproduced their movements. The study showed that cockroaches, like ants, are egalitarian creatures, without a group leader. They congregate as a result of a "collective intelligence" that depends upon interaction within the group. "Cockroaches like contact with each other. When they meet, they stay still. They are happy to be with a friend for a few moments. The more friends around them, the longer they stay," said project co-ordinator Jean-Louis Deneubourg. The second stage of the E2 million ($3.3 million) program, called Leurre, was to build a robot capable of detecting cockroaches, of moving like them and of becoming inactive in the dark. InsBot, which is green, the size of a matchbox and equipped with lasers and a light sensor, was developed by Switzerland's Federal Polytechnic School in Lausanne. When it bumps into a cockroach, it does what they do: it stops moving. The more cockroaches that approach it, the longer it remains stationary. The third stage, undertaken by the French Centre for Scientific Research in Brittany, was to isolate the molecules that give cockroaches their smell -- to create a cockroach perfume -- and to spray it on the robot. Early next year Professor Deneubourg hopes to publish findings that demonstrate InsBot's capacity to modify its friends' behaviour. His experiments place cockroaches in a space that contains two shelters -- one dark, one light. Naturally, they gather in the dark shelter, where they feel comfortable. But if the robots go to the light shelter, cockroaches follow -- the desire for companionship proving stronger than the need for dark. "It is plausible and realistic to imagine that in five or 10 years time, people with a cockroach infestation will be buying robots to get rid of them," Professor Deneubourg said. Other applications are also envisaged for the computer programs developed under the Leurre project. Guy Theraulaz, CRCA director of research, said it may be possible to build chicken-like robots that will be used to stimulate poultry. "A lot of chickens don't move at all and die as a result. They need to be encouraged to run around. Robots could do that," he said. Another area of research involves sheep. In mountainous regions when one sheep jumps off a cliff to escape a predator, the others tend to follow -- with the result that the whole flock dies. Dr Theraulaz believes his team will soon be able to identify flock leaders and give them collars equipped with receivers. They will then train these sheep to stand still -- or move -- when the receivers emit a signal such as a sound or an electric shock. The Times From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Nov 16 00:03:01 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 08:03:01 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5F@tpeex05> So human virus will infect computers also? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of nsjacobus at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:13 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Why not? A virus, whether biological or computer-based, is really just a logic machine. Such a virus would be able to cross from a digital logic medium to a biological one. The effects of such a virus would differ depending on whether the virus is currently infecting a biological-system or a computer, but this is very much like biological viruses when they pass across species. On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Well, I think the idea is that eventually > computer/human interfaces > will consist of some sort of data-port that connects > directly into the > human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses > could indeed have a > deleterious effect on humans. Yes, but this is not "computer viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same" even if they can affect the same target. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein _______________________________________________ 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: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 16 00:11:49 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:11:49 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] X-43A Mach 10 Mission Scrubbed For Today Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115181135.01af1a98@pop-server.satx.rr.com> NASA's third X-43A hypersonic research mission has been scrubbed for today due to technical glitches with X-43A instrumentation. When the issues were addressed, not enough time remained in the launch window. Another flight attempt will be made tomorrow. Tomorrow's launch window for the X-43A/Pegasus combination will be from 2-4 p.m., PST. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 00:21:14 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:21:14 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' References: <20041115205725.12852.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008801c4cb72$2f1bfc50$deebfb44@kevin> Whoa! This is too cool. I had my suspicions, but I didn;t expect any research, let alone discoveries about it any time soon. I actually have a post-it note on my computer that reads "Story - Anti-Religion virus? Religion=drugs. Kill religious peeps/change them? Can get rid of religion?" I know this is probably incoherent jabber to you, but I have had a story in the back of my mind about such a weapon, but never narrowed it down to a specific gene. I expected it to be something more pleiotropic and/or hugely polygenic. If it is indeed related to one, or even a few genes, this could really get my story going. WOOHOO! Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 2:57 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' > --- Zero Powers wrote: > > "[World News]: London, Nov 15 : "God genes" are > > responsible for > > creating religious fanatics, says new scientific > > research - much to > > the chagrin of church representatives. The findings > > of Dean Hamer, > > director of the US National Cancer Institute's Gene > > Structure and > > Regulation Unit, also claim that Jesus, the Buddha > > and Prophet > > Mohammed are likely to have carried the gene." > > > > If this is true, the chances of us ever wiping out > > the FTB's would > > appear to be very remote indeed. Sad. > > ...what about the possibility for biological weapons > designed to target everyone with - or everyone without > - this gene? (Fundies might target everyone without > it, accepting that pious members of other religions > might be spared "but they worship God in their own > ways", and accepting that "less faithful" members of > their own religion would also be affected. OTOH, if > the rabidly faithful were incapacitated - not killed, > but clearly not blessed - en masse around their holy > days...) > > To be clear, I'm not actually suggesting the above as > something to do. Just pointing out how (and why) > certain people might abuse this. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 00:25:41 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:25:41 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5F@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5F@tpeex05> Message-ID: <0C09B999-3766-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> Why not? It would obviously depend a lot on the nature of the interface itself. If the interface is sufficiently general so as to be able to dynamically generate code, why not? Pretty cool, if you ask me. Ever read Cory Doctorow's short story "0wnz0red" ? If not, please do: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/28/0wnz0red/. Cheers NJ On Nov 15, 2004, at 7:03 PM, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: So human virus will infect computers also? Thanks. ? Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of nsjacobus at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:13 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Why not? A virus, whether biological or computer-based, is really just a logic machine. Such a virus would be able to cross from a digital logic medium to a? biological one. The effects of such a virus would differ depending on whether the virus is currently infecting a biological-system or a computer, but this is very much like biological viruses when they pass across species. On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Well, I think the idea is that eventually > computer/human interfaces > will consist of some sort of data-port that connects > directly into the > human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses > could indeed have a > deleterious effect on humans. Yes, but this is not "computer viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same" even if they can affect the same target. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- ? A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet,? set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. ? -- Robert Heinlein _______________________________________________ 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 Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 3920 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 16 01:13:00 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:13:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <008801c4cb72$2f1bfc50$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I know this is probably incoherent jabber to you, > but I have had a story in > the back of my mind about such a weapon, but never > narrowed it down to a > specific gene. I expected it to be something more > pleiotropic and/or hugely > polygenic. If it is indeed related to one, or even a > few genes, this could > really get my story going. WOOHOO! If you're seriously going to write a story about it, it'd probably be best to identify a small group of genes rather than a single one, and don't name them except for slang names (like "the god genes"). There are probably multiple genes that could influence one towards being highly - even fanatically - spiritual, for whatever version of "spiritual" happens to be floating around one's community of birth, especially in combination with one another. From max at maxmore.com Tue Nov 16 01:51:10 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:51:10 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5D@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5D@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041115195043.03aa9ed0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 05:32 PM 11/15/2004, you wrote: >I don't particularly believe in channeling in general. >But for Seth in particular, Jane Roberts had written over 30 books. >It's difficult to say it's just nonsense. It's just nonsense. That was *really* easy. Max >Some of her ideas are very interesting. >Maybe this is also the Principle of Complementarity: Some people believe, >some people don't. >For me, I just try to digest and reason what I think is good. >For example, >******************************************* >The Unknown? Reality, Vol. 1 >by Jane Roberts >In this mind-stretching journey into the very frontiers of consciousness, >Seth continues his discussions of the multidimensional nature of the human >soul. In Seth Speaks, Seth introduced the concept of ?probable realities,? >in which all possible choices are fully experienced by other portions of >the self. Now, in this first volume of The ?Unknown? Reality, Seth >explains the dazzling labyrinths of unseen probabilities involved in any >decision, and how our awareness of these can enrich the waking life we >know. In a fascinating exploration of the cosmic web of our existence, >Seth reveals: > >the purpose of dreams, and how they are often fulfilled unconsciously > >consciousness units? (CUs), electromagnetic energy units? (EEs), as the >building blocks of our entire universe > >misconceptions about death and the afterlife >how different probable realities intersect and influence one another >the relationship between physical health and inner reality >explorers of the unknown reality ?the dream-art scientist, true mental >physicist, complete physician; as dream-art disciplines for incorporating >the ?blueprints? for reality into physical reality > >a series of exercises to help you discover the unknown portions of your >greater identity > >?The Seth books present an alternate map of reality with a new diagram of >the psyche ... useful to all explorers of consciousness.? Deepak Chopra, >M.D., author of Ageless Body, Timeless Mind > >**************************************************** > >Thanks. > >Walter. >--------- > >-----Original Message----- >From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] >On Behalf Of BillK >Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 5:40 PM >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense > >On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:43:34 +0800, walter_chen wrote: > > > > But it also can not satisfy me if you say pure 4 physical forces alone can > > evolve into > > such complicated world and thoughtful human beings like you and me. > > Maybe technology is not the best way to transcend the human limits. > > And I don't understand why Seth-related stuff is nonsense. > > > >If you *really* don't know why channeling is nonsense (or fraud) read: > >Demon-Haunted World >by CARL SAGAN, ANN DRUYAN >Carl Sagan muses on the current state of scientific thought, which >offers him marvelous opportunities to entertain us with his own >childhood experiences, the newspaper morgues, UFO stories, and the >assorted flotsam and jetsam of pseudoscience. Along the way he debunks >alien abduction, faith-healing, and channeling; refutes the arguments >that science destroys spirituality, and provides a "baloney detection >kit" for thinking through political, social, religious, and other >issues. > >Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and >Other Confusions of Our Time >by Michael Schermer >Review ><http://www.rathinker.co.kr/skeptic/refuge/weird.html> > > >BillK >_______________________________________________ >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 _______________________________________________________ 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 mark at permanentend.org Tue Nov 16 01:55:42 2004 From: mark at permanentend.org (Mark Walker) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:55:42 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> A point sometimes made (probably not enough) is that trying to stop emerging technologies is no easy task. It is certainly not like trying to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. Nuclear technology leaves a big footprint in terms of industrial infrastructure, genetically altering a human zygote, in contrast, could be done on a much smaller scale. So here's the thought: what is the minimum in terms of financial resources that one would need to spend to set-up a biological for genetically altering human zygotes? How big would the lab have to be? How many people involved? Where would you set-up and hide such a lab? How small could the footprint be? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark Walker Department of Philosophy University Hall 310 McMaster University 1280 Main Street West Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1 Canada From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:06:37 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:06:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5D@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF5D@tpeex05> Message-ID: <2619AF0E-3774-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> You've already fooled yourself. Don't bother to _believe_ anything. Belief (in things other than yourself) is for suckers. -NJ On Nov 15, 2004, at 6:32 PM, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: I don't particularly believe in channeling in general. But for Seth in particular, Jane Roberts had written over 30 books. It's difficult to say it's just nonsense. Some of her ideas are very interesting. Maybe this is also the Principle of Complementarity: Some people believe, some people don't. For me, I just try to digest and reason what I think is good. For example, ******************************************* The Unknown? Reality, Vol. 1 by Jane Roberts In this mind-stretching journey into the very frontiers of consciousness, Seth continues his discussions of the multidimensional nature of the human soul. In Seth Speaks, Seth introduced the concept of ?probable realities,? in which all possible choices are fully experienced by other portions of the self. Now, in this first volume of The ?Unknown? Reality, Seth explains the dazzling labyrinths of unseen probabilities involved in any decision, and how our awareness of these can enrich the waking life we know. In a fascinating exploration of the cosmic web of our existence, Seth reveals: the purpose of dreams, and how they are often fulfilled unconsciously consciousness units? (CUs), electromagnetic energy units? (EEs), as the building blocks of our entire universe misconceptions about death and the afterlife how different probable realities intersect and influence one another the relationship between physical health and inner reality explorers of the unknown reality ?the dream-art scientist, true mental physicist, complete physician; as dream-art disciplines for incorporating the ?blueprints? for reality into physical reality a series of exercises to help you discover the unknown portions of your greater identity ?The Seth books present an alternate map of reality with a new diagram of the psyche ... useful to all explorers of consciousness.? Deepak Chopra, M.D., author of Ageless Body, Timeless Mind **************************************************** Thanks. ? Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 5:40 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Seth and other nonsense On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:43:34 +0800, walter_chen wrote: > > But it also can not satisfy me if you say pure 4 physical forces alone can > evolve into > such complicated world and thoughtful human beings like you and me. > Maybe technology is not the best way to transcend the human limits. > And I don't understand why Seth-related stuff is nonsense. > If you *really* don't know why channeling is nonsense (or fraud) read: Demon-Haunted World by CARL SAGAN, ANN DRUYAN Carl Sagan muses on the current state of scientific thought, which offers him marvelous opportunities to entertain us with his own childhood experiences, the newspaper morgues, UFO stories, and the assorted flotsam and jetsam of pseudoscience. Along the way he debunks alien abduction, faith-healing, and channeling; refutes the arguments that science destroys spirituality, and provides a "baloney detection kit" for thinking through political, social, religious, and other issues. Why People Believe Weird Things:? Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time by Michael Schermer Review BillK _______________________________________________ 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 Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 5565 bytes Desc: not available URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 01:44:29 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:44:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <7a32170504111503163786be29@mail.gmail.com> References: <710b78fc0411091638712ea805@mail.gmail.com> <20041110150402.68583.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <710b78fc0411101706756c7d3@mail.gmail.com> <710b78fc04111017061b0fbbc6@mail.gmail.com> <1100159573.27591.45.camel@alito.homeip.net> <7a32170504111503163786be29@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115173552.029529b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Ubiquitous in Taxifornia. Here in Santa Cruz we have Frenchie's with full lines of just about everything straight, gay or slightly kinky. Large selection of really 'good' stores in San Francisco, catering to ALL tastes. For example, the Leather Store on 6th st. Most of USA permits mail order from just about anywhere. Now and then, some stickyness. 20 years ago I lived in Amherst MA, and my gent magazine envelope was opened, a word with the PO stopped that. So much free stuff on Web I no longer subscribe to anything, looking is not doing, my rather conventional urges are rare these days due to Type II diabetes, Alas, libido is mostly a word now. Definitely on the short list when I come out of the Dewar. At 03:16 AM 11/15/2004, you wrote: >Hmm. I can't speak for any other state, and not that I have any >*personal* experience in the area..., but X-rated stuff is perfectly >legal to sell buy and sell here in California. L.A.'s San Fernando >Valley is the porn capital of the world, and is chock full of "Adult" >video and book stores. Uh, or so I hear... > >On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:52:53 +1000, Alejandro Dubrovsky > wrote: > > > > X-rated material is, of course, illegal to sell in all states so > > everyone has to buy from canberra, and don't try to host it anywhere in > > australia. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 01:56:19 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:56:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: <470a3c520411150351725de71d@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520411150351725de71d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115174525.02913f88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, I disagree. Most cyberpathogens come via Microsoft products due to MS having a seizure this last decade about Internet access. The main door is the email and browser. With Eudora email I get nothing virus wise. I still have to routinely scrape the hull with Search and Destroy, and AdAware. Were I to change browser most of that would go too. And yes have a hardware router/firewall in place. If you change your OS much of this vanishes. Apple, or Linux good examples. Life learned at high cost long ago to vary its DNA, and sex developed mostly in response to pathogens of all kinds, as variance leaves survivors of just about anything. Even Ebola only kills 90%. Sex is costly, but note that each day, 1/3 of prokayrotes in ocean destroyed by viruses. So, OSs will have to evolve to something like sex, and each machine is different. How to avoid the associated software installation nightmare, gaaaah. Like the old "it's not a bug, it's a feature", future virii may be a bit blurry as to their function. Individual brains have lots of variations, so I expect high resistance there. We already have higher level virii, usually called memes, and the word 'fundamentalism' describes a whole phylum of these. At 03:51 AM 11/15/2004, you wrote: >Very interesting article on Silicon.com (found via KurzweilAI): Kevin >Warwick, professor of cybernetics at Reading University, warned the >day will come when computer viruses can infect humans as well as PCs. >"We're looking at software viruses and biological viruses becoming one >and the same," he said. "The security problems [will] be much, much >greater... they will have to become critical in future." >If humans were networked, the implications of being hacked would be >far more serious and attitudes towards hackers would be radically >changed, he added. >"For those of you that want to stay human... you'll be a subspecies in >the future," he said. >Warwick believes that there are advantages for a human being to be >networked to a computer. >Networking a human brain would mean an almost "infinite knowledge >base", he said, adding it would be akin to "upgrading humans... giving >us abilities we don't already have". >http://www.kurzweilai.net/news/frame.html?main=/news/news_single.html?id%3D3958 >http://networks.silicon.com/webwatch/0,39024667,39125887,00.htm ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 02:02:53 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:02:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Seth, 4 forces and urk In-Reply-To: <000f01c4cb31$37a2aae0$94b31b97@administxl09yj> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> <005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> <6.0.3.0.1.20041115011938.02925158@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <000f01c4cb31$37a2aae0$94b31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115175827.02917100@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Like I said, the theory may well say things that in real life cannot be found without changing things totally. I spell that principle "urk" OK, I will invent an acryonym: Un Reliable Knowledge. (or Utterly Ridiculous Krap) If the observable is the state vectors for each molecule, ahem. If not, statistical mechanics is fine. At 08:36 AM 11/15/2004, you wrote: >From: "Hara Ra" > > 3) Even if we ever determine the relation > > between the initial BCs and final BCs, > > there is still the problem of observability. > > Note each cm^3 of air has 10^19 molecules in it, > > and any way of finding out the details will change > > them beyond recovery. Can you spell 'heisenberg'? > >Not sure I get your point. But even when HUP has >a physical meaning (that is not always, see *) >if we really need to know the 'true' state of >a physical system (not just in the trivial case in >which the physical system is already in an eigenstate) >we can measure it. The 'weak measurement' technique >exploits quantum uncertainty. In this case quantum >detectors are so weakly linked to the experiment >that any measurement moves the detector's pointer >by less than the level of uncertainty. There is >a price to pay for these delicate readings, they >are inaccurate. But while this might appear to make >the whole process pointless, when repeated many >times, the average of these weak measurements >approximates to the 'true' value of the observable >to be measured. (But what is the 'urk' in the subject >line?). > >s. > >* In general given a pair of non-commuting observables A and B, >belonging to an Hilbert space H, the quantity delta A delta B >can either vanish, or become arbitrarily close to zero, if at least >one of the two observables (A or B) is bounded. Suppose B is the >bounded observable and suppose A possesses a discrete eigenvalue. >In this case the variance of the observable A becomes null >in correspondence of the proper eigenvector associated to >the discrete eigenvalue and the indeterminacy relation assumes >the form 'delta A delta B = zero' since delta B is always finite >for a bounded B. Not to mention here the 'delta E delta t' relation, >in which 'delta t' is about 'our' clock time and 'delta E' is >about 'its' energy! > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 02:07:58 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:07:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Bush Cabinet Resignations In-Reply-To: <080d01c4cb35$84bef9b0$deebfb44@kevin> References: <080d01c4cb35$84bef9b0$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115180654.029053f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> My cynical POV is: To avoid the loyalty oath trials due in 2007. >Colin Powell is resigning. > >http://www.cnn.com/ > >Does anyone know what is going on here? Four more of his cabinet are >resigning as well. I think that makes 6. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 02:06:12 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:06:12 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <6793F700-3727-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> References: <20041115164243.52678.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> <6793F700-3727-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115180331.029137d8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Dat's why I left the list for many years. Nowadays, my Del finger is olympic world class gold calber >As interesting (and inaccurate) as this point is, I am have to say that when I lurked here in the early 1990s there was more >interesting discussion going on. Is this list now about discussing anything by anyone at all? I am afraid that in order to >raise the quality of list on my machine I am going to have to start doing some heavy filtering of individual posters, which is >really too bad as I am sure that they have something interesting to say some of the time. Or, heh, provide some better posts...... >best, patrick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:30:16 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:30:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POL: Bush Cabinet Resignations In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041115180654.029053f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041116023017.27144.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Geesh was I wrong about Condi. She's staying on-- as Secretary of State, no less. >Colin Powell is resigning. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From fortean1 at mindspring.com Tue Nov 16 02:32:46 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:32:46 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Democracy in Australia [was Re: CBS: "Skeptics...are right to be concerned"] Message-ID: <419966CE.6F467E92@mindspring.com> FWD (SK) Democracy in Australia [was Re: CBS: "Skeptics...are right to be concerned"] On Monday, Nov 15, 2004, at 15:10 Australia/Sydney, Kevin Enns wrote: [snip] Really. I've always thought it kind of silly that we expect to know the results of every election within hours of the polls' closing (if not sooner). Why not wait until *all* the votes have been counted and tabulated before announcing the results to the public? What's the big deal if we have to wait a couple of days to find out who won? It's not even that bad. We know the results of our elections (national, provincial, municipal, you name it) the night of the vote. All you need is a bunch of volunteers to count the damn ballots. Again, the population of your country is ten times than of mine, so either get ten times the number of volunteers, or, at worst, wait ten days. You waited longer than that in 2000, so what's the harm? kWe I suspect Kevin that we should now be happy that the Usanian colonies rebelled against the Empire in the late 1700s and went their own way. They do tend to let the side down a bit. In our recent election, with 150 electorates to be decided, it was clear by about two hours after the polls closed that the government was far enough ahead in enough seats to be returned. By close of counting for the night, there were only six seats still undecided and the size of gov't's majority was the only matter in doubt. As it was well above 6 seats (24 in the final count) the final few seats didn't really matter. It took a couple of weeks to get the final tally as they had to wait for postal and provisional votes to be tallied. And this all happened in a system based on preferential voting, which is far more complex than first past the post. It could happen that just a handfull of seats could decide which side won, but that is historically pretty rare in our elections. The Senate count took much longer, but within a day, the first five senators (out of six) from each state were known with some certainty, although it took up to a month for the final places in all states to become clear. However the government is made in the Reps, so the Senate majority is not critical to the election, just to the ability to pass legislation in the new parliament. As it happened, the gov't won a majority in the Senate, the first time this has happened since 1979. The obvious solution for Usania is to go back to having an hereditary head of state (disposing of the bloody awful Electoral College) and change to a Parliamentary form of government. The most logical answer (and I offer this gratis and with no thought of reward) is to find a young male Kennedy, marry him to a young female Bush - thus taking cognizance of present dynastic realities - let them reign jointly (the Brits had William and Mary for a time, and that worked for them) and then the senior offspring could become King or Queen of Usania, and the line could continue on ad infinitum. No need for them to wield any power, bung on a few fancy uniforms, crank up some instant traditions, rake of squillions from tourists to Washington and Robert is your relative. Say Thank You Oh Sage of the Great South Land. Barry Williams the Skeptic of Oz This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.printcharger.com/emailStripper.htm -- "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 dgc at cox.net Tue Nov 16 02:42:40 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:42:40 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? In-Reply-To: <003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> <003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> Message-ID: <41996920.8090301@cox.net> Mark Walker wrote: >A point sometimes made (probably not enough) is that trying to stop emerging >technologies is no easy task. It is certainly not like trying to stop the >proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. Nuclear technology leaves a big >footprint in terms of industrial infrastructure, > This is a common misconception. Unfortunately, it fails to account for emerging technologies that can be applied to building nuclear weapons. Example: There are new ways to create lasers that are tuned to extremely precise frequencies (google femtosecond comb) and ways to amplify such lasers to moderate power (google EDFA.) A sufficiently precise laser will ionize one isotope preferentially, and ionized molecules are trivially easy to separate from un-ionized molecules. None of this has the "big industrial footprint" of centrifuges or a diffusion plant. This isn't really even an "emerging" technology. The technologies have already emerged and are just waiting for someone to apply them to isotope separation. If you want to worry about emerging technologies, think about applying nanotech to isotope separation. Of course, nanotech would already have altered civilization unimaginably by the time was a problem. From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:49:05 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:49:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush Cabinet Resignations Message-ID: <20041116024905.33078.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Hal, Yes, I was wrong about Condi, she is being kicked upstairs. You Right. Me wrong: such is what counts. Al Brooks, LQP (Low Quality Poster) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 03:11:12 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:11:12 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> <003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> Message-ID: <003201c4cb89$ee0157c0$deebfb44@kevin> One word. Malaysia. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Walker" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 7:55 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? > A point sometimes made (probably not enough) is that trying to stop emerging > technologies is no easy task. It is certainly not like trying to stop the > proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. Nuclear technology leaves a big > footprint in terms of industrial infrastructure, genetically altering a > human zygote, in contrast, could be done on a much smaller scale. So here's > the thought: what is the minimum in terms of financial resources that one > would need to spend to set-up a biological for genetically altering human > zygotes? How big would the lab have to be? How many people involved? Where > would you set-up and hide such a lab? How small could the footprint be? > > Cheers, > > Mark > > Dr. Mark Walker > Department of Philosophy > University Hall 310 > McMaster University > 1280 Main Street West > Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1 > Canada > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 03:34:25 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:34:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008301c4cb8d$2bb53660$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > I know this is probably incoherent jabber to you, > > but I have had a story in > > the back of my mind about such a weapon, but never > > narrowed it down to a > > specific gene... Ja it does kinda. Do refrain from posting material that could be misinterpreted as a desire to slay religious people. A quick reading could be misinterpreted as something other than a sci-fi story you want to write. spike From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 03:39:07 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:39:07 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' References: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006101c4cb8d$d43ea8c0$deebfb44@kevin> > > If you're seriously going to write a story about it, > it'd probably be best to identify a small group of > genes rather than a single one, and don't name them > except for slang names (like "the god genes"). There > are probably multiple genes that could influence one > towards being highly - even fanatically - spiritual, > for whatever version of "spiritual" happens to be > floating around one's community of birth, especially > in combination with one another. That's the route I am considering. I am extremely excited about this. I have to consider the details, but as a work of fiction I can toy with it a bit. I am trying to decide just how it works. My gut tells me that it is a simple matter of addiction to the chemicals in the brain that are produced by strong faith and worship. Research has shown this as well, but then am I dealing with an addiction gene instead of a "spiritual" gene? Or are we dealing with a behavior such as "willingness to kill for religious reasons". Then I run into problems with people who have been spiritual in the past who no longer are. I have to assume that the reverse holds true as well. If this is the case, how many would actually be left if such a virus were released? Let's say it is 6 genes. Is the trait well enough defined to have the virus kill off everyone who has just one of these 6, or do they need all 6? Or is it somewhere in between? Also, are those who have a lolt of emotion tied up in naturalism just as succeptable to the virus since they are simply substituting one "religion" for another? Then there is linkage. What other traits are found within people who have these genes? How does environment affect the behavior of people with these genes? I guess I need to start with finding out what the difference is in the behaviours of people with and without these genes. Gee. Now that I think about it, I feel that I am no further along than I was before. I have a lot of thinking to do on this. I can tell I won't be sleeping much for a while! Kevin Freels From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 03:52:13 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:52:13 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' References: <008301c4cb8d$2bb53660$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <000a01c4cb8f$a8b829e0$deebfb44@kevin> Whoops. Sorry. :-( ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 9:34 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > > I know this is probably incoherent jabber to you, > > > but I have had a story in > > > the back of my mind about such a weapon, but never > > > narrowed it down to a > > > specific gene... > > > Ja it does kinda. Do refrain from posting material > that could be misinterpreted as a desire to slay religious > people. A quick reading could be misinterpreted as > something other than a sci-fi story you want to write. > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 05:20:17 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:20:17 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] cbs news again In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115175626.019afd68@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000001c4cb9b$f8bcd1f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Sometimes I just hafta sit down and laugh. CBS cuts into Crime Scene Investigators to report the death of Yasser Arafat. The next day they *fire* the producer responsible for the decision to cut into the sacred CSI, with what sure looks to me like a major breaking news item. CBS quickly issues an apology, for interrupting CSI. Yet Dan Rather still has a job. And Mary Mapes is still gainfully employed at CBS. And they *still* haven't explained the notorious counterfeit documents. What is the deal with that? Is this a messed up network or what? spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 16 05:57:47 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:57:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <006101c4cb8d$d43ea8c0$deebfb44@kevin> References: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <006101c4cb8d$d43ea8c0$deebfb44@kevin> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115234336.01c31a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:39 PM 11/15/2004 -0600, Kevin Freels wrote: >how many would actually be left if such a virus were released? >Let's say it is 6 genes. Is the trait well enough defined to have the virus >kill off everyone who has just one of these 6, or do they need all 6? 1) Has nobody posting on this dire topic actually bothered to read the reasoned and extremely damaging SciAm review of Dr. Hamer's claims? 2) What Spike said, with bells on. Try to remember what happened when Robert Bradbury posted a series of apparently genocide-encouraging posts not long ago. This is the extropian list, not a hangout for wannabe death squads. 3) If anyone wishes to explore the idea of interfering with genes conducive to spiritual experiences and religious behavior, why not try positing a virus that *silences* the genes, rather than murdered their carriers? This is also pretty damned totalitarian as a notion, but markedly less vile. 4) Then you should go and read the great novel using this very idea, Jamil Nasir's DISTANCE HAZE (Bantam, 2000), where a reductionist scientist of considerable subtlety edits out such genes, in vitro, from his daughter's genome. The fictional outcome to this thought experiment might give even an ardent atheist pause. In the meantime: let's keep the genocidal fits of excitement to a minimum, huh? Damien Broderick [not an extrope, however, and not an office-holder in the organization, so IMHO] From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Nov 16 06:19:01 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:49:01 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <20041115172004.58950.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <8825176D-3729-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> <20041115172004.58950.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc0411152219557c3b6a@mail.gmail.com> Is someone here in Canberra? Either that, or you are blaming me for this ('tweren't me). Emlyn On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:20:03 -0800 (PST), Al Brooks wrote: > > It was the guy in Canberra or somewhere else down under who brought up the > topic. You win again, you're always in the right. Silly me. > > > > > > > Patrick Wilken wrote: > Actually Al I didn't bring up the topic of porn in California. > > best, patrick > > > ________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 16 06:35:48 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:35:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115234336.01c31a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <006101c4cb8d$d43ea8c0$deebfb44@kevin> <6.1.1.1.0.20041115234336.01c31a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <41999FC4.7080807@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > > 2) What Spike said, with bells on. Try to remember what happened when > Robert Bradbury posted a series of apparently genocide-encouraging posts > not long ago. This is the extropian list, not a hangout for wannabe > death squads. > > 3) If anyone wishes to explore the idea of interfering with genes > conducive to spiritual experiences and religious behavior, why not try > positing a virus that *silences* the genes, rather than murdered their > carriers? This is also pretty damned totalitarian as a notion, but > markedly less vile. Spider Robinson would disagree. As the hero of Spider's _Mindkiller_ said, "I have made it a rule never to tamper with anyone's memories if I can accomplish my purpose by merely killing them." I think I'm not with Spider on this, especially if the tampering is reversible, but I can see where Spider is coming from. > 4) Then you should go and read the great novel using this very idea, > Jamil Nasir's DISTANCE HAZE (Bantam, 2000), where a reductionist > scientist of considerable subtlety edits out such genes, in vitro, from > his daughter's genome. The fictional outcome to this thought experiment > might give even an ardent atheist pause. Logical fallacy of generalization from imaginary evidence. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 16 07:01:06 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:01:06 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <41999FC4.7080807@pobox.com> References: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <006101c4cb8d$d43ea8c0$deebfb44@kevin> <6.1.1.1.0.20041115234336.01c31a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <41999FC4.7080807@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116005651.01c733c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:35 AM 11/16/2004 -0500, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: >>4) Then you should go and read the great novel using this very idea, >>Jamil Nasir's DISTANCE HAZE (Bantam, 2000), where a reductionist >>scientist of considerable subtlety edits out such genes, in vitro, from >>his daughter's genome. The fictional outcome to this thought experiment >>might give even an ardent atheist pause. > >Logical fallacy of generalization from imaginary evidence. Do you really wish to see this inappropriate mantra trotted out every time you offer one of your own parables? Don't be a philistine, Eliezer. Those who fail to learn from literature are doomed to repeat Lit 101. Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 09:02:45 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:02:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] No Joy in Mudville In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0411152219557c3b6a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041116090245.82649.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Alright, maybe it was the Phantom of the Oprah. BTW I was thinking of leaving this list for awhile, but Guilio asked me to stay. There sure are some hardcase Randians here; it's never too boring. > Is someone here in Canberra? Either that, or you are blaming me for > this ('tweren't me). __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Nov 16 09:35:42 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:35:42 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF68@tpeex05> Human virus could cause flu, VD, ...etc. Difficult to imagine what will happen to computers if infected? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of nsjacobus at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:26 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Why not? It would obviously depend a lot on the nature of the interface itself. If the interface is sufficiently general so as to be able to dynamically generate code, why not? Pretty cool, if you ask me. Ever read Cory Doctorow's short story "0wnz0red" ? If not, please do: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/28/0wnz0red/. Cheers NJ On Nov 15, 2004, at 7:03 PM, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: So human virus will infect computers also? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of nsjacobus at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:13 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Why not? A virus, whether biological or computer-based, is really just a logic machine. Such a virus would be able to cross from a digital logic medium to a biological one. The effects of such a virus would differ depending on whether the virus is currently infecting a biological-system or a computer, but this is very much like biological viruses when they pass across species. On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Well, I think the idea is that eventually > computer/human interfaces > will consist of some sort of data-port that connects > directly into the > human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses > could indeed have a > deleterious effect on humans. Yes, but this is not "computer viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same" even if they can affect the same target. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein _______________________________________________ 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 Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 13:59:25 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 08:59:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF68@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF68@tpeex05> Message-ID: Certainly. Again, it would depend totally on how the interface works. If the interface has the ability to "interpret" biological data and then to dynamically generate an appropriate code version of the bio-data, then one could imagine that a biological virus could be interpreted/compiled into some bizarre message/code etc on the computer side thus resulting in a virus. -nj On Nov 16, 2004, at 4:35 AM, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: Human virus could cause flu, VD, ...etc. Difficult to imagine what will happen to computers if infected? ? Thanks. ? Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of nsjacobus at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 8:26 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Why not? It would obviously depend a lot on the nature of the interface itself. If the interface is sufficiently general so as to be able to dynamically generate code, why not? Pretty cool, if you ask me. Ever read Cory Doctorow's short story "0wnz0red" ? If not, please do: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/28/0wnz0red/. Cheers NJ On Nov 15, 2004, at 7:03 PM, Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: So human virus will infect computers also? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of nsjacobus at yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:13 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Why not? A virus, whether biological or computer-based, is really just a logic machine. Such a virus would be able to cross from a digital logic medium to a? biological one. The effects of such a virus would differ depending on whether the virus is currently infecting a biological-system or a computer, but this is very much like biological viruses when they pass across species. On Nov 15, 2004, at 5:51 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Well, I think the idea is that eventually > computer/human interfaces > will consist of some sort of data-port that connects > directly into the > human nervous system. If so, then computer viruses > could indeed have a > deleterious effect on humans. Yes, but this is not "computer viruses and biological viruses becoming one and the same" even if they can affect the same target. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- ? A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet,? set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. ? -- Robert Heinlein _______________________________________________ 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 Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 6185 bytes Desc: not available URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 16 18:32:20 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:32:20 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116005651.01c733c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041116011300.47512.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> <006101c4cb8d$d43ea8c0$deebfb44@kevin> <6.1.1.1.0.20041115234336.01c31a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <41999FC4.7080807@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041116005651.01c733c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116121740.019949d0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Just to elaborate on this exchange a little: >[me to Kevin Freels:] > >>>4) Then you should go and read the great novel using this very idea, >>>Jamil Nasir's DISTANCE HAZE (Bantam, 2000), where a reductionist >>>scientist of considerable subtlety edits out such genes, in vitro, from >>>his daughter's genome. The fictional outcome to this thought experiment >>>might give even an ardent atheist pause. [Eliezer Yudkowsky:] >>Logical fallacy of generalization from imaginary evidence. [me to Eliezer:] >Do you really wish to see this inappropriate mantra trotted out every time >you offer one of your own parables? Don't be a philistine, Eliezer. Those >who fail to learn from literature are doomed to repeat Lit 101. Of course I don't object to the point that Eliezer was making, only to its appropriateness under the circumstances. He and I agree that nothing is more futile than someone shouting `Frankenstein!' as if that were evidence of something salient, let alone knock-down, to, e.g., stem cell work or cloning. Mary Shelley made up that novel two hundred years ago, before anything substantial was known about biology; her opinions as manifest in fiction are not useful evidence in today's debate (although they do have lessons to teach us about other matters). Indeed, when Eliezer drew upon FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON some years ago in his analysis of the downside of tinkering with the brain, I was the first to claim that this was an instance of the fallacy of generalization from imaginary evidence. In the present case, Mr. Freels was talking about the fictional story he planned to write based on the genocidal postulate of killing all those with `god gene/s'. My advice was to read the existing excellent fictional work on the subject of tampering with `god genes'. This is neither a generalization or a fallacy. What's more, I'd recommend Nasir's novel to anyone interested in pursuing this thought experiment and others like it, in the same spirit that impelled Dennett and Hofstadter to include fiction alongside the philosophy and cogsci in THE MIND'S I. Damien Broderick From mark at permanentend.org Tue Nov 16 19:16:40 2004 From: mark at permanentend.org (Mark Walker) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:16:40 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com><003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> <41996920.8090301@cox.net> Message-ID: <017301c4cc10$cd618580$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> Dan Clemmensen wrote: > This is a common misconception. Unfortunately, it fails to account for > emerging technologies that can be applied to building nuclear weapons. > Example: There are new ways to create lasers that are tuned to extremely > precise > frequencies (google femtosecond comb) and ways to amplify such lasers to > moderate > power (google EDFA.) A sufficiently precise laser will ionize one > isotope preferentially, > and ionized molecules are trivially easy to separate from un-ionized > molecules. None of this > has the "big industrial footprint" of centrifuges or a diffusion plant. > The laser stuff is interesting, and I agree that it underscores the point that we cannot be confident that we can monitor (emerging) technologies by the size of their industrial footprint. As an analogy, I suggest that trying to monitor genetic engineering of humans is more like trying to detect someone creating a computer virus than it is to trying to monitor traditional nuclear facilities. So like the virus writer, how easy would it be to genetically engineer a human zygote _today_ a go undetected. As I said, I think this might be quite easy, but how easy? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark Walker Department of Philosophy University Hall 310 McMaster University 1280 Main Street West Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1 Canada From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 16 19:35:12 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:35:12 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? In-Reply-To: <017301c4cc10$cd618580$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> <003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> <41996920.8090301@cox.net> <017301c4cc10$cd618580$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116132944.01b0bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:16 PM 11/16/2004 -0500, Mark Walker wrote: >how easy would it >be to genetically engineer a human zygote _today_ and go undetected. On another list Robert Bradbury recently commented: ================= I've known how to (and had a business plan) for ~4 years now to do "whole genome synthesis". It is generally feasible using current technologies and the synthesis of a "new" genome could be done quite cheaply provided the proper investments were made. (There actually exist two companies working in this area but they don't understand things to the extent I do.) Cloning is actually a stop-gap measure. What you actually want to be able to do is synthesize entirely new "perfect" off-the-shelf genomes. That capability would completely bypass the entire cloning debate. If you think *cloning* has the conservatives climbing the walls wait until we get to process of the synthesis of whole genomes (e.g. "life" itself). It implies the effective "dethroning" of God (e.g. "and so God created humans -- big deal -- humans can do it too") -- and we could do it today but they don't understand that yet. And it would be very difficult to stop this. All of this is small scale laboratory technology (of the type I built in the mid-90's with several million dollars of my own money -- it is most likely cheaper today and will get even cheaper in the future). This is not like you need a huge factory full of uranium centrifuges that you can see on a satellite image. Enforcement would be a nightmare. You would effectively have to turn every country that agrees to this into a police state. Plus countries like China, Japan, Korea, etc. which are a little more logical and will think of the value of having the technologies to their economies completely outweighs any "UN Ban" based on "Christian" reasoning. Its CNN -- they get value out of raising the controversial issues. They don't actually apply logic to whether or not said issues are significant or will make any difference in the course of the development of humanity. For that you need to take a step back and listen to someone like Charlie Rose (on PBS) or Thomas Friedman (NY Times) -- people who actually really think to a fair amount of depth about things and whether or not they are relevant. ======================== The approach where a de novo human genome is compiled from spare units is something that nobody seems to discussing, let alone the next step (which Greg Egan placed in a story at least a decade ago) of first deleting the supposed junk introns. This will *really* get the fussbudgets in a rage (and I'm not sure that I mightn't be one of them, given the unforeseeable dangers for any person so created). Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 16 19:38:16 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:38:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041116193816.38915.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Certainly. Again, it would depend totally on how the > interface works. > If the interface has the ability to "interpret" > biological data and > then to dynamically generate an appropriate code > version of the > bio-data, then one could imagine that a biological > virus could be > interpreted/compiled into some bizarre message/code > etc on the computer > side thus resulting in a virus. Pardon me, but that is complete and utter ignorance. A neural interface interprets *ELECTRICAL*, not *BIOLOGICAL*, data: neural impulses and signals on circuits. It translates thoughts, not proteins. True, neurotransmitters do convey part of the neural impulses, and computer signals can be transmitted electronically - but, again, it's pure information. A virus may be primarily "information" encoded in DNA or RNA, but it also contains a mechanism to infect - in computer terms, an executable portion, however minimal in proportion to the information that may be. The nature of this executable portion is inherently different between biological and comptuer viruses - which is why the one can not translate into the other, even if an infected person's brain is linked to a computer. Alternately, think about this: why are Linux machines utterly safe from Windows viruses? Different OSes; a Linux machine has nothing that can even run a Windows virus, unless the Linux machine has set up specific emulation. The difference between either OS and the human body's "OS" is far greater still. In this context, a neural interface is the equivalent of an IM client: it can transmit and receive information, but that by itself does not inherently expose one OS to viruses that can run on the other, even if said viruses get transmitted over the connection. To make them compatible would require either radically redesigning the human body to be like the computers we have invented, or vice versa - neither of which is likely to happen before we have the ability to upload minds onto computers. (An uploaded mind running on a computer is a different story, but that's not what we're talking about here.) Now, if there was an "emulator" - some device to auto-construct biological things based on input commands - and this was in any way controllable through the neural interface...one could possibly do that, but that's not the same as the neural interface itself nor is it an inevitable, or even likely, consequence, because that's just asking for trouble. It'd be kind of like making military control systems directly accessible, and thus theoretically hackable, from the public Internet. Note that the US military explicitly forbids doing that with its own systems for this reason. Hollywood may accept baseless technobabble as reality, but this list tries to focus on actual science, which really does define some things as impossible no matter how plot-convenient they might be. (Which makes it more interesting than most Hollywood productions, IMO, since one can not just wave one's hands to make all problems go away.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 16 21:31:49 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:31:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Religious fanatic? Blame it on 'god gene' In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041115234336.01c31a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041116213149.65542.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > 3) If anyone wishes to explore the idea of > interfering with genes conducive > to spiritual experiences and religious behavior, why > not try positing a > virus that *silences* the genes, rather than > murdered their carriers? This > is also pretty damned totalitarian as a notion, but > markedly less vile. Unfortunately, the chain of causation makes it seem likely that the direct effects of the gene would occur in childhood. Thus, switching off the gene itself would seem to do little good, except perhaps to disable it in future generations...which leaves time for the affected to seek to have the change undone. You are correct, IMO, to condemn the mass-murder part of it - which is why thoughts are being directed to how those who hold the lives of people like us in contempt might use it. (And there are a lot of theists who would gladly exterminate all scientists were it in their power to do so.) 'Twould seem in our best interests to develop a defense against this, but one usually needs to be aware of the threat before one can defend against it. From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 23:27:48 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:27:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041116232748.78220.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> So far having used 130 pounds of xenon 'fuel' the European Union's Smart-1 has arrived in lunar orbit. The craft has gotten the equivalent of 5 million miles to the gallon, better than expected. Detroit, are you paying attention? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From benboc at lineone.net Tue Nov 16 23:36:20 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:36:20 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: <200411160211.iAG2BQ027997@tick.javien.com> References: <200411160211.iAG2BQ027997@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <419A8EF4.2040806@lineone.net> Adrian Tymes wrote: "Umm...no. Biological viruses require a physical presence to infect; software viruses do not, being pure information." Whoa!! There is no such thing as 'pure information'. Unless you believe in souls, etc. Information is always embodied in some way. I assume you meant to make a distinction between information encoded on electrons and information encoded on molecules? I certainly hope so, anyway. ben From Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Nov 17 00:14:54 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:14:54 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF6C@tpeex05> At least it's fun to imagine that a computer got a cold (then maybe it doesn't need thermal solution sometimes because it feels too cold?) or got a VD (how to cure a VD on a computer?), or ... Thanks. Walter. -------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of ben Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 7:36 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? Adrian Tymes wrote: "Umm...no. Biological viruses require a physical presence to infect; software viruses do not, being pure information." Whoa!! There is no such thing as 'pure information'. Unless you believe in souls, etc. Information is always embodied in some way. I assume you meant to make a distinction between information encoded on electrons and information encoded on molecules? I certainly hope so, anyway. ben _______________________________________________ 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: From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 00:15:30 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:15:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infect humans? In-Reply-To: <419A8EF4.2040806@lineone.net> Message-ID: <20041117001530.9379.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- ben wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > "Umm...no. Biological viruses require a physical > presence to infect; software viruses do not, being > pure information." > > Whoa!! > > There is no such thing as 'pure information'. > > Unless you believe in souls, etc. > > Information is always embodied in some way. > > I assume you meant to make a distinction between > information encoded on > electrons and information encoded on molecules? > > I certainly hope so, anyway. Kind of, but moreso since this distinction is so critical to why biological and computer viruses are fundamentally different. How about this? Computer viruses can be transmitted by the usual ways we transmit information, and are not affected by having their encoding transformed from electrons to photons to sound waves to any other information transmission method a computer can understand, thus the actual "virus" itself can be seen as purely the informational content of these encodings rather than something associated with one particular physical encoding. Thus, a computer virus can be called "pure information" even though it will always have a physical encoding (and would not exist without one). Similarly, one can speak of "minds" or "souls" as things that exists, even though they would not without the physical brains they run on: the patterns themselves, and their informational content, are the "things" being discussed. Biological viruses, OTOH, are strictly bound to their particular physical method of expression - usually DNA or RNA with a protein coat. While they may contain information, they also contain physical mechanisms to force this information into a cell or other replicator. It is true that it does not matter much which, say, carbon atom goes in position N, so long as there is a carbon atom there, but this is far different from not caring whether one is expressed as a big-endian or little-endian stream (which completely inverts the order of each set of 8 bits). Known biological viruses do not survive translation to significantly different physical mediums - i.e., a picture of a biological virus, by itself, does not usually cause transmission of the virus to those who view it, whereas there have been reported instances of computer viruses generating pictures files (which themselves got physically expressed in a number of ways) that contained code that would infect certain types of viewers. (These viewers had, of course, some rather basic coding flaws, even moreso than one would expect of Microsoft products. Google for "JPEG virus" if you want details; there have been multiple versions of it, some closer to trojans than viruses.) Does this clarify the sense in which I meant "pure information"? From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 00:33:05 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:33:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF6C@tpeex05> Message-ID: <20041117003305.36988.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > At least it's fun to imagine that a computer got a > cold (then maybe it > doesn't need thermal solution sometimes > because it feels too cold?) > or got a VD (how to cure a VD on a computer?), or > ... So long as one is clear that one is imagining, perhaps (although that can violate the suspension of disbelief that is one of the keys to getting an audience to enjoy a work of fiction). However, Mr. Warwick and his research are reality. My apologies if I have seemed to overreact on this thread, but I work in the computer industry, and this nature of misunderstanding (anthropomorphizing computers) has been one of my largest frustrations (and many others in this field can relay the same story about their own work). Even if it is also an occasional good source of insight and humor - e.g., grokking the concept of genetic algorithms through discussions of Software EXchange. ;) From Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Nov 17 00:57:28 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:57:28 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF6E@tpeex05> Certainly you didn't overreact. It's very good to see some detailed explanation from experts. But sometimes imagination can lead to some important creation also. (Now I am thinking how to let the PC, esp. a notebook, to get a cold to solve the more and more difficult thermal problem.) Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 8:33 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > At least it's fun to imagine that a computer got a > cold (then maybe it > doesn't need thermal solution sometimes > because it feels too cold?) > or got a VD (how to cure a VD on a computer?), or > ... So long as one is clear that one is imagining, perhaps (although that can violate the suspension of disbelief that is one of the keys to getting an audience to enjoy a work of fiction). However, Mr. Warwick and his research are reality. My apologies if I have seemed to overreact on this thread, but I work in the computer industry, and this nature of misunderstanding (anthropomorphizing computers) has been one of my largest frustrations (and many others in this field can relay the same story about their own work). Even if it is also an occasional good source of insight and humor - e.g., grokking the concept of genetic algorithms through discussions of Software EXchange. ;) _______________________________________________ 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: From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 01:11:53 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:11:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF6E@tpeex05> Message-ID: <20041117011153.68255.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > Certainly you didn't overreact. > It's very good to see some detailed explanation from > experts. > But sometimes imagination can lead to some important > creation also. > (Now I am thinking how to let the PC, esp. a > notebook, to get a cold to > solve the more > and more difficult thermal problem.) Biological metaphor: exercise. If your computer is too cold, run it a lot and most computers will warm up pretty quickly - especially if they're not designed with good heat sinks. The converse is a good example of where biological metaphors break down. In practice, computers often run too hot - and they don't sweat. (Water + electricity = bad, although there have been attempts at water-cooled systems.) But they do take advantage of passive and active heat dissapation mechanisms, some of which do not have close analogs in nature. (E.g., certain metals and ceramics are excellent heat conductors, so use them to ship heat from the computer's core to the air outside. Few biological creatures have natural metal or ceramic anything, not even heat sinks like this.) Fans to cool off are seen in nature and in computers, but computer fans tend to be made out of multiple parts in ways that are difficult to grow in a single creature, but easy for us to manufacture. From Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Nov 17 01:36:40 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:36:40 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF6F@tpeex05> Except the heat dissipation by some thermal module, the computer can also reduce the heat by reducing the CPU volt. (such as Intel SpeedStep) or CPU throttling (reducing the effective CPU freq.). Of course, there will be some performance down in doing this. To let a notebook get a cold, maybe there will be some side effects also (like you feel sick when you get a cold). Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 9:12 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecthumans? --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > Certainly you didn't overreact. > It's very good to see some detailed explanation from > experts. > But sometimes imagination can lead to some important > creation also. > (Now I am thinking how to let the PC, esp. a > notebook, to get a cold to > solve the more > and more difficult thermal problem.) Biological metaphor: exercise. If your computer is too cold, run it a lot and most computers will warm up pretty quickly - especially if they're not designed with good heat sinks. The converse is a good example of where biological metaphors break down. In practice, computers often run too hot - and they don't sweat. (Water + electricity = bad, although there have been attempts at water-cooled systems.) But they do take advantage of passive and active heat dissapation mechanisms, some of which do not have close analogs in nature. (E.g., certain metals and ceramics are excellent heat conductors, so use them to ship heat from the computer's core to the air outside. Few biological creatures have natural metal or ceramic anything, not even heat sinks like this.) Fans to cool off are seen in nature and in computers, but computer fans tend to be made out of multiple parts in ways that are difficult to grow in a single creature, but easy for us to manufacture. _______________________________________________ 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: From fortean1 at mindspring.com Wed Nov 17 02:41:30 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:41:30 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Typical Brits Message-ID: <419ABA5A.D1BFAE88@mindspring.com> http://www.guardian.co.uk/britain/article/0,2763,1352259,00.html A typical Briton: uptight but witty Poll draws out overseas views of the national character, with some unexpected compliments and inevitable references to dental hygiene Lee Glendinning Tuesday November 16, 2004 The Guardian Would like to meet: someone with a clever wit, a "bulldog" spirit, and high regard for tradition. A sense of style, and clean teeth not essential. Well, it shouldn't be hard. As far as many foreigners are concerned, the aforementioned list contains most of the "qualities" possessed by the typical Briton. Throw in a huge amount of reserve and this apparently encompasses the quintessential British character. In an attempt to understand the perception abroad of Brits, The Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufacturers and Commerce (RSA) published research yesterday containing a list of British characteristics. The research, undertaken by poll company Mori, included in-depth interviews with groups in Italy, America and India, as well as local discussions in Norfolk. The opinions of a number of foreign correspondents working in London were also included in the analysis. Across the board, wit and cleverness were considered a very British trait. "Cleverness makes me think of British humour," one American said. "Clever is a word and concept that I think is particular to Britain." However, the Italians thought slightly differently, with some describing the British humour as cold: "Their sense of humour ... it's like laughing with tight teeth," said one. During discussion groups, the report says, the same words came up again and again. Reserved. Uptight. Snobbishness. "They treat you with cold detachment," one Italian offered up, "but they are not impolite." An American correspondent said: "It is especially noticeable among [British] men, both physical - no hugging, but also a reluctance to express emotion in normal discourse ... they are more formal and slower to make friends." Although some respondents found a contradiction between the British "lager lout" and the high level of reserve, one interviewee from Chicago explained it away with: "They need relief from all that formalness." As far as divisions within the UK, some broad generalisations were offered. Scotland and Ireland were seen as more rural with sheep and rolling hills whereas England was deemed more industrial. The Irish were seen to drink more and have a more devout faith, and the Scots were seen as more down-to-earth. As for Wales, there was some mention made of it being left off the EU map, but otherwise, some knew it was green, and there was the odd mention made of Catherine Zeta Jones growing up there. Paul Crake, of the RSA, was surprised at how kind the other nations were. "I would have expected more dirt being dished by foreign groups. But we had to really push them to say anything at all negative," he said. "The one perception the Americans have about us, is of really bad teeth, which I think is due to The Simpsons, and they also think that the level of reserve really does touch on the British being a little snooty, but that's as bad as it got. "We beat ourselves up over what we've offered to the rest of the world, but it seems they are quite nice to us in return." Perhaps. But the Italians certainly didn't hold back on their views in matters of style. They said the English have no clue. "Elegance is not typically English. Apart from the Lords, they're a bit slovenly. They don't dress with care," said an Italian interviewee. Britons were not viewed as weak or devious, but rather as individualistic and traditional. "Britons...have learned how to make their traditions comfortable to live in ... the weight of manners here is very great, the weight of social conformity at times here strikes me as very severe," one American said. Britons are deemed tolerant and multicultural, but a Norfolk discussion group based in King's Lynn differed in their attitudes to minority groups. Chinese immigrants were seen as hard-working, but Portuguese, Russian and eastern European groups were deemed "spongers", exploiting Britain's welfare state. When groups were asked about the number of British achievers throughout history, the obligatory references were made to Shakespeare, Charles Dickens and the Industrial Revolution. When pushed to describe British achievements in the last 10 years however, the task proved more difficult. It may have been the foreign correspondent from India who summed it up best. "I can't think of anything very much other than the fact its got a very vibrant press ... even though the Americans may run the world, it is the British who write about it." Politeness, pride ... and bad teeth Chicago British politeness and pride is a positive attribute. America's impression of Britain is of a nation rooted in romantic visions of the Victorian era but they believe Brits need relief from their formalness Britons are better dressed than Americans but they've got bad teeth and are conceited. Mumbai The British are "haughty" and known for their snobbishness. Those questioned considered themselves humble, whereas the British are not. They are seen as too closely aligned to the US While the British are open and tolerant of homosexuality, they are the fathers of racism. Milan UK is "isolationist" and tied to out-dated traditions and customs. It is seen as too closely aligned to the US The British sense of humour is cold and people treat you with detachment but are not impolite. They are proud and full of themselves and are exaggeratedly tied to the past. -- "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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 02:51:00 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:51:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Typical Brits In-Reply-To: <419ABA5A.D1BFAE88@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041117025100.45175.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> And the British make great pop music. > A typical Briton: uptight but witty __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From fortean1 at mindspring.com Wed Nov 17 02:55:57 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:55:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Principles: absolute, or guiding? Message-ID: <419ABDBD.2E2AF01E@mindspring.com> Steven Goodridge wrote an excellent commentary upon guiding principles and such. I recommend that readers read it again. However, there is a bit more to add. Traffic engineering and highway traffic operation is not a "hard science" such as physics and chemistry are. It is a combination of some features of hard science (the physics of acceleration, braking, turning, hill climbing and hill descending, etc.) and physiological science (reaction time, spread of mental concentration, vision, etc.) and social science (laws, which side of the road, following behavior, class distinctions, etc.). Therefore, while Newton's Laws of Motion strictly apply to the strictly physics aspects, there cannot be a traffic operating law that applies to all other aspects of traffic operation with the same degree of rigor. There are bound to be blurred edges, marginal conditions in which the degree of conformity is less or even non-existent. Therefore, to pretend that such a law has been created is absolutely false; such cannot be created. Much of the discussion herein, and elsewhere, also. about bicycle transportation, is based on the false and impossible assumption that bicycle transportation is based on rigorous logical principles. This type of discussion is that appropriate to classical philosophical argument, or to the discussions of social activities that use similar methods, such as religion and communism. That is, starting from verbal assumptions to produce a logically consistent description of the world. "I think, therefore I am," "God created mankind in His image," etc., etc. This form of deductive reasoning from assumptions that cannot be more than approximations to reality produces grotesque results, as modern philosophers have generally accepted. Producing any accurate description of the world requires repeated testing against the real world, with either verification or modification as the result. The real world is complex and, in certain areas, apparently illogical, because we do not yet know the more accurate description that would explain the apparent illogicality. The further we get from the "hard" sciences, the greater the deviation from the simple and accurate explanations of the hard sciences. (And don't bring in quantum mechanics; that's a different kettle of fish that is both far too complex and largely irrelevant to this discussion.) Those who are trying to turn advocacy of bicycle transportation into a philosophical system are doing so because they have particular assumptions upon which they want to base its structure, as if by doing so they could change the structure into one that supports their assumptions. That's all nonsense. Transportation engineering is not a logical philosophical system, but an empirical description of the real world, as near as we can produce such. It must be tested against reality at each step. While it helps to infer general principles that generally apply, such as the vehicular cycling principle, none of them can be assumed to be a complete description of the world, and even less cannot be supposed to command and direct the real world. In short, just stop trying to argue about bicycle transportation as if it were a classical philosophical system. Those who do so disclose their intent to insist on incorporating their peculiar and probably inaccurate assumptions into its structure. While their intent is to have the system reflect what they consider to be the basic descriptions of reality, the result of the errors that are built into such an approach is inevitably to push the system into a grotesque cartoon of reality. Unfortunately, as we know from the editorial pages, grotesque cartoons have psychological appeal. Learning and applying the truths, piece by piece, has much less appeal than the supposed insight of cartoons, but it is the only accurate way. John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer -- "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 eliasen at mindspring.com Wed Nov 17 03:03:17 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:03:17 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency In-Reply-To: <20041116232748.78220.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041116232748.78220.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <419ABF75.5050302@mindspring.com> Al Brooks wrote: > So far having used 130 pounds of xenon 'fuel' the > European Union's Smart-1 has arrived in lunar orbit. > The craft has gotten the equivalent of 5 million miles > to the gallon, better than expected. I'm curious about this odd "miles per gallon" figure. How was it derived? What densities are assumed for the xenon? Anyway, anyone getting less than infinite miles per gallon in space is squandering fuel. :) But still, specific impulse of 1500 s is great. > Detroit, are you paying attention? Considering that the thruster has a thrust of a whopping 70 millinewtons, (that's the force exerted by about 7 U.S. dollar bills, or about 7 raisins, sitting in earth's gravity) a 2000-lb car could go from 0 to 60 mph in ... 4 days? If you eliminate all sources of friction, that is. That's probably the guy who was in front of me in traffic tonight. ----- Appendix: Calculations in Frink ( http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/ ) 70 mN / (2000 lb) / (60 mph) -> days 70 mN -> gravity grams -- 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 17 03:26:28 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:26:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117025100.45175.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <419ABA5A.D1BFAE88@mindspring.com> <20041117025100.45175.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116212057.01a34640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:51 PM 11/16/2004 -0800, someone blithered: >And the British make great pop music. > > > A typical Briton: uptight but witty someone else blathered: >To let a notebook get a cold, maybe there will be some side effects also >(like you feel sick when you get a cold). What has this drivel got to do with the extropy list? It'd be tedious in a noisy pub but at least there you could get drunk. Here it's simply inane. Yeah, I've got a delete button, and a *Plonk* file, but how about a bit of elementary list discipline and forethought before rabbiting on like boors and halfwits? Damien Broderick [fed up] From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 03:54:33 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:54:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116212057.01a34640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041117035433.8845.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Is there a poker up your arse, Damien? Lighten up. > Damien Broderick thespike at satx.rr.com wrote: > What has this drivel got to do with the extropy > list? It'd be tedious in a > noisy pub but at least there you could get drunk. > Here it's simply inane. > Yeah, I've got a delete button, and a *Plonk* file, > but how about a bit of > elementary list discipline and forethought before > rabbiting on like boors > and halfwits? > Damien Broderick > [fed up] __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 03:52:08 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:52:08 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hazard a guess? In-Reply-To: <017301c4cc10$cd618580$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> References: <291220-2200411115225112614@M2W071.mail2web.com> <003801c4cb7f$62e66d10$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> <41996920.8090301@cox.net> <017301c4cc10$cd618580$9a00a8c0@markcomputer> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116194427.0297ee20@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Years ago worked as lab tech on free electron laser at Stanford, intent U235 isotope separation. Main problem is most laseers have very low efficiency. The FEL got around that by using the superconducting linear accelerator. If you forgot the refrigeration costs, 75% Pg&E to E beam power. Not exactly tabletop device. Now, here's a nano fantasy: Make oscillating arm with hole that attracts uranium. Put forest of arms on a rotating wheel. Note osc frequency. As wheel turns, change hole to repel Uranium, or hit with a few properly tuned photons. Voila, tabletop efficient device for separation. Maybe use ionized UFl6... > Example: There are new ways to create lasers that are tuned to extremely > > precise > > frequencies (google femtosecond comb) and ways to amplify such lasers to > > moderate > > power (google EDFA.) A sufficiently precise laser will ionize one > > isotope preferentially, > > and ionized molecules are trivially easy to separate from un-ionized > > molecules. None of this > > has the "big industrial footprint" of centrifuges or a diffusion plant. > > > >The laser stuff is interesting, and I agree that it underscores the point >that we cannot be confident that we can monitor (emerging) technologies by >the size of their industrial footprint. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 04:03:06 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:03:06 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116212057.01a34640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <419ABA5A.D1BFAE88@mindspring.com> <20041117025100.45175.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041116212057.01a34640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116195701.0296bc88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> You can also filter out the posters. The one who blathers has a 99% blather rate on his posts, good for filtering. The other one has self identified himself as a LQP explicitly.... Said posters (you know who you are) might take note, too.... >At 06:51 PM 11/16/2004 -0800, someone blithered: > >>And the British make great pop music. >> >> > A typical Briton: uptight but witty > >someone else blathered: > >>To let a notebook get a cold, maybe there will be some side effects also >>(like you feel sick when you get a cold). > >What has this drivel got to do with the extropy list? It'd be tedious in a >noisy pub but at least there you could get drunk. Here it's simply inane. >Yeah, I've got a delete button, and a *Plonk* file, but how about a bit of >elementary list discipline and forethought before rabbiting on like boors >and halfwits? > >Damien Broderick >[fed up] ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 04:05:11 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:05:11 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117035433.8845.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041116212057.01a34640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041117035433.8845.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116200419.02936d48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.... >Is there a poker up your arse, Damien? Lighten up. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 04:05:53 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:05:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency In-Reply-To: <419ABF75.5050302@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041117040553.82695.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alan Eliasen wrote: Yes, I was being hard on Detroit, they have to keep their prices affordable while paying high salaries to their workers. Anyhow, though heavy vehicles are fuel gulpers they do offer more protection in accidents. I got sideswiped by an 18 wheeler once while driving a Lincoln; could have been killed had I been driving a lighter vehicle. >Considering that the thruster has a thrust of a > whopping 70 millinewtons, > (that's the force exerted by about 7 U.S. dollar > bills, or about 7 raisins, > sitting in earth's gravity) a 2000-lb car could go > from 0 to 60 mph in ... 4 > days? If you eliminate all sources of friction, > that is. That's probably the > guy who was in front of me in traffic tonight. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 04:10:10 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:10:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116200419.02936d48@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041117041010.14152.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Yes I am a fool, and it bugs me that Damien wont admit he's one as well. It doesn't appear to irk him when Randians write the most narrow minded "crap". Crap means feces, it is a childish word. >Hara Ra Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 17 04:24:32 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:24:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise Message-ID: <20041117042432.53C7A57E2A@finney.org> Hara Ra writes: > You can also filter out the posters. The one who blathers has a 99% blather > rate on his posts, good for filtering. > The other one has self identified himself as a LQP explicitly.... I have to take Damien's side on this one. A mailing list is a commons, and its quality needs to be protected, just like a community park. It's not enough for individuals to filter out people they don't like. Most people don't want to take the time to set up filters; they prefer to see the same list that everyone else sees. This exposes them to everything, good and bad. Bad posters often drive out good, in my experience. An occasional reminder to try to stay on topic and put some thought into postings is helpful, and I appreciate it. Hal From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 17 04:26:17 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:26:17 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] coool! the scramjet works In-Reply-To: <41999FC4.7080807@pobox.com> Message-ID: <005501c4cc5d$95426dc0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/11/16/scramjet.delay/index.html From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 04:47:58 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:47:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117042432.53C7A57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041117044758.87929.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> I stay on this list because Guilio Prisco asked me to. He wrote me to say everyone at extropy-chat would leave if they followed their instincts. Personally, I hated reading the Randian posts. Talk about uptight, Rand was the archetype. Anyway if enough of you don't want me here, don't be shy in writing just so. I'll go right away; my bags are packed and in the driveway. >Hal Finney wrote: > Hara Ra writes: > > You can also filter out the posters. The one who > blathers has a 99% blather > > rate on his posts, good for filtering. > > The other one has self identified himself as a LQP > explicitly.... > > I have to take Damien's side on this one. A mailing > list is a commons, > and its quality needs to be protected, just like a > community park. > It's not enough for individuals to filter out people > they don't like. > Most people don't want to take the time to set up > filters; they prefer > to see the same list that everyone else sees. This > exposes them to > everything, good and bad. > > Bad posters often drive out good, in my experience. > An occasional > reminder to try to stay on topic and put some > thought into postings > is helpful, and I appreciate it. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 17 05:09:19 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:09:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117044758.87929.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006001c4cc63$9874da40$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Al Brooks > > ... Personally, I > hated reading the Randian posts. Talk about uptight, > Rand was the archetype... We have no problem with you, Al, but many of us here are big fans of Rand. She was one of very few authors who advocate unapologetic minarchism and rugged self sufficiency. spike From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 17 05:13:58 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:13:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117041010.14152.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117041010.14152.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7C3B4F44-3857-11D9-9CAA-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 16, 2004, at 8:10 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > Yes I am a fool, and it bugs me that Damien wont admit > he's one as well. This may be, but in the great sea of fools that is humanity, Damien has a long and distinguished history of being a lesser fool than most of us. If we all must be fools, then we should aspire to be fools like him. I second Damien's annoyance with the crescendo of inane banter that is currently threatening to inundate the list. Posting single lines of semantically null content does nothing to maintain the pretense of intelligent discussion. If you *must* reply in such a fashion, at least try to do it off-list to minimize replication. > It doesn't appear to irk him when > Randians write the most narrow minded "crap". Crap > means feces, it is a childish word. Funny that you should bring up childishness. j. andrew rogers From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 05:23:28 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:23:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <20041116193816.38915.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041116193816.38915.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: What I was suggesting was a completely general neuro-biological interface that is capable of interacting in both directions. I'm not suggesting simply an interface that is used to control a PC with your thoughts (we can already do that). I'm taking about a general interface that allows the body to interact with an external computing system. Such as system would be able to convert digital signals into proteins, endorphins, nerotransmitters, etc and vice versa. This would enable a far more sophisticated interaction between the machine and biological. One would be able to write code on the computer to generate specific and complex biological reactions. Given such a scenario, a suitably constructed computer virus could have as it's payload an egg that causes the neuro-biological interface to generate a pathological state on the biological side of the interface resulting in a biological virus being instantiated. What I'm getting at here is not simply a way to hook up a brain/mind to a computer. I'm talking about interfacing the biological system to the digital system. The analogy of a virus not being able to run on windows and linux is not really apt here. A more accurate analogy would be a virus that is translated/compiled to run on a new operating system/architecture. Imagine a computer virus that contains it's own cross-compiler and it's own source code....that's a much better analogy to what I'm suggesting. -NJ On Nov 16, 2004, at 2:38 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Certainly. Again, it would depend totally on how the > interface works. > If the interface has the ability to "interpret" > biological data and > then to dynamically generate an appropriate code > version of the > bio-data, then one could imagine that a biological > virus could be > interpreted/compiled into some bizarre message/code > etc on the computer > side thus resulting in a virus. Pardon me, but that is complete and utter ignorance. A neural interface interprets *ELECTRICAL*, not *BIOLOGICAL*, data: neural impulses and signals on circuits. It translates thoughts, not proteins. True, neurotransmitters do convey part of the neural impulses, and computer signals can be transmitted electronically - but, again, it's pure information. A virus may be primarily "information" encoded in DNA or RNA, but it also contains a mechanism to infect - in computer terms, an executable portion, however minimal in proportion to the information that may be. The nature of this executable portion is inherently different between biological and comptuer viruses - which is why the one can not translate into the other, even if an infected person's brain is linked to a computer. Alternately, think about this: why are Linux machines utterly safe from Windows viruses? Different OSes; a Linux machine has nothing that can even run a Windows virus, unless the Linux machine has set up specific emulation. The difference between either OS and the human body's "OS" is far greater still. In this context, a neural interface is the equivalent of an IM client: it can transmit and receive information, but that by itself does not inherently expose one OS to viruses that can run on the other, even if said viruses get transmitted over the connection. To make them compatible would require either radically redesigning the human body to be like the computers we have invented, or vice versa - neither of which is likely to happen before we have the ability to upload minds onto computers. (An uploaded mind running on a computer is a different story, but that's not what we're talking about here.) Now, if there was an "emulator" - some device to auto-construct biological things based on input commands - and this was in any way controllable through the neural interface...one could possibly do that, but that's not the same as the neural interface itself nor is it an inevitable, or even likely, consequence, because that's just asking for trouble. It'd be kind of like making military control systems directly accessible, and thus theoretically hackable, from the public Internet. Note that the US military explicitly forbids doing that with its own systems for this reason. Hollywood may accept baseless technobabble as reality, but this list tries to focus on actual science, which really does define some things as impossible no matter how plot-convenient they might be. (Which makes it more interesting than most Hollywood productions, IMO, since one can not just wave one's hands to make all problems go away.) _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 05:23:41 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:23:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <7C3B4F44-3857-11D9-9CAA-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <20041117052341.43161.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Okay then, I know from where I speak. As I wrote in the last message: if you & others want me to go, please say so and I'll tally up the number who want me to leave; again, I remain here primarily because Giulio asked me to stay on this list. > Funny that you should bring up childishness. > j. andrew rogers __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 05:33:11 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:33:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <006001c4cc63$9874da40$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041117053312.93042.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> 'We' have no problem with you, Al?: I was just now accused of writing childish posts. Rand upheld the standards of productivity & individuality. Self sufficiency is a 19th century western frontier myth. The only people who are self sufficient in North America today are, say, something like sheep herders in the wilderness. > We have no problem with you, Al, but many of > us here are big fans of Rand. She was one of > very few authors who advocate unapologetic > minarchism and rugged self sufficiency. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Wed Nov 17 06:02:09 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:02:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117052341.43161.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117052341.43161.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <37B18586-385E-11D9-9CAA-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 16, 2004, at 9:23 PM, Al Brooks wrote: > As I wrote in the last message: if you & others want > me to go, please say so and I'll tally up the number > who want me to leave; again, I remain here primarily > because Giulio asked me to stay on this list. While this list may not have much in the way of official rules, it did at one time have community standards. All that is being asked is that everyone who posts make some attempt to abide by those standards. Let me sum them up for you: 1.) Make your posts substantive. If you can make your point in one line, it probably didn't need to be made. Captains of the obvious are not really necessary either. Be prepared to explain your reasoning in depth, preferably putting your in-depth reasoning in the post even. 2.) Make your posts rational. Writing posts that assume the supernatural, inconsistent mathematics, violations of thermodynamics, or any other axioms that have obvious conflicts with reality better be prefaced by some astoundingly good justification for those assumptions. Know all the basic Fallacies of Reasoning, and learn to instinctively identify them in your thinking. Discussing "what ifs" is fun, but it is not terribly constructive if the "what ifs" are outside the scope of plausible reality. We have a signal-to-noise ratio to maintain here. 3.) Do not become emotionally attached to your argument; there is no insult in being wrong. If you have to use your personal feelings to make a point, you've pretty much lost the argument. Enough said. The negative reaction you may be seeing results from the perception that you are making no attempt to abide by the standards of the community. This community is tolerant and forgiving, but it may require some genuine effort on your part to be a functional part of the community. j. andrew rogers From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 06:09:52 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:09:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > What I was suggesting was a completely general > neuro-biological > interface that is capable of interacting in both > directions. "Neuro-biological" technically refers to the existing interface we already have, with no electronic (or similar) components. (Sorry, but there are rules for combining terms like that, including that you list everything you're referring to. Even if there weren't, "neurobiology" is a well established scientific field, and thus has prior claim to that term.) > I'm not > suggesting simply an interface that is used to > control a PC with your > thoughts (we can already do that). I'm taking about > a general interface > that allows the body to interact with an external > computing system. > What I'm getting at here is not simply a way to hook > up a brain/mind to > a computer. I'm talking about interfacing the > biological system to the > digital system. I thought we were discussing what Warwick and almost everybody else means by a "neural interface". What you describe seems at first glance to be of little use, except specifically to enable remote control of biological systems (and remote controlling another human being, in the modern sense of the term, borders on slavery). True, that particular system could allow computer code to create biological viruses (by design) - but why would anyone use such a thing (again, unless they were being made into virtual slaves)? There is an exception if the system is entirely under the sole control of the person, e.g. a cybernetic management system for someone whose body has been mostly replaced with machines (repairing from a grevious accident, upgrading from the human norm, or whatever). But that exception precludes any connection to the outside world. One could have a "neural interface" in the normal definition on top of this, but that would link the outside world through the user's brain to the body - and any competent user would filter out viruses if this was at all an issue. (It's one thing if lax security disables your computer. It's another if lax security disables *you*, and in RL situations where that has been the case, computer viruses as we know them tend not to be able to infect.) > The analogy of a virus not being able to run on > windows and linux is > not really apt here. A more accurate analogy would > be a virus that is > translated/compiled to run on a new operating > system/architecture. > Imagine a computer virus that contains it's own > cross-compiler and it's > own source code....that's a much better analogy to > what I'm suggesting. Which are notable for their absence in reality. Each platform has different holes that a virus exploits; trying the same holes on different systems tends not to work. (One can imagine a virus as you describe, but that's really multiple viruses, one for each platform carrying the other viruses as almost junk data for its own purposes.) From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 06:25:20 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:25:20 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117042432.53C7A57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041117042432.53C7A57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116222450.02951908@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> If you read my entire post note I poked at the perps too. At 08:24 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: >Hara Ra writes: > > You can also filter out the posters. The one who blathers has a 99% > blather > > rate on his posts, good for filtering. > > The other one has self identified himself as a LQP explicitly.... > >I have to take Damien's side on this one. A mailing list is a commons, ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 06:35:19 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:35:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: You're absolutely right. I should have abandoned the "neuro/neural" moniker. My bad. I was being lazy with terms. Now, wrt what you could do with my "interface", there's a whole host of things you could do with it. You could write "programs" for the interface that could be used to control/manipulate muscle development, pain management, etc. I disagree with your assessment/characterization of viruses. A virus exploits OS features by employing a suitably crafted payload, or "egg". In fact cross-platform viruses have been around for a while. Why don't we see more of them? Well, it's much harder to write virus-generators for such multi-platform viruses (which is where the bulk of viruses come from nowadays). Furthermore, the notion that a virus carry it's own tools for recompiling itself, etc. is a standard technique of modern metamorphic viruses which use built-in metamorphic-engines to change their own signatures so as to avoid detection. -NJ On Nov 17, 2004, at 1:09 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > What I was suggesting was a completely general > neuro-biological > interface that is capable of interacting in both > directions. "Neuro-biological" technically refers to the existing interface we already have, with no electronic (or similar) components. (Sorry, but there are rules for combining terms like that, including that you list everything you're referring to. Even if there weren't, "neurobiology" is a well established scientific field, and thus has prior claim to that term.) > I'm not > suggesting simply an interface that is used to > control a PC with your > thoughts (we can already do that). I'm taking about > a general interface > that allows the body to interact with an external > computing system. > What I'm getting at here is not simply a way to hook > up a brain/mind to > a computer. I'm talking about interfacing the > biological system to the > digital system. I thought we were discussing what Warwick and almost everybody else means by a "neural interface". What you describe seems at first glance to be of little use, except specifically to enable remote control of biological systems (and remote controlling another human being, in the modern sense of the term, borders on slavery). True, that particular system could allow computer code to create biological viruses (by design) - but why would anyone use such a thing (again, unless they were being made into virtual slaves)? There is an exception if the system is entirely under the sole control of the person, e.g. a cybernetic management system for someone whose body has been mostly replaced with machines (repairing from a grevious accident, upgrading from the human norm, or whatever). But that exception precludes any connection to the outside world. One could have a "neural interface" in the normal definition on top of this, but that would link the outside world through the user's brain to the body - and any competent user would filter out viruses if this was at all an issue. (It's one thing if lax security disables your computer. It's another if lax security disables *you*, and in RL situations where that has been the case, computer viruses as we know them tend not to be able to infect.) > The analogy of a virus not being able to run on > windows and linux is > not really apt here. A more accurate analogy would > be a virus that is > translated/compiled to run on a new operating > system/architecture. > Imagine a computer virus that contains it's own > cross-compiler and it's > own source code....that's a much better analogy to > what I'm suggesting. Which are notable for their absence in reality. Each platform has different holes that a virus exploits; trying the same holes on different systems tends not to work. (One can imagine a virus as you describe, but that's really multiple viruses, one for each platform carrying the other viruses as almost junk data for its own purposes.) _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 06:38:34 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:38:34 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116222748.0293edd8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I am sure 'neurocybernetic' will do nicely. As to whether a 'virus' can be made, be aware that most virii, physical or informational, depend on some kind of hack of the host's structure - whether the DNA replication system or the Hard Drive file system. If the details of these systems are not visible, hacking is extremely difficult. A good example is breaking cryptosystems vs codesystems. A cryptosystem is algorithmic, the world of same is comparatively small and regular (except one time pads). A code system is a mapping between words and phrases, and there are no regualar rules there. I recall a movie, wind talkers? about the Navajo language being used for secure messaging in the Pacific WWII. Not crackable cuz no Navajo speakers in Japan.... This suggests, rather nastily, that each of us has a unique neural net, and detailed cross translation of experience is undoable. I can imagine growing up with a dynamic interface which converts Me.Neurosystem to Net.HolyHTTP and vice versa, but a true translation between Me.Neurosystem and You.Neurosystem is something I quaila at.... At 10:09 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: >--- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > > What I was suggesting was a completely general > > neuro-biological > > interface that is capable of interacting in both > > directions. > >"Neuro-biological" technically refers to the existing >interface we already have, with no electronic (or >similar) components. (Sorry, but there are rules for >combining terms like that, including that you list >everything you're referring to. Even if there >weren't, "neurobiology" is a well established >scientific field, and thus has prior claim to that >term.) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 06:45:30 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:45:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116222748.0293edd8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041116222748.0293edd8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <46263901-3864-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> True. Exactly how a piece of code in one system gets translated into another can be problematic especially when you're crossing domains like this. However, this kind of inter-system en-decoding is exactly what such an interface is for. The semantics and syntax of the translation would have to be built right into the interface. -NJ On Nov 17, 2004, at 1:38 AM, Hara Ra wrote: I am sure 'neurocybernetic' will do nicely. As to whether a 'virus' can be made, be aware that most virii, physical or informational, depend on some kind of hack of the host's structure - whether the DNA replication system or the Hard Drive file system. If the details of these systems are not visible, hacking is extremely difficult. A good example is breaking cryptosystems vs codesystems. A cryptosystem is algorithmic, the world of same is comparatively small and regular (except one time pads). A code system is a mapping between words and phrases, and there are no regualar rules there. I recall a movie, wind talkers? about the Navajo language being used for secure messaging in the Pacific WWII. Not crackable cuz no Navajo speakers in Japan.... This suggests, rather nastily, that each of us has a unique neural net, and detailed cross translation of experience is undoable. I can imagine growing up with a dynamic interface which converts Me.Neurosystem to Net.HolyHTTP and vice versa, but a true translation between Me.Neurosystem and You.Neurosystem is something I quaila at.... At 10:09 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: > --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > > What I was suggesting was a completely general > > neuro-biological > > interface that is capable of interacting in both > > directions. > > "Neuro-biological" technically refers to the existing > interface we already have, with no electronic (or > similar) components. (Sorry, but there are rules for > combining terms like that, including that you list > everything you're referring to. Even if there > weren't, "neurobiology" is a well established > scientific field, and thus has prior claim to that > term.) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 06:51:50 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:51:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <282F0473-3865-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> Rather than slavery, I was thinking more in terms of what you could do if you could directly manipulate your own internal biochemical environment with code. The compiler would be designed to filter out any pathological results (hopefully). Consider: complete control over one's biological existence via code. -NJ On Nov 17, 2004, at 1:09 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > What I was suggesting was a completely general > neuro-biological > interface that is capable of interacting in both > directions. "Neuro-biological" technically refers to the existing interface we already have, with no electronic (or similar) components. (Sorry, but there are rules for combining terms like that, including that you list everything you're referring to. Even if there weren't, "neurobiology" is a well established scientific field, and thus has prior claim to that term.) > I'm not > suggesting simply an interface that is used to > control a PC with your > thoughts (we can already do that). I'm taking about > a general interface > that allows the body to interact with an external > computing system. > What I'm getting at here is not simply a way to hook > up a brain/mind to > a computer. I'm talking about interfacing the > biological system to the > digital system. I thought we were discussing what Warwick and almost everybody else means by a "neural interface". What you describe seems at first glance to be of little use, except specifically to enable remote control of biological systems (and remote controlling another human being, in the modern sense of the term, borders on slavery). True, that particular system could allow computer code to create biological viruses (by design) - but why would anyone use such a thing (again, unless they were being made into virtual slaves)? There is an exception if the system is entirely under the sole control of the person, e.g. a cybernetic management system for someone whose body has been mostly replaced with machines (repairing from a grevious accident, upgrading from the human norm, or whatever). But that exception precludes any connection to the outside world. One could have a "neural interface" in the normal definition on top of this, but that would link the outside world through the user's brain to the body - and any competent user would filter out viruses if this was at all an issue. (It's one thing if lax security disables your computer. It's another if lax security disables *you*, and in RL situations where that has been the case, computer viruses as we know them tend not to be able to infect.) > The analogy of a virus not being able to run on > windows and linux is > not really apt here. A more accurate analogy would > be a virus that is > translated/compiled to run on a new operating > system/architecture. > Imagine a computer virus that contains it's own > cross-compiler and it's > own source code....that's a much better analogy to > what I'm suggesting. Which are notable for their absence in reality. Each platform has different holes that a virus exploits; trying the same holes on different systems tends not to work. (One can imagine a virus as you describe, but that's really multiple viruses, one for each platform carrying the other viruses as almost junk data for its own purposes.) _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 07:07:35 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:07:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116222207.0293f440@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041117070735.69707.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> I don't know what it is in the realms outside science you wish to discuss yet, for what it's worth, don't Rand's admirers have an emotional attachment to her works? No doubt during the late 1950s- early '60s Rand was an important thinker but for otherwise rational readers to cling so doggedly to her beliefs up to this day strikes me as being somewhat irrational. Like Nietzsche, Rand is an engrossing read however couldn't she be described as a romantic technocrat rather than as a rationalist? Isn't this romanticism the attraction of Rand's thought? Her romanticization of industry and progress? Rand appears to me as being a more philosophical version of Newt Gingrich, only more oriented to the '50s Organization Men than to the 21st century's individualism. > excrement = literary __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Nov 17 08:37:58 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:37:58 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117052341.43161.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117052341.43161.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <419B0DE6.2000209@mac.com> Actually, it is not up to your tally whether you remain here or not. If you do not clean up your act and mind the per day posting limits you will be removed. - samantha (a moderator) Al Brooks wrote: >Okay then, I know from where I speak. >As I wrote in the last message: if you & others want >me to go, please say so and I'll tally up the number >who want me to leave; again, I remain here primarily >because Giulio asked me to stay on this list. > > > > > >>Funny that you should bring up childishness. >>j. andrew rogers >> >> > > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! >http://my.yahoo.com > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 08:40:12 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:40:12 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <282F0473-3865-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> <282F0473-3865-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117003711.0292b460@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Indeed. I hope when I come back from freezing that I will see a 'control panel' of thousands of items I can tweak to optimize my performance and enforce my preferences. Do note that the brain already does this, mostly via the pitituitary, but also by several other means. However I want total choice both biochemically and in perception. Ever saw the movie 'brainstorm'? Now add an editor.... and make it totally interactive. At 10:51 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: >Rather than slavery, I was thinking more in terms of what you could do if >you could directly manipulate your own internal biochemical environment >with code. The compiler would be designed to filter out any pathological >results (hopefully). > >Consider: complete control over one's biological existence via code. > >-NJ ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 08:46:49 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:46:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <282F0473-3865-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041117084649.5865.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > I was thinking more in terms of > what you could do > if you could directly manipulate your own internal > biochemical > environment with code. The compiler would be > designed to filter out any > pathological results (hopefully). > > Consider: complete control over one's biological > existence via code. Ah. Then you're using the wrong analogy. Your body is a biological machine, but not a biological program. Think "robot", not "computer". Both can be programmed, and both can be altered by programs, but the exact mechanism by which that change takes place is ever so slightly (yet significantly) different. (And once we have a high level of control over nanotech - possibly easier to do for biological systems like your body than for, say, diamondoid mechanosynthesis - the capabilities would not be that different for each control method, either.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 08:53:42 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:53:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041116222748.0293edd8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041117085342.63730.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hara Ra wrote: > This suggests, rather nastily, that each of us has a > unique neural net, and > detailed cross translation of experience is > undoable. I can imagine growing > up with a dynamic interface which converts > Me.Neurosystem to Net.HolyHTTP > and vice versa, but a true translation between > Me.Neurosystem and > You.Neurosystem is something I quaila at.... You might be right about this. At least at first, I suspect neural interfaces will be more like an extra sense and set of muscles than the data pipeline that is perceived. The user will have to learn how to interpret the signals - although hopefully this could be done at a good rate since the user would get very quick feedback. Speed of data transmission would thus depend on operator skill, much like speed of Morse code in the days of the telegraph. Once we gain a lot more knowledge on the generalities of human neural nets, then we might possibly be able to do something like the data highway. We're partly there already, by identifying which parts of the brain do (generally) which tasks. But there's a long way to go there. From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Nov 17 13:42:00 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:42:00 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <20041117044758.87929.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117042432.53C7A57E2A@finney.org> <20041117044758.87929.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041117074112.021a4618@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 10:47 PM 11/16/2004, Al Brooks wrote: >I stay on this list because Guilio Prisco asked me to. >He wrote me to say everyone at extropy-chat would >leave if they followed their instincts. Would you please explain what you mean by this statement? Thank you, Natasha Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc [_______________________________________________ President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org [_____________________________________________________ Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Wed Nov 17 13:46:20 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:46:20 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <37B18586-385E-11D9-9CAA-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> References: <20041117052341.43161.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> <37B18586-385E-11D9-9CAA-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041117074506.02304ad0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> At 12:02 AM 11/17/2004, j. Anderw Rogers wrote: >On Nov 16, 2004, at 9:23 PM, Al Brooks wrote: >>As I wrote in the last message: if you & others want >>me to go, please say so and I'll tally up the number >>who want me to leave; again, I remain here primarily >>because Giulio asked me to stay on this list. > > >While this list may not have much in the way of official rules, it did at >one time have community standards. All that is being asked is that >everyone who posts make some attempt to abide by those standards. A very nice post J. Anderw Rogers. Thank you. >Let me sum them up for you: > >1.) Make your posts substantive. If you can make your point in one line, >it probably didn't need to be made. Captains of the obvious are not >really necessary either. Be prepared to explain your reasoning in depth, >preferably putting your in-depth reasoning in the post even. > >2.) Make your posts rational. Writing posts that assume the supernatural, >inconsistent mathematics, violations of thermodynamics, or any other >axioms that have obvious conflicts with reality better be prefaced by some >astoundingly good justification for those assumptions. Know all the basic >Fallacies of Reasoning, and learn to instinctively identify them in your >thinking. Discussing "what ifs" is fun, but it is not terribly >constructive if the "what ifs" are outside the scope of plausible >reality. We have a signal-to-noise ratio to maintain here. > >3.) Do not become emotionally attached to your argument; there is no >insult in being wrong. If you have to use your personal feelings to make >a point, you've pretty much lost the argument. Enough said. > > >The negative reaction you may be seeing results from the perception that >you are making no attempt to abide by the standards of the >community. This community is tolerant and forgiving, but it may require >some genuine effort on your part to be a functional part of the community. > > >j. andrew rogers > >_______________________________________________ >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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 14:08:27 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:08:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Ownz0red In-Reply-To: <20041117084649.5865.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041117084649.5865.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <26EA76CD-38A2-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> Not sure I agree there on robots vs computers. A robot is certain kind of computer with effectors, actuators, sensors etc. All computers have some kind of external devices. You simply need to understand the particular environment for which you're writing code. I've programmed several types of research-level robotic systems and most conventional computers. There's no difference when considering a robot and say a computer with realtime capabilities. I mentioned in a prior post, the science fiction short-story "Ownz0red" by Cory Doctorow. Ever read it? It's about a hacker that acquires a digital-biological interface more or less like what I've been talking about. It's a terrific story. Give it a read, when you get a chance and maybe we can discuss it here: http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/28/0wnz0red/ In case you haven't read any of Doctorow's work, he's a excellent writer with some the most apt, brilliant science fiction of the last 20 years. All of his work is maintained under the Creative Commons license and it available from: http://www.craphound.com/ Cheers, NJ On Nov 17, 2004, at 3:46 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > I was thinking more in terms of > what you could do > if you could directly manipulate your own internal > biochemical > environment with code. The compiler would be > designed to filter out any > pathological results (hopefully). > > Consider: complete control over one's biological > existence via code. Ah. Then you're using the wrong analogy. Your body is a biological machine, but not a biological program. Think "robot", not "computer". Both can be programmed, and both can be altered by programs, but the exact mechanism by which that change takes place is ever so slightly (yet significantly) different. (And once we have a high level of control over nanotech - possibly easier to do for biological systems like your body than for, say, diamondoid mechanosynthesis - the capabilities would not be that different for each control method, either.) _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From nsjacobus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 14:34:35 2004 From: nsjacobus at yahoo.com (nsjacobus at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:34:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117003711.0292b460@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> <282F0473-3865-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041117003711.0292b460@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Well mate, if i have my way, I'll be able to upload you before you are frozen so that you can have your immortality-cake and eat it too. -NJ On Nov 17, 2004, at 3:40 AM, Hara Ra wrote: Indeed. I hope when I come back from freezing that I will see a 'control panel' of thousands of items I can tweak to optimize my performance and enforce my preferences. Do note that the brain already does this, mostly via the pitituitary, but also by several other means. However I want total choice both biochemically and in perception. Ever saw the movie 'brainstorm'? Now add an editor.... and make it totally interactive. At 10:51 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: > Rather than slavery, I was thinking more in terms of what you could do > if you could directly manipulate your own internal biochemical > environment with code. The compiler would be designed to filter out > any pathological results (hopefully). > > Consider: complete control over one's biological existence via code. > > -NJ ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Cheers, Nige -- A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. -- Robert Heinlein From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Nov 17 15:52:59 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:52:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency Message-ID: It's not just size and weight though. My saab 9-3 has better safety ratings than a lincoln towncar and weighs 1000 lbs less (3285 vs. 4359). It is also nimbler and faster so I can better avoid accidents. BAL >From: Al Brooks >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:05:53 -0800 (PST) > >--- Alan Eliasen wrote: >Yes, I was being hard on Detroit, they have to keep >their prices affordable while paying high salaries to >their workers. >Anyhow, though heavy vehicles are fuel gulpers they do >offer more protection in accidents. I got sideswiped >by an 18 wheeler once while driving a Lincoln; could >have been killed had I been driving a lighter vehicle. > > > >Considering that the thruster has a thrust of a > > whopping 70 millinewtons, > > (that's the force exerted by about 7 U.S. dollar > > bills, or about 7 raisins, > > sitting in earth's gravity) a 2000-lb car could go > > from 0 to 60 mph in ... 4 > > days? If you eliminate all sources of friction, > > that is. That's probably the > > guy who was in front of me in traffic tonight. > > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! >http://my.yahoo.com > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Nov 17 16:53:46 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:53:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise Message-ID: <71440-2200411317165346309@M2W047.mail2web.com> From: Al Brooks kerry_prez at yahoo.com > 'We' have no problem with you, Al?: > I was just now accused of writing childish posts. >Rand upheld the standards of productivity & >individuality. Self sufficiency is a 19th century >western frontier myth. The only people who are self >sufficient in North America today are, say, something >like sheep herders in the wilderness. I am not a big fan of Ayn Rand. Nonetheless, it does not matter who is or is not a fan of Rand. What does matter is the quality of postings on this list. Ayn Rand, Teilhard de Chardin, Dante Alighieri, and T.S. Elliot, are all valuable figures of the past and share in the origination of transhumanism. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From harara at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 17:08:22 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:08:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Warwick: Could future computer viruses infecth umans? In-Reply-To: References: <20041117060952.75343.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> <282F0473-3865-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041117003711.0292b460@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117090533.02939900@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Not. I am 59, have a decade of Type II Diabetes, though HGH has put this in stasis, the damage already done still present, utter maximum years left estimated at 20. Suspect upload performed from frozen state around 120 years later. > you wrote: >Well mate, if i have my way, I'll be able to upload you before you are >frozen so that you can have your immortality-cake and eat it too. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Nov 17 17:38:05 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:38:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Ownz0red In-Reply-To: <26EA76CD-38A2-11D9-8C03-000393AD804A@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041117173805.84215.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- nsjacobus at yahoo.com wrote: > Not sure I agree there on robots vs computers. A > robot is certain kind > of computer with effectors, actuators, sensors etc. > All computers have > some kind of external devices. You simply need to > understand the > particular environment for which you're writing > code. I've programmed > several types of research-level robotic systems and > most conventional > computers. There's no difference when considering a > robot and say a > computer with realtime capabilities. A "computer", in the common sense of the term, does not have effectors, actuators, sensors, et cetera. A robot-controlling computer tends to be specialized to controlling that robot - which tends to reduce its vulnerability to viruses and unauthorized hacking, both in terms of speciality and in terms of increased costs from said hacking (thus, justified greater measures against it). > I mentioned in a prior post, the science fiction > short-story "Ownz0red" > by Cory Doctorow. Ever read it? It's about a hacker > that acquires > a digital-biological interface more or less like > what I've been talking > about. > > It's a terrific story. Give it a read, when you get > a chance and maybe > we can discuss it here: > > http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/08/28/0wnz0red/ I've read it before, but I read it again just now. It combines both aspects of what I was talking about: at first, Liam's body is the tool of the Feds who don't care if he dies so long as they get their data (thus, "virtual slavery"), but then he gains control over himself. But note this line from the story: > Here's the protocol: tomorrow, we give you a bug. > It's a controlled mutagen that prepares your > brainstem so that it can emits and receives weak > electromagnetic fields that can be manipulated with > an external microcontroller. So, it's still just a neural interface in the standard sense. It hacks around with how your brain (of which the brainstem is part) controls your body, but it still uses the brain to mediate that connection. Note that nowhere do they even imply that these "programs" could run on a normal computer, or that programs that can run on a normal computer could run on the human OS. What Liam talks about is largely like programming a robot, albeit a highly sophisticated one. From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 18:33:29 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:33:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <71440-2200411317165346309@M2W047.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041117183329.62267.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Dante? How is there anything but the most remote connection between a 'dark ages' literary figure to transhumanism? That would be a stretch. Anyway, I will try to write better posts. Things have improved at extropy-chat, I don't see micky-mouse-libertarian posts anymore. Such was one reason I was lax about the content of my messages; coming here and reading right-wing paranoid posts rather than solid anti-government arguments was partially responsible for lowering my standards. Of course the main reason for my LQP is I am not as comprehensively educated as the rest of you-- yet remember (once again) I did offer to unsubscribe before Giulio very nicely asked me to remain. Giulio is quite a kindly moderator. >"natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: >Ayn Rand, Teilhard de Chardin, Dante Alighieri, and T.S. Elliot, are all >valuable figures of the past and share in the origination of transhumanism. >Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Discover all that?s new in My Yahoo! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 18:42:54 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:42:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117184254.35052.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Your Saab may be safer on paper, but when the crunch came would you be safer than if you were in a larger heavier vehicle? There is only one way to find out. Safety ratings don't mean much until you are in an accident. Personally I will choose a larger heavier auto over a Saab no matter what the Saab's safety ratings are. BTW an auto worker in Detroit told me he was making over $30 an hour. No wonder the price of autos is so high. Brian Lee wrote: It's not just size and weight though. My saab 9-3 has better safety ratings than a lincoln towncar and weighs 1000 lbs less (3285 vs. 4359). It is also nimbler and faster so I can better avoid accidents. BAL >From: Al Brooks >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:05:53 -0800 (PST) > >--- Alan Eliasen wrote: >Yes, I was being hard on Detroit, they have to keep >their prices affordable while paying high salaries to >their workers. >Anyhow, though heavy vehicles are fuel gulpers they do >offer more protection in accidents. I got sideswiped >by an 18 wheeler once while driving a Lincoln; could >have been killed had I been driving a lighter vehicle. > > > >Considering that the thruster has a thrust of a > > whopping 70 millinewtons, > > (that's the force exerted by about 7 U.S. dollar > > bills, or about 7 raisins, > > sitting in earth's gravity) a 2000-lb car could go > > from 0 to 60 mph in ... 4 > > days? If you eliminate all sources of friction, > > that is. That's probably the > > guy who was in front of me in traffic tonight. > > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! >http://my.yahoo.com > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Wed Nov 17 18:50:04 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:50:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand References: <20041117070735.69707.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <019e01c4ccd6$4aea4030$a6f44d0c@hal2001> I'll tell you one thing, I'm not impressed with the followers of Ayn Rand, those armchair philosophers and self described intellectuals that call themselves Objectivists. A few months ago I was invited to join an online forum called Objectivism Online but I was soon banned for life. I was astonished at their ignorance of the revolution in physics and mathematical logic made during the previous century; they were oblivious of the profound implications for philosophy these discoverers had, they didn't know and they didn't care, they just quoted Ayn Rand back at me as if what she said was more important than Bell's experiment or Godel. I said a lot of stuff they didn't like very much but then I said something that made the howls of protest reach a crescendo and they looked for the tar and feathers. The dreadful blasphemy I dared to utter is this: "We've suspected for 80 years and known with certainty for nearly 40 that some events have no cause and are random. I mean, I liked Atlas Shrugged as much as anyone but if Ayn Rand tells me one thing and experiment tells me another it's no contest; I'm a rational man so I have to go with experiment." I don't believe I will go back there. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 18:51:29 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:51:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041117074112.021a4618@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041117185129.57438.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Why don't you ask Giulio? Two weeks ago I meant to leave this list temporarily because I was upset about the presidential election result, but Giulio assumed I wanted to leave this list permanently. He wrote: "don't go. If everyone who thought of unsubscribing actually left, there would be no one here". Natasha Vita-More wrote: At 10:47 PM 11/16/2004, Al Brooks wrote: >>He wrote me to say everyone at extropy-chat would >>leave if they followed their instincts. >Would you please explain what you mean by this statement? >Thank you, >Natasha --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Nov 17 18:54:27 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:54:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise Message-ID: <286340-2200411317185427526@M2W078.mail2web.com> From: Al Brooks kerry_prez at yahoo.com >Dante? How is there anything but the most remote connection between >a 'dark ages' literary figure to transhumanism? That would be a stretch. Not a stretch at all. Transhumanism did not simply appear from one domain of thinking. Dante used the word transhuman in his poem "The Divine Comedy" and lived in Ravenna, Italy. "Words may not tell of that transhuman change" Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 17 18:59:44 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:59:44 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar In-Reply-To: <005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05> <005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041117125633.019e4ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> You probably know about this, Serafino (and it's all mysterious wizardry to me), but I repost it from `a student' on sci.physics.research: ============ On the logical derivation side, there has recently been a cool 'exact uncertainty' way of getting from the classical equations of motion to the quantum equations, just by adding momentum fluctuations. This method (by Hall and Reginatto) doesn't assume wavefunctions, complex numbers, operators, etc. - they all come out in the wash (see http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0102069; there is a nice review at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0408098, which claims to do quantum gravity as well, and calls the textbook approach 'black magic'!). The basic formalism is a sort of classical field theory (it is all in terms of two fields P and S, rather than position and momentum). They start with a probability density P(x,t) for an ensemble, and assume it satisfies an action principle. So there is a Lagrangian or Hamiltonian for P(x,t), and a conjugate field S(x,t). They derive an extra term for the classical Lagrangian by assuming fluctuations are added to the classical momentum, with the strength of the momentum fluctuations depending only on the position uncertainty (this is what they mean by 'exact uncertainty'). The equations for P and S then magically turn out to be the same as the Schrodinger equation, if you define psi=sqrt{P} exp{i S/hbar} (hbar appears as a constant that sets the scale of the fluctuations). Actually, I'm not sure if they do general operator theory, but at least they get the right statistics for position, momentum and energy (and Bohm showed that all you really need is position - and a linear meter interaction - to measure anything). From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 19:19:49 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:19:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <019e01c4ccd6$4aea4030$a6f44d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <20041117191949.53723.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> The Randians may be 'playing dumb'. Over & over again I've had communications - or lack thereof- with coy respondents. What Randians appear to be saying is, to paraphrase a conservative dictum, 'that which is not unambigiously conservative tends to erode towards something else'. In the case of Randians, they might be saying, 'that which is not pro- free market and work ethic tends to erode towards command economics and evasion of responsibilities', and this is clear & understandable; however when Randians act like martinets, even if they are merely putting on an act, they can only hope to snare those who are susceptible to rope-a-dope rhetoric. John K Clark wrote:[...] they just quoted Ayn Rand back at me as if what she said was more important than Bell's experiment or Godel. I said a lot of stuff they didn't like very much but then I said something that made the howls of protest reach a crescendo and they looked for the tar and feathers. The dreadful blasphemy I dared to utter is this: "We've suspected for 80 years and known with certainty for nearly 40 that some events have no cause and are random. I mean, I liked Atlas Shrugged as much as anyone but if Ayn Rand tells me one thing and experiment tells me another it's no contest; I'm a rational man so I have to go with experiment." I don't believe I will go back there. John K Clark jonkc at att.net --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! ? Get yours free! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 19:25:07 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:25:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise In-Reply-To: <286340-2200411317185427526@M2W078.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041117192507.63039.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> Isn't the context thoroughly different? Didn't Dante reference the transhuman movement to the afterlife, not anything whatsoever related to life extension, to science? "natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: Not a stretch at all. Transhumanism did not simply appear from one domain of thinking. Dante used the word transhuman in his poem "The Divine Comedy" and lived in Ravenna, Italy. "Words may not tell of that transhuman change" Natasha __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From scerir at libero.it Wed Nov 17 19:58:19 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:58:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] crap crap crap and noise References: <20041117183329.62267.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001f01c4ccdf$c9576de0$30c41b97@administxl09yj> From: "Al Brooks" > Dante? How is there anything but > the most remote connection between > a 'dark ages' literary figure to transhumanism? For verily I see, and hence narrate it, The stars already near to bring the time, >From every hindrance safe, and every bar, Within which a Five-hundred, Ten, and Five, One sent from God, shall slay the thievish woman And that same giant who is sinning with her. And peradventure my dark utterance, Like Themis and the Sphinx, may less persuade thee, Since, in their mode, it clouds the intellect; But soon the facts shall be the Naiades Who shall this difficult enigma solve, Without destruction of the flocks and harvests. (Dante, La Divina Commedia, Purgatorio XXXIII) J+E+S+U+S = 10+5+100+300+100 = 515 But how did Dante know that 515 = JESUS, since the letter 'J' became a letter much later? Let us ask the Naiades ... From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Nov 17 19:54:16 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:54:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dante and Transhuman Message-ID: <73960-2200411317195416884@M2W041.mail2web.com> From: Al Brooks >>Not a stretch at all. Transhumanism did not simply appear from one domain >>of thinking. Dante used the word transhuman in his poem "The Divine >>Comedy" and lived in Ravenna, Italy. >>"Words may not tell of that transhuman change" >Isn't the context thoroughly different? Didn't Dante reference the >transhuman movement to the afterlife, not anything whatsoever related to >life extension, to science? It would take me at least an hour to convey my views and research about the beginnings of transhumanism and the idea of the transhuman. At this moment, I only have a few minutes, so I?ll be brief. In being fair-minded, we need to consider the environment of the time in which Dante lived, just as we do with today and Huxley's time. Huxley believed in a "New Divinity" while Dante believed in ?philosophical wisdom.? What this meant to them may not be what it means to us by today?s standards and language. The bottom line is that both wanted something more than an ordinary human condition. Dante: "He was one of the most learned Italian laymen of his day, intimately familiar with Aristotelian logic and natural philosophy, theology (he had a special affinity for the thought of Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas), and classical literature. His writings reflect this in its mingling of philosophical and theological language, invoking Aristotle and the neo-Platonists side by side with the poet of the psalms. Like Aquinas, Dante wished to summon his audience to the practice of philosophical wisdom, though by means of truths embedded in his own poetry, rather than mysteriously embodied in scripture." (Stanford University) Let us not dismiss of the world and society of Dante and his ideas about the transhuman. Today we can harshly criticize those who have spiritual beliefs, but we leaned that it is not completely appropriate since spirituality also includes those who simply want peace of mind. Since the transhumanist community has grown to include several religious sectors, we cannot defame Dante or Huxley or any of us for our personal unconventional views. As such, an afterlife in the far past could possibly equal an afterlife today, as we know it as technological immortality. In Dante's time, there were no such things as molecular engineering, cryonics, and the medical and scientific innovations that we are aware of today that could make our dreams of a longer life feasible. There are many steps in the direction of enlightenment, and some of the footprints belong to Dante. Natasha Vita-More -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From scerir at libero.it Wed Nov 17 20:29:09 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:29:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cramer on Afshar References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF54@tpeex05><005701c4cae8$091c75a0$05b31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041117125633.019e4ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00ea01c4cce4$17df3390$30c41b97@administxl09yj> [D.B.] > You probably know about this, Serafino > (and it's all mysterious wizardry to > me), but I repost it from `a student' on > sci.physics.research ....... I think I read it. But I forgot it completely! There are many way to get the Schroedinger equation (Einstein himself derived the equation as soon as he got some information from Lorentz!). Essentially it is a diffusion equation, with no predetermined time arrow. It is possible to write a 'double' diffusion equation with two opposite time arrows. But the physical interpretation of the S. equation is still difficult. (Even the interpretation of the fundamental equation of the 'realistic' Bohmian quantum mechanics is difficult, since many do not like the 'quantum potential', and since the trajectories of the particles are, very often, completely 'surreal'). And there are many derivations of Robertson-Heisenberg uncertainty relations. D.Deutsch and G.C.Ghirardi are writing down a completely different uncertainty relation based on 'entropy' (or information gain), that is the best possible choice, to avoid the well known inconsistencies. s. From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 20:25:57 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:25:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Dante and Transhuman In-Reply-To: <73960-2200411317195416884@M2W041.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041117202557.86155.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> The connection between Dante and advanced life extension (which is my shorthand for transhumanism) is too remote for my liking. How far can we stretch it? perhaps Jesus was the first extropian when he broke the loaves and fishes into enough fragments to feed that large crowd of hungry people two thousand years ago? My quota of posts has been reached for the list today, and you don't want a blizzard of back & forth to your email, do you? "natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: It would take me at least an hour to convey my views and research about the beginnings of transhumanism and the idea of the transhuman. At this moment, I only have a few minutes, so I?ll be brief. In being fair-minded, we need to consider the environment of the time in which Dante lived, just as we do with today and Huxley's time. Huxley believed in a "New Divinity" while Dante believed in ?philosophical wisdom.? What this meant to them may not be what it means to us by today?s standards and language. The bottom line is that both wanted something more than an ordinary human condition. Dante: "He was one of the most learned Italian laymen of his day, intimately familiar with Aristotelian logic and natural philosophy, theology (he had a special affinity for the thought of Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas), and classical literature. His writings reflect this in its mingling of philosophical and theological language, invoking Aristotle and the neo-Platonists side by side with the poet of the psalms. Like Aquinas, Dante wished to summon his audience to the practice of philosophical wisdom, though by means of truths embedded in his own poetry, rather than mysteriously embodied in scripture." (Stanford University) Let us not dismiss of the world and society of Dante and his ideas about the transhuman. Today we can harshly criticize those who have spiritual beliefs, but we leaned that it is not completely appropriate since spirituality also includes those who simply want peace of mind. Since the transhumanist community has grown to include several religious sectors, we cannot defame Dante or Huxley or any of us for our personal unconventional views. As such, an afterlife in the far past could possibly equal an afterlife today, as we know it as technological immortality. In Dante's time, there were no such things as molecular engineering, cryonics, and the medical and scientific innovations that we are aware of today that could make our dreams of a longer life feasible. There are many steps in the direction of enlightenment, and some of the footprints belong to Dante. Natasha Vita-More --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Discover all that?s new in My Yahoo! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 17 20:28:27 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:28:27 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Survey - Ireland best country to live in Message-ID: Ireland is the best place to live in the world, according to a "quality of life" assessment by Economist magazine. The country's combination of increasing wealth and traditional values gives it the conditions most likely to make its people happy, the survey found. The Economist said: "Ireland wins because it successfully combines the most desirable elements of the new, such as low unemployment and political liberties, with the preservation of certain cosy elements of the old, such as stable family and community life." The USA languished in 13th, while Britain was 29th - the lowest of the pre-expansion EU nations. The researchers said although the UK achieved high income per head, it had high levels of social and family breakdown. 1 Ireland 2 Switzerland 3 Norway 4 Luxembourg 5 Sweden 6 Australia 7 Iceland 8 Italy 9 Denmark 10 Spain BillK From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 22:31:37 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:31:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing Message-ID: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> A year or so ago I joined in the folding at home distributed computing project. I have been out for some time, but I thought I would check back in on it. I stumbled across "World Community Grid" that is doing the Human Proteome Folding Project. It seems like a similar project. I also found genome at home, and Einstein at home . Then I found Xgrid, Lifemapper, and a host of others. So now I have to decide. Which one of these is the most worthy? My first instinct is to go with folding at home and/or genome at home, but the World Community Grid seems to have a lot of backing and may move along faster. Does anyone have any input to offer on this? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From megao at sasktel.net Wed Nov 17 23:55:57 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:55:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Survey - Ireland best country to live in -- tech facilitated social evolution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <419BE50D.60505@sasktel.net> What a difference 3 decades make. When I was in high school in 1971 we had a current affairs class and studied the Quebec Canada FLQ separatist movement and the Irish IRA. Ireland seemed like a pretty terrible place to live then. So maybe there is hope for Iraq.....? What is sad is that such massive groups of humans are such slow learners. Resources and time are wasted in this very inefficient learning process. Technological hardware/software direct neural links may enhance the learning process by allowing access to a globally distributed conscious experience. Distributed knowledge caches and associative links will fundamentally change the nature of education. Simple rote can be replaced by cognitive experience package up and downloads. Not simple information but knowledge but experience. Individual neural link enabled enhancment to facilitate holding numerous individual customized cognitive experience packages "files" open similtaneously "multitasking" will substantially increase "social IQ". as well as overall "working IQ". The differentiations between personal VS group cognitive experience....generic/ public domain VS private commercial cognitive experience will define average distributed group baseline IQ VS personal IQ. Like Ireland, conflicting cognitive experiences will be thrust together. Hopefully, it does not take the equivalent of 70 years of social violence to make a coexistance of social cognitive environments a reality. BillK wrote: > > >Ireland is the best place to live in the world, according to a >"quality of life" assessment by Economist magazine. The country's >combination of increasing wealth and traditional values gives it the >conditions most likely to make its people happy, the survey found. >The Economist said: "Ireland wins because it successfully combines the >most desirable elements of the new, such as low unemployment and >political liberties, with the preservation of certain cosy elements of >the old, such as stable family and community life." > >The USA languished in 13th, while Britain was 29th - the lowest of the >pre-expansion EU nations. The researchers said although the UK >achieved high income per head, it had high levels of social and family >breakdown. > > 1 Ireland >2 Switzerland >3 Norway >4 Luxembourg >5 Sweden >6 Australia >7 Iceland >8 Italy >9 Denmark >10 Spain > > >BillK >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From Walter_Chen at compal.com Thu Nov 18 00:06:10 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:06:10 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF7D@tpeex05> Rand's absolute Objectivism is just at the one extreme of life. Of course, the other extreme is the subjectivism. It's better to be at the middle way to see the world. This world includes everything, not just one extreme. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Al Brooks Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:20 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Rand The Randians may be 'playing dumb'. Over & over again I've had communications - or lack thereof- with coy respondents. What Randians appear to be saying is, to paraphrase a conservative dictum, 'that which is not unambigiously conservative tends to erode towards something else'. In the case of Randians, they might be saying, 'that which is not pro- free market and work ethic tends to erode towards command economics and evasion of responsibilities', and this is clear & understandable; however when Randians act like martinets, even if they are merely putting on an act, they can only hope to snare those who are susceptible to rope-a-dope rhetoric. John K Clark wrote:[...] they just quoted Ayn Rand back at me as if what she said was more important than Bell's experiment or Godel. I said a lot of stuff they didn't like very much but then I said something that made the howls of protest reach a crescendo and they looked for the tar and feathers. The dreadful blasphemy I dared to utter is this: "We've suspected for 80 years and known with certainty for nearly 40 that some events have no cause and are random. I mean, I liked Atlas Shrugged as much as anyone but if Ayn Rand tells me one thing and experiment tells me another it's no contest; I'm a rational man so I have to go with experiment." I don't believe I will go back there. John K Clark jonkc at att.net _____ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! ?Get yours free! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 00:25:09 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:25:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF7D@tpeex05> Message-ID: <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> No question about it. i'm over the quota for posts yet when someone responds kindly, it's polite to respond back ASAP. Libertarians used to be on this list (heavens to Betsy, where did they go?), and for such sharp people-- such as Mike Lorrey who appears to be a polymath-- to be so exercised arouses my curiosity as to what provoked them to become almost hysterically antigovernment. Were they severely penalized by Internal Revenue? Did many of them work previously for the state- only to flip when they saw too much? They are as militant in their own way as Communists, leading me to wonder what makes them tick. >Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > Rand's absolute Objectivism is just at the one > extreme of life. > Of course, the other extreme is the subjectivism. > It's better to be at the middle way to see the > world. > This world includes everything, not just one > extreme. > > Thanks. > > Walter. > --------- > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf Of Al Brooks > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:20 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Rand > > > The Randians may be 'playing dumb'. Over & over > again I've had > communications - or lack thereof- with coy > respondents. What Randians appear > to be saying is, to paraphrase a conservative > dictum, 'that which is not > unambigiously conservative tends to erode towards > something else'. In the > case of Randians, they might be saying, 'that which > is not pro- free market > and work ethic tends to erode towards command > economics and evasion of > responsibilities', and this is clear & > understandable; however when Randians > act like martinets, even if they are merely putting > on an act, they can > only hope to snare those who are susceptible to > rope-a-dope rhetoric. > > > John K Clark wrote:[...] they just > quoted Ayn Rand back at > me as if what she said was more important than > Bell's experiment or Godel. I > said a lot of stuff they didn't like very much but > then I said something > that made the howls of > protest reach a crescendo and they looked for the > tar and feathers. The > dreadful blasphemy I dared to utter is this: > > "We've suspected for 80 years and known with > certainty for nearly 40 that > some events have no cause and are random. > I mean, I liked Atlas Shrugged as much as anyone but > if Ayn Rand tells me > one thing and experiment tells me another it's no > contest; I'm a rational > man so I have to go with experiment." > > I don't believe I will go back there. > > John K Clark jonkc at att.net > > > > > > _____ > > Do you Yahoo!? > The all-new My Yahoo! ?Get > yours free! > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From nanogirl at halcyon.com Thu Nov 18 00:37:08 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:37:08 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl News~ Message-ID: <007f01c4cd06$bc360050$1db71218@Nano> The Nanogirl News November 17, 2004 N is for nanotechnology. A new 30 minute documentary discusses the field of nanotech. You can download the trailer at this website: http://www.knhproductions.ca . You can also click through drawings at the site. I have not figured out where, when, or even if the documentary is going to air or if it will be available for purchase? (Knhproductions 11/14/04) http://www.knhproductions.ca/nisnano/ ANSI-NSP Releases Priority Recommendations Related to Nanotechnology Standardization Needs. In September 2004, nearly 100 representatives of academia, the legal profession, industry, government, standards developing organizations and other subject matter experts gathered for the first meeting of the ANSI-NSP to discuss the coordination and development of voluntary consensus standards relating to nanotechnology...The ANSI-NSP identified manufacturing and processing as well as modeling and simulation as items of lower urgency and noted standardization time frames of 3-5 years in these areas. The panel is actively soliciting the participation of ANSI accredited standards developing organizations and other interested parties in its efforts toward developing nanotechnology standards. The full text of the recommendations is available via ANSI Online. (Nanotechnology Now 11/17/04) http://nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=06739 Nanoscale Patterning. UV light is used to make a loosely bound molecular pattern more robust...University of Toronto chemists have shown that weakly bound self-assembled layers of molecules can be secured to solid surfaces via strong chemical bonds by irradiating the molecules with ultraviolet light. The study advances the understanding of surface reaction mechanisms and may lead to simple, yet precise, procedures for patterning surfaces with nanometer-sized features. (C&E 11/15/04) http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8246/8246notw4.html Nanotech could put a new spin on sports. Sometime in 2005, start-up company NanoDynamics plans to sell a nanotech golf ball that promises to dramatically reduce hooks and slices for even the most frustrated of weekend golfers. That will be a hint of the future of sports. NanoDynamics says it's figured out how to alter the materials in a golf ball at the molecular level so the weight inside shifts less as the ball spins. The less it shifts, the straighter even a badly hit ball will go. "It's all about controlling the physics of how the ball spins," says CEO Keith Blakely. (USA Today 11/17/04) http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/2004-11-17-nanotechnology-sports_x.htm Tips for Better Fluorescence. Two improved fluorescence microscopes, reported in the 29 October and 12 November issues of PRL, could allow researchers to see individual protein molecules on the surface of a living cell. Both teams of researchers obtained fluorescence images by dipping a needle-like "tip" into the focus of the laser used to create the fluorescence. One team improved the positioning of their tip, while the other channeled the laser light through a narrow aperture before letting it hit the tip. (PRF 11/8/04) http://focus.aps.org/story/v14/st19 Indium phosphide nanowires grow on silicon. Researchers in the Netherlands have for the first time, grown indium phosphide nanowires epitaxially onto silicon and germanium substrates. The team, from Philips Research Laboratories and Delft University of Technology, says this could aid the integration of III-V semiconductors, which have good optoelectronic and high-frequency properties, with standard silicon technology. (nanotechweb 11/10/04) http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/11/2/1 HIV, diagnostic health care tools top of list for UH researchers. Designing devices to combat HIV and biosensors to aid in diagnostic health care will be among the presentations of two University of Houston professors at a gathering of the top nanotechnologists in the nation Nov. 19-21...Presenting some of his latest breakthroughs in the fight against HIV, Krause will present research on the design of proteins that can split DNA made by pathogenic organisms, which will produce nanomachines that could be used to combat latent infections caused by viruses like HIV. (Eurekalert 11/15/04) http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/uoh-hdh111504.php UO's molecular 'claws' trap arsenic atoms. Chemists at the University of Oregon [profile] have hit upon a way to build a molecular "claw" that grabs onto arsenic and sequesters it. The discovery is published in the Nov. 5 issue of Angewandte Chemie International Edition, a premier journal in the field of chemistry. Since the article was written, the UO team has developed additional ways of capturing arsenic so that it cannot bond with other substances in a laboratory setting, according to Darren Johnson, an assistant professor of chemistry specializing in supramolecular and materials chemistry. (NanoApex 11/16/04) http://news.nanoapex.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5256 (PDF Document) International Dialogue on Responsible Research and Development of Nanotechnology Report Now Online. In June 2004 a group of experts involved with nanotechnology from twenty-five countries and the European Union met for an informal dialogue on responsible nanotechnology research and development. The meeting was sponsored and convened by the National Science Foundation and facilitated by the Meridian Institute. Discussions focused on: benefits and risks to the environment; benefits and risks to human health and safety; the socio-economic and ethical implications of nanotechnology; and the special consideration of nanotechnology in developing countries. (NNI) http://www.nsf.gov/home/crssprgm/nano/1_final_report.pdf Green Plus Helps Taxi Drivers in London Lower Emissions and Save Fuel. London's famous diesel "black cabs" are now running cleaner and more economically thanks to the addition of Green Plus in their fuel. Biofriendly Corporation and its sister company in Europe, Green Plus Limited, announced that they have received a letter of endorsement from British Clean Fuels, a fuel company in London known for its service to taxis in London. Green Plus is a liquid fuel combustion catalyst that can be added to diesel, gasoline, marine and other fuels...Green Plus is a product that employs nanotechnology (working at the molecular level) to achieve a breakthrough combination of improved fuel economy and reduced emissions. (W-Wire 11/17/04) http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/2380 Doing More with Less. A new way to learn how large proteins move. In a development that will help scientists better determine how many large proteins work, Berkeley Lab's Paul Adams and collaborators used the latest advances in computational analysis to study how a complex biological machine refolds proteins, a process critical to cell survival. They took advantage of the fact that the protein, called a chaperonin, encapsulates unfolded proteins by moving large portions of its structure in unison, like a hand clenching a marble. This means that only a few frames of crystallographic images, each revealing the protein at a different stage of its motion, are needed to picture the entire process. (Berkeley Lab 11/5/04) http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/sb/Nov-2004/05-GroEL-proteins.html (PDF document) Silica-coated SWNTs form unique nanostructures; Novel liquid-crystal phases formed with introduction of chirality; High-strength reticulated porous ceramics; Cracks in rubber propagate faster than the speed of sound; F-containing molecules serve as structure-directing agentsin synthesis of molecular sieves; Flame-spraying technique yields aluminate bulk glasses and nanoceramics; Composite polymer-carbon nanotubes function as optoelectronic memory devices. (MRS Oct. 04) http://www.mrs.org/publications/bulletin/2004/oct/oct04_researchers.pdf Hewitt plans to tempt scientists to UK. Scientists around the world are being wooed by the government with a message that the UK is the place to do research in leading edge areas like stem cells and nanotechnology. More funding for research will be coupled with a crackdown on animal rights extremists, who are threatening to drive away pharmaceutical companies and have severely hampered the work of universities like Oxford and Cambridge. The trade and industry secretary, Patricia Hewitt, today set out a five-year plan to make Britain the most attractive place in the world for scientific research. (Guardian Unlimited 11/17/04) http://education.guardian.co.uk/businessofresearch/story/0,9860,1353379,00.html Technologies Of The Year -- IBM Corp.'s Nanotechnology For Semiconductor Processing. Polymer molecules that self-assemble will enable smaller, more powerful semiconductor devices for the future. (Industry week) http://www.industryweek.com/CurrentArticles/Asp/articles.asp?ArticleId=1705 The Nanotech Company Announces Nanotechnology.com's Newly Re-Designed Website. The Site's Nanotechnology Newsletter Offers the Latest Updates, News and Possibilities in the Industry, The Nanotech Company, LLC announced today that their nanotechnology site has recently undergone a dramatic redesign and upgrade. Clearly reflecting the company's business model, the site is available to visitors today, November 17, 2004 at 7 a.m. EST at www.nanotechnology.com. (Yahoo 11/17/04) http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041117/sfw050_1.html Switching One Light Beam With Another, Cornell Provides A Key Component For Photonic Chips. Cornell University researchers have demonstrated for the first time a device that allows one low-powered beam of light to switch another on and off on silicon, a key component for future "photonic" microchips in which light replaces electrons...The advancement of nanoscale fabrication techniques in just the past few years has made it possible to overcome some of the traditional limitations of silicon photonics, Lipson said. Photonic circuits will find their first application in routing devices for fiber-optic communications, she suggests. (ScienceDaily 11/16/04) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/10/041030184421.htm Nanosys Awarded New Government Contracts Totaling $1.2 Million. Nanosys, Inc. today announced that it has been awarded new government contracts from various government agencies that collectively total $1.2 million. These new contracts come from government agencies such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Office of Naval Research (ONR). http://www.nanosysinc.com/news/Press%20Release%20html/2004/111504_NewGovContracts.html DNA in nanotubes sorts molecules. Researchers from the University of Florida have made a synthetic membrane that recognizes certain biochemical molecules and allows them to pass through. The method could be used to make biological sensors like those needed for genetics research, and to sort biological molecules, according to the researchers. The synthetic membrane is made up of tiny gates and molecular gatekeepers. The gates are gold nanotubes, and DNA strands attached to the nanotubes determine which molecules pass through. (alwayson 11/16/04) http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=7053_0_6_0_C Nano Center Building Business Booming...SmithGroup Inc. is an architectural, engineering planning and interior design firm with 800 employees in nine U.S. offices. The company, which celebrated its 150th anniversary recently, is planning a solid-state electronic lab expansion at University of Michigan Engineering School, just finished a clean room for University of Maryland Bioresearch lab, and is developing two labs for a consortium of UC Berkeley and the Lawrence Livermore National Labs. The company started construction on the 96,000-square-foot Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Molecular Foundry project in January this year and expects to finish in 2006. (Smalltimes 11/16/04) http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?section_id=53&document_id=8435 Nanobattery points to the future. mPhase Technologies and Bell Labs (the R&D arm of Lucent Technologies) claim to have successfully developed the first ever nanotechnology battery. What's more, the prototype is expected to be turned into commercialized products within just 12 to 15 months. (ferret.com.au 11/16/04) http://www.ferret.com.au/articles/c7/0c0291c7.asp Small Times Magazine Best of Small Tech Awards Recognize Micro and Nano Technologies Affecting Today's World. One winner already has an Emmy. Another pulled off a $55 million nano IPO without mentioning the word nano. A third has captured the attention of life science and data storage researchers with breakthrough equipment that rapidly images atoms in 3-D. These are a few of the 31 people, products and companies recognized in the 2004 Small Times Magazine Best of Small Tech Awards announced today. The annual Small Times Magazine Best of Small Tech Awards spotlight the best work and the biggest successes in nanotechnology, MEMS and microsystems during the past year. Follow the link to see who's who. (PRN 11/15/04) http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/11-15-2004/0002456641&EDATE= Nanotechnology still mainly the domain of researchers. But commercial uses begin to emerge. Nanotechnology may yet be the next big thing, but for now it is still primarily the domain of researchers and scientists, such as those who attended a nanotech conference at the University of Texas-Dallas on Thursday and Friday. Venture funding for start-up firms remains hard to come by. Government money is mostly going to nanotech research labs in universities nationwide. But experts say the industry -- built around technology measured in billionths of a meter -- is slowly starting to crank out nanotech products and technologies with commercial applications, and that process should accelerate over the next few years. (Mercurynews 11/15/04) http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/10185360.htm?1c Groundbreaking Nanotechnology Research at The University of Scranton Published in Science. For the first time, an innovative research technique successfully completed a detailed measurement of how heat energy is created at the molecular level, an approach that could have far- reaching implications for developing nano-devices in health care, computer and other industries. (nanotechwire 11/12/04) http://nanotechwire.com/news.asp?nid=1295 Gold Nano Anchors Put Nanowires in Their Place. Researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have demonstrated a technique for growing well-formed, single-crystal nanowires in place-and in a predictable orientation-on a commercially important substrate. The method uses nanoparticles of gold arranged in rows on a sapphire surface as starting points for growing horizontal semiconductor "wires" only 3 nanometers (nm) in diameter. Other methods produce semiconductor nanowires more than 10 nm in diameter. NIST chemists' work was highlighted in the Oct. 11 issue of Applied Physics Letters. (nanotechwire 11/12/04) http://nanotechwire.com/news.asp?nid=1286 Happy Turkey Day! Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org My New Project: Microscope Jewelry http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From neptune at superlink.net Thu Nov 18 02:20:53 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:20:53 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand References: <20041117070735.69707.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00b901c4cd15$521483e0$ec893cd1@pavilion> On Wednesday, November 17, 2004 2:07 AM Al Brooks kerry_prez at yahoo.com wrote: > I don't know what it is in the realms outside > science you wish to discuss yet, for what > it's worth, don't Rand's admirers have an > emotional attachment to her works? No doubt, many of them do. I do not -- at least not in the sense you mean. Instead, I see her as an important thinker with some very useful and some true ideas. (This means, for those incapable of reading between the lines, that she also had some useless and false ideas too. This is the same for every single thinker I've studied. No one is perfect and all require critical scrutiny -- not blind acceptance or offhand rejection.) > No doubt during the late 1950s- early '60s > Rand was an important thinker but for > otherwise rational readers to cling so > doggedly to her beliefs up to this day > strikes me as being somewhat irrational. Therein lies a problem. You seem to stating that Rand's ideas were true or rational circa 1960, but not after. I think it's bad policy to adopt that sort of historicist approach to her (or any thinker or any idea). Does this mean I believe following her beliefs in toto is rational? No. Instead, a critical thinker must look at her just as she or he would look at any other thinker. Ditto for Objectivism. Consider it, critically evaluate, but do not confuse it with some kind of all or nothing choice. (Randians follow her to the letter. Many anti-Randian follow _against_ her to the letter. What is the difference between the two? Both are followers, the former in their admiration, the latter in their rejection.) > Like Nietzsche, Rand is an engrossing > read however couldn't she be described > as a romantic technocrat rather than as a > rationalist? Well, it depends on what you mean by the terms. Rationalism means many things inside philosophy, one of them being a sort of Cartesian Rationalism (somewhat anachronistically: a priori reasoning), which Rand railed was against. If you just mean she used reason -- i.e., was rational in common parlance -- then, if you understand her views on the subject, there needn't be an antagonism between reason and Romanticism or reason and passion. In fact, others have argued that she was a dialectical thinker -- as opposed to the dualism or monism we usually see on this topic. (See http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/ for more on the dialectical aspects in her thought.) She did claim to be a Romanticist, though not of the sort that most Romanticist might have agreed with. Whether you agree with depends on your agreeing with her view of Romanticism as essentially center on moral ideals in art and human volition. If that's a legit definition, then it could be argued the she was a Romantic. (In fact, she called herself a Romantic-Realist -- meaning she believed moral ideals and volition could be portrayed in a realistic setting -- as opposed to a fantastic one.) I think there's problems with her view of Romanticism and I've voiced my opinion on this years ago. See "Romanticism -- Beyond Rand" at: http://www.freeradical.co.nz/content/34/34ust.php and "Response to David C. Adams on Rand's View of Romanticism" at: http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/Adams.html Of course, my views have changed somewhat since then, but I don't have as much enthusiasm for the subject to take up the chore of writing and publishing them.:) "Technocrat" usually means an advocate of technocracy -- rule by technical experts. Rand doesn't argue for that anywhere in her writings -- at least the ones I've read. In fact, she's basically a libertarian -- despite her not liking the term or other libertarian thinkers -- minarchist when it comes to politics -- at least, she advocated that kind of government -- one limited to protecting individual rights and nothing else. (However, some claim, including yours truly, that anarchism is more consistent with her core beliefs.) > Isn't this romanticism the attraction of > Rand's thought? Her romanticization of > industry and progress? I think the first question can be answered in the affirmative for many people, especially those who come to her fiction first. (I was exposed to her nonfiction first. Reading a thousand page novel when I was 15 would've been a chore.:) I believe it's a lot of the motifs in her fiction, such as the lone hero against the world and her plotting that draws a lot of people in. Surely, some are drawn in by the situations, which they find to resonate with theirs. (This is a guess on my part. If you already feel kind of like an outcast and an anti-traditionalist, I believe she might appeal to you, especially since she presents you with a whole thought system to shore up your feelings and beliefs.) > Rand appears to me as being a more > philosophical version of Newt Gingrich, > only more oriented to the '50s Organization > Men than to the 21st century's individualism. I disagree. I think there are many lessons to be drawn from her philosophy and it shouldn't be dismissed lightly. Well, that's my opinion anyway, and I'm sticking to it.:) I do think, however, that [too] many of her admirers are merely followers and they kind of fit into that mold of 1950s conformists. Sadly, too, she reinforced them in their intellectual dependency during her lifetime and some of her acolytes and their acolytes continue down the same road. But a renaissance in Objectivist and Rand scholarship is already well underway. If you're interested, you should check out, e.g., _The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies_ at: http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/index.asp Shameless plug: You can also check out my site and the links therein: http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/ Cheers! Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 02:16:19 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:16:19 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Time and Posting limits In-Reply-To: <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF7D@tpeex05> <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117181405.02920d70@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> One can always compose a reply to several posts, to stay within the limit. I presume with email 24 hours is prompt enough. If you want faster, go to a chat room. >No question about it. >i'm over the quota for posts yet when someone responds >kindly, it's polite to respond back ASAP. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From neptune at superlink.net Thu Nov 18 02:30:28 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:30:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand References: <20041117070735.69707.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> <019e01c4ccd6$4aea4030$a6f44d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <00ce01c4cd16$91cca8e0$ec893cd1@pavilion> On Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:50 PM John K Clark jonkc at att.net wrote: > I'll tell you one thing, I'm not impressed with > the followers of Ayn Rand, those armchair > philosophers and self described intellectuals > that call themselves Objectivists. A few > months ago I was invited to join an online > forum called Objectivism Online but I was > soon banned for life. You might do better at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atlantis_II/ There the dicsussion is a lot more freewheeling, though the traffic is not that high, and there have been some more serious discussions of physics. Either way, you'll find it very hard to get "banned for life" from it. > I was astonished at their ignorance of the > revolution in physics and mathematical logic > made during the previous century; they were > oblivious of the profound implications for > philosophy these discoverers had, they didn't > know and they didn't care, they just quoted > Ayn Rand back at me as if what she said was > more important than Bell's experiment or Godel. That's the problem with many Randroids. They've only managed to read some Rand and they think they know everything. Classic true believers. > I said a lot of stuff they didn't like very much but > then I said something that made the howls of > protest reach a crescendo and they looked for > the tar and feathers. The dreadful blasphemy I > dared to utter is this: > > "We've suspected for 80 years and known with > certainty for nearly 40 that some events have no > cause and are random. I mean, I liked Atlas > Shrugged as much as anyone but if Ayn Rand > tells me one thing and experiment tells me > another it's no contest; I'm a rational > man so I have to go with experiment." Good for you. > I don't believe I will go back there. No need to -- unless you just like to argue with people who'll never change -- but please don't dismiss every last Objectivist or every last part of Objectivism itself just because of a few dozen (hundred, thousand, million) ignorant fools. Be critical and see where they or it correspond to reality and chuck out the rest. Cheers! Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html From neptune at superlink.net Thu Nov 18 02:43:54 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:43:54 -0500 Subject: What makes one a libertarian?/was Re: [extropy-chat] Rand References: <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <011901c4cd18$726d6e60$ec893cd1@pavilion> On Wednesday, November 17, 2004 7:25 PM Al Brooks kerry_prez at yahoo.com wrote: > Libertarians used to be on this list > (heavens to Betsy, where did they > go?), I consider myself one and I'm still here. I just don't post all that much. > and for such sharp people-- such as > Mike Lorrey who appears to be a > polymath-- to be so exercised arouses > my curiosity as to what provoked them > to become almost hysterically > antigovernment. Were they severely > penalized by Internal Revenue? Did > many of them work previously for the > state- only to flip when they saw too > much? Well, that question presupposes that something non-logical must make people libertarians -- like a traumatic experience. Isn't it possible that some libertarians might just be libertarian because they believe the idea to be sound, logical, and better than the alternatives? I fancy myself that sort of libertarian. Maybe I'm deluded, but what's to be gained by a psychologistic argument? > They are as militant in their own way > as Communists, leading me to wonder > what makes them tick. That might be true of some, but not all. Also, it depends on what you mean by "militant." If you mean stern and uncompromising, then the term is being abused, especially since it generally has a negative connotation. For example, would you call a "stern and uncompromising" pacifist a _militant_ pacifist?:) If you mean actually taking up arms against others, then I know of no libertarian who has actually done that. After all, in most places, that's illegal and will be met with a quick, decisive, and armed response by the authorities. Cheers! Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html From neptune at superlink.net Thu Nov 18 02:50:10 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:50:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AF7D@tpeex05> Message-ID: <013901c4cd19$5285e680$ec893cd1@pavilion> ??On Wednesday, November 17, 2004 7:06 PM Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > Rand's absolute Objectivism is just at the > one extreme of life. Of course, the other > extreme is the subjectivism. It's better to > be at the middle way to see the world. > This world includes everything, not just > one extreme. Maybe you're right, but Rand actually saw the extremes as subjectivism and intrinsicism with Objectivism dialectically melding the best aspects of both while dumping out the worst aspects of either. For more on this, see "Dialectical Objectivism: An Answer to Ronald E. Merrill" at: http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/Dialecti.html and Chris Sciabarra's _Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical_ "abstract" page at: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/rad/nonserv.htm But, of course, that doesn't mean she was right.:) Cheers! Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Nov 18 03:00:40 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:30:40 +1030 Subject: [extropy-chat] Australia really is a different democracy from America In-Reply-To: <345F6EA2-36EF-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> References: <345F6EA2-36EF-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <710b78fc041117190025f3a864@mail.gmail.com> lol! I particularly loved this: "Mr La Rosa welcomed Friday's decision, saying that if the authorities wanted to tax his profits, they should also take account of his losses. " (this is a guy who's income was assessed by the tax office for a particular year as A$450,000, claiming this was A$220,000 too high because that money was stolen from him) Fair call, really. Emlyn On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:14:58 +0100, Patrick Wilken wrote: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2968938.stm > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From sjvans at ameritech.net Thu Nov 18 03:09:59 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:09:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Survey - Ireland best country to live in -- tech facilitated social evolution In-Reply-To: <419BE50D.60505@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <20041118030959.28381.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." wrote: > When I was in high school in 1971 we had a current > affairs class and > studied the Quebec Canada FLQ separatist movement > and the Irish IRA. Ireland seemed like a pretty > terrible place to live > then. I think you are confusing Ireland and Northern Ireland. Most of Ireland achieved independence in 1921 iirc. The IRC wanted the North to join them, but I don't think they ever did much in the already independent south. From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 18 03:26:36 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:26:36 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing In-Reply-To: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <006d01c4cd1e$691010b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Of Kevin Freels So now I have to decide. Which one of these is the most worthy? My first instinct is to go with folding at home and/or genome at home, but the World Community Grid seems to have a lot of backing and may move along faster. Does anyone have any input to offer on this? Kevin, GIMPS won't solve any medical mysteries, but it might make you a $1E5-aire. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Nov 18 04:28:11 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:28:11 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dante and Transhuman In-Reply-To: <20041117202557.86155.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <73960-2200411317195416884@M2W041.mail2web.com> <20041117202557.86155.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041117222413.023f1ec0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Your hyperbole just isn't interesting to me. Natasha At 02:25 PM 11/17/2004, you wrote: >The connection between Dante and advanced life extension (which is my >shorthand for transhumanism) is too remote for my liking. How far can we >stretch it? perhaps Jesus was the first extropian when he broke the loaves >and fishes into enough fragments to feed that large crowd of hungry people >two thousand years ago? >My quota of posts has been reached for the list today, and you don't want >a blizzard of back & forth to your email, do you? > >"natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: >It would take me at least an hour to convey my views and research about the >beginnings of transhumanism and the idea of the transhuman. At this >moment, I only have a few minutes, so I'll be brief. > >In being fair-minded, we need to consider the environment of the time in >which Dante lived, just as we do with today and Huxley's time. Huxley >believed in a "New Divinity" while Dante believed in "philosophical >wisdom." What this meant to them may not be what it means to us by today's >standards and language. The bottom line is that both wanted something more >than an ordinary human condition. > >Dante: "He was one of the most learned Italian laymen of his day, >intimately familiar with Aristotelian logic and natur! al philosophy, >theology (he had a special affinity for the thought of Albert the Great and >Thomas Aquinas), and classical literature. His writings reflect this in its >mingling of philosophical and theological language, invoking Aristotle and >the neo-Platonists side by side with the poet of the psalms. Like Aquinas, >Dante wished to summon his audience to the practice of philosophical >wisdom, though by means of truths embedded in his own poetry, rather than >mysteriously embodied in scripture." (Stanford University) > >Let us not dismiss of the world and society of Dante and his ideas about >the transhuman. >Today we can harshly criticize those who have spiritual beliefs, but we >leaned that it is not completely appropriate since spirituality also >includes those who simply want peace of mind. Since the transhumanist >community has grown to include several religious sectors, we cannot defame >Dante or Huxley or any of us for our personal unconventional views. > >As such, an afterlife in the far past could possibly equal an afterlife >today, as we know it as technological immortality. In Dante's time, there >were no such things as molecular engineering, cryonics, and the medical and >scientific innovations that we are aware of today that could make our >dreams of a longer life feasible. > >There are many steps in the direction of enlightenment, and some of the >footprints belong to Dante. > >Natasha Vita-More > > >Do you Yahoo!? >Discover all that's new in My Yahoo! >_______________________________________________ >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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alito at organicrobot.com Thu Nov 18 05:21:47 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:21:47 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory Message-ID: <1100755307.27591.306.camel@alito.homeip.net> ( http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=570&ncid=753&e=2&u=/nm/20041117/sc_nm/science_running_dc ) By Patricia Reaney Humans Were Born to Run, Scientists Say LONDON (Reuters) - Humans were born to run and evolved from ape-like creatures into the way they look today probably because of the need to cover long distances and compete for food, scientists said on Wednesday. >From tendons and ligaments in the legs and feet that act like springs and skull features that help prevent overheating, to well-defined buttocks that stabilize the body, the human anatomy is shaped for running. .... "There were 2.5 million to 3 million years of bipedal walking without ever looking like a human, so is walking going to be what suddenly transforms the hominid body?" said Bramble. "We're saying 'no, walking won't do that, but running will."' If natural selection did not favor running, the scientists believe humans would still look a lot like apes. "Running has substantially shaped human evolution. Running made us human -- at least in the anatomical sense," Bramble added. Among the features that set humans apart from apes to make them good runners are longer legs to take longer strides, shorter forearms to enable the upper body to counterbalance the lower half during running and larger disks which allow for better shock absorption. Big buttocks are also important. "Have you ever looked at an ape? They have no buns," said Bramble. Humans lean forward when they run and the buttocks "keep you from pitching over on your nose each time a foot hits the ground," he added. From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 05:37:18 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:37:18 -0800 Subject: What makes one a libertarian?/was Re: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <011901c4cd18$726d6e60$ec893cd1@pavilion> References: <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> <011901c4cd18$726d6e60$ec893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117212935.029477e8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, I am registered as one. How - ever, I can't say I fully agree with them. Some issues are: 1) Very strange folk who become Lib candidates. Not very palatable, just other parties are at least as bad. 2) No real way to deal with people who are hurt enough to need some assistance, during some parts of my life, welfare and soc security were a godsend, albeit inadequate. 3) Lib and Anarchy both presume rational people and decision making. Nice ideal, but unreal. Al Brooks kerry_prez at yahoo.com wrote: > > Libertarians used to be on this list > > (heavens to Betsy, where did they > > go?), TechnoT said: >Well, that question presupposes that something non-logical must make >people libertarians -- like a traumatic experience. Isn't it possible >that some libertarians might just be libertarian because they believe >the idea to be sound, logical, and better than the alternatives? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 05:39:47 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:39:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Australia really is a different democracy from America In-Reply-To: <710b78fc041117190025f3a864@mail.gmail.com> References: <345F6EA2-36EF-11D9-BABA-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> <710b78fc041117190025f3a864@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117213755.0293c9a0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Cool! How about a tax on stolen money! Just the reason to encourage folks to tote guns everywhere! ;) "Mr La Rosa welcomed Friday's decision, saying that if the authorities >wanted to tax his profits, they should also take account of his >losses. " > >(this is a guy who's income was assessed by the tax office for a >particular year as A$450,000, claiming this was A$220,000 too high >because that money was stolen from him) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 05:43:47 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:43:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dante and Transhuman In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041117222413.023f1ec0@pop-server.austin.rr.com > References: <73960-2200411317195416884@M2W041.mail2web.com> <20041117202557.86155.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.2.0.0.20041117222413.023f1ec0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117214146.0293c480@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Do bear in mind the first shaman who became one with the spirits can be considered a proto-transhuman.... >Your hyperbole just isn't interesting to me. >Natasha > >>The connection between Dante and advanced life extension (which is my >>shorthand for transhumanism)... >>"natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: >>It would take me at least an hour to convey my views and research about the >>beginnings of transhumanism ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 05:47:01 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:47:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Running on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: <1100755307.27591.306.camel@alito.homeip.net> References: <1100755307.27591.306.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117214503.02947038@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> That humans are the best long distance runners and cursorial hunters is a well known fact, I am glad the media are catching up, so to speak. >By Patricia Reaney >Humans Were Born to Run, Scientists Say ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 18 06:19:53 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:19:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: <1100755307.27591.306.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Alejandro Dubrovsky > Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory > > http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=570&ncid=753&e =2&u=/nm/20041117/sc_nm/science_running_dc > > By Patricia Reaney > Humans Were Born to Run, Scientists Say > > LONDON (Reuters) - Humans were born to run and evolved from ape-like > creatures into the way they look today probably because of the need to > cover long distances and compete for food, scientists said on > Wednesday... I'm thinking this over, and it does have some merits. It actually competes with my big ass theory, which condenses to something like this: humans have some exaggerated features resulting from sex selection, not from inherent functional usefulness, the two most remarkable examples being pecs and gluts. I have been pondering the counter indicators: what functions could our enormous pecs and butts have, if not for simply attracting mates? Large pecs would be good for hurling objects, which would be enormously useful in hunting. Here the argument sounds a little circular, so please ponder before responding. If large pecs and gluts helps the hunter hurl and run, then potential mates capable of logic might reason that the individual with these traits might be a superior choice for a mate. This individual might be better able to chase, slay and bring home the bacon. Today we do not criticize one for choosing a mate with more earning potential. If life were dependent upon hunting, so much the more advisable for choosing one with the wherewithal to hunt. This all becomes quite difficult to unravel. Clearly the fastest runners have great butts, as amply demonstrated by the Olympic sprinters. But perhaps humans chose to mate with the best butts, which *resulted in* fast runners. Perhaps humans chose big chests for looks, which resulted in good weapons hurlers. Perhaps we chose big headed mates because they were cute, which resulted in a really smart species. My notion that we have butts, chests and brains greater than strictly necessary for hunting then would depend on the one example I can think of that goes the other way: the knees. We dislike big knobby knees, right? Models of both genders have understated knees. Perhaps humans selected undersized knees for cosmetic reasons, which today results in the knees being a general problem area. The knee cartilage often wears out before our other parts: the load bearing area is too small, resulting in the pressure being too large. Either that or I am subconsciously trying to explain my own lack of success with the opposite gender in my teenage years by blaming my flat chest and bony ass. spike From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 18 06:26:52 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 07:26:52 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing In-Reply-To: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Well the athome projects started with setiathome have been precursors of grid computing. I think we can still see them as practical implementations of grid computing even if they do not use the Globus software and other "official" grid components. A question: is there anything like AIathome? I mean some project aimed at developing a conscious AI, or more realistically some preliminary implementation of AI, based on athome or grid computational components and using all subscribed PCs in the world as neurons? Now this would be a global brain! G. On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:31:37 -0600, Kevin Freels wrote: > > A year or so ago I joined in the folding at home distributed computing project. > I have been out for some time, but I thought I would check back in on it. > > I stumbled across "World Community Grid" that is doing the Human Proteome > Folding Project. It seems like a similar project. I also found genome at home, > and Einstein at home . Then I found Xgrid, Lifemapper, and a host of others. > > So now I have to decide. Which one of these is the most worthy? My first > instinct is to go with folding at home and/or genome at home, but the World > Community Grid seems to have a lot of backing and may move along faster. > > Does anyone have any input to offer on this? From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 07:35:05 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:35:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: What makes one a libertarian? In-Reply-To: <011901c4cd18$726d6e60$ec893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20041118073505.68380.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Yes, there are in fact militant pacifists, I'm related to some. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 07:49:35 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:49:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <00b901c4cd15$521483e0$ec893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20041118074935.45869.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> BTW whatever happened to Gingrich? He was interested in discussing and more than merely discussing the future, the Contract With America might have been a mid- '90s fad, but Gingrich wasn't a faddist, he was serious. It doesn't matter to me that he was Republican, Gingrich had much to offer in discussing the future with Republicans who would otherwise pay little attention. Yet Gingrich faded from view after a season or two. > > Rand appears to me as being a more > > philosophical version of Newt Gingrich, > > only more oriented to the '50s Organization > > Men than to the 21st century's individualism. > I disagree. I think there are many lessons to be > drawn from her > philosophy and it shouldn't be dismissed lightly. > Well, that's my > opinion anyway, and I'm sticking to it.:) I do > think, however, that > [too] many of her admirers are merely followers and > they kind of fit > into that mold of 1950s conformists. Sadly, too, > she reinforced them in > their intellectual dependency during her lifetime > and some of her > acolytes and their acolytes continue down the same > road. But a > renaissance in Objectivist and Rand scholarship is > already well > underway. If you're interested, you should check > out, e.g., _The > Journal of Ayn Rand Studies_ at: > > http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/index.asp > > Shameless plug: You can also check out my site and > the links therein: > > http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/ > > Cheers! > > Dan > http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/MyWorksBySubject.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 07:22:47 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:22:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: What makes one a libertarian? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117212935.029477e8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041118072247.57947.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Sure, some. Nevertheless the widespread libertarian fear of the state makes little sense; mistrust, yes, fear, no. Their fear is justified-yet-misplaced, for instance there is indeed a real risk of having firearms taken, however with an organization such as the NRA guarding second amendment rights the odds are vastly greater a robber will break in to their homes to remove firearms than the state will do so. Lib is very attractive philosophically, who doesn't want more personal liberty? What isn't at all attractive is the antigovernment paranoia many libs suffer from. In the '70s I liked libertarianism more than anything and went to meetings. Thereafter, listening to near-hysterical antistatist talk, I lost serious interest. Orwell wrote how Christians are the worst advertisements for their creed- same might be said for libs. > Isn't it possible that some libertarians might just be libertarian > because they believe the idea to be sound, logical, and better than >the alternatives? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Nov 18 09:07:34 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:07:34 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <019e01c4ccd6$4aea4030$a6f44d0c@hal2001> References: <20041117070735.69707.qmail@web51607.mail.yahoo.com> <019e01c4ccd6$4aea4030$a6f44d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <419C6656.7090908@mac.com> I am not impressed with *some* of the followers either. Ayn Rand would roll in her grave over the shenanigans of so-called "objectivist" fundamentalists and Pope Peikoff. They quote the words and argue to death trivial points while nearly completely misunderstanding or ignoring much of what was good and important in her thought and work. It would be a mistake though to see only the errors she made or the pedantic fools amoung her followers. There are many other objectivists who are some of the finest and most clear-headed people I know. I owe Ayn Rand a tremendous debt of gratitude. She got me to truly respect the mind and to see the world far differently than the cultural norms of my youth. The very act of grappling with her ideas sharpened my own ability to think about a great number of things. And, despite dark areas, her Sense of Life truly was superb and powerfully communicated. - samantha John K Clark wrote: > I'll tell you one thing, I'm not impressed with the followers of Ayn > Rand, > those armchair philosophers and self described intellectuals that call > themselves Objectivists. A few months ago I was invited to join an > online > forum called Objectivism Online but I was soon banned for life. I was > astonished at their ignorance of the revolution in physics and > mathematical > logic made during the previous century; they were oblivious of the > profound > implications for philosophy these discoverers had, they didn't know > and they > didn't care, they just quoted Ayn Rand back at me as if what she said was > more important than Bell's experiment or Godel. I said a lot of stuff > they > didn't like very much but then I said something that made the howls of > protest reach a crescendo and they looked for the tar and feathers. The > dreadful blasphemy I dared to utter is this: > > "We've suspected for 80 years and known with certainty for nearly 40 that > some events have no cause and are random. > I mean, I liked Atlas Shrugged as much as anyone but if Ayn Rand tells me > one thing and experiment tells me another it's no contest; I'm a rational > man so I have to go with experiment." > > I don't believe I will go back there. > > John K Clark jonkc at att.net > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Nov 18 09:20:46 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:20:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041118002509.10617.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <419C696E.30501@mac.com> This is psychologizing and ad-hominem with a long handle. It has no place here. Please constrain yourself to arguing for what you believe is so and against what you believe isn't without attempting to shift the discussion to the motives or life histories etc. of those who disagree with you. These are other people, not bugs for you to take apart in your implied superiority. This sort of tactic sucks. - samantha Al Brooks wrote: >No question about it. >i'm over the quota for posts yet when someone responds >kindly, it's polite to respond back ASAP. Libertarians >used to be on this list (heavens to Betsy, where did >they go?), and for such sharp people-- such as Mike >Lorrey who appears to be a polymath-- to be so >exercised arouses my curiosity as to what provoked >them to become almost hysterically antigovernment. >Were they severely penalized by Internal Revenue? Did >many of them work previously for the state- only to >flip when they saw too much? >They are as militant in their own way as Communists, >leading me to wonder what makes them tick. > > > >>Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: >>Rand's absolute Objectivism is just at the one >>extreme of life. >>Of course, the other extreme is the subjectivism. >>It's better to be at the middle way to see the >>world. >>This world includes everything, not just one >>extreme. >> >>Thanks. >> >>Walter. >>--------- >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >>[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On >>Behalf Of Al Brooks >>Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 3:20 AM >>To: ExI chat list >>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Rand >> >> >>The Randians may be 'playing dumb'. Over & over >>again I've had >>communications - or lack thereof- with coy >>respondents. What Randians appear >>to be saying is, to paraphrase a conservative >>dictum, 'that which is not >>unambigiously conservative tends to erode towards >>something else'. In the >>case of Randians, they might be saying, 'that which >>is not pro- free market >>and work ethic tends to erode towards command >>economics and evasion of >>responsibilities', and this is clear & >>understandable; however when Randians >>act like martinets, even if they are merely putting >>on an act, they can >>only hope to snare those who are susceptible to >>rope-a-dope rhetoric. >> >> >>John K Clark wrote:[...] they just >>quoted Ayn Rand back at >>me as if what she said was more important than >>Bell's experiment or Godel. I >>said a lot of stuff they didn't like very much but >>then I said something >>that made the howls of >>protest reach a crescendo and they looked for the >>tar and feathers. The >>dreadful blasphemy I dared to utter is this: >> >>"We've suspected for 80 years and known with >>certainty for nearly 40 that >>some events have no cause and are random. >>I mean, I liked Atlas Shrugged as much as anyone but >>if Ayn Rand tells me >>one thing and experiment tells me another it's no >>contest; I'm a rational >>man so I have to go with experiment." >> >>I don't believe I will go back there. >> >>John K Clark jonkc at att.net >> >> >> >> >> >> _____ >> >>Do you Yahoo!? >>The all-new My Yahoo! ?Get >>yours free! >> >> >> >>>_______________________________________________ >>> >>> >>extropy-chat mailing list >>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> >> >> >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! >http://my.yahoo.com > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 09:26:00 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:26:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <419C696E.30501@mac.com> Message-ID: <20041118092600.69074.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> No, as usual you and I don't agree, these libertarians are different & interesting to me, and kind Randian responders have illuminated their thinking in very recent posts. Merely because I cannot get along with you and, say, Smigrodzki, does not mean there are not a few I can communicate with. Implied superiority? Takes one to know one. > Samantha Atkins wrote: > These are other people, not bugs for you > to take apart in > your implied superiority. This sort of tactic > sucks. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Thu Nov 18 10:15:34 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:15:34 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <004201c4cd57$8b086ad0$03bb1b97@administxl09yj> > A question: is there anything like AIathome? [...] > Now this would be a global brain! > Giu1iO In the mean time they are developing theoretical models ... Barabasi http://www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0106096 Pietronero (Rome) http://www.arxiv.org/abs/nlin.AO/0411011 From hemm at openlink.com.br Thu Nov 18 11:18:07 2004 From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:18:07 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <010201c4cd60$47e98fa0$fe00a8c0@HEMM> This would be interesting. and what if some guys (and girls) that waste their time developing viruses and trojans started to develop the ultimate trojan, based on AI to turn every infected computer into a neuron of the world brain. Good plot for a SciFi novel. Then this giant AI could proceed with the usual "killing humans" stuff... :-) Please not again the same clich?. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" To: "Kevin Freels" ; "ExI chat list" ; Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 4:26 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing | Well the athome projects started with setiathome have been precursors | of grid computing. I think we can still see them as practical | implementations of grid computing even if they do not use the Globus | software and other "official" grid components. | A question: is there anything like AIathome? I mean some project aimed | at developing a conscious AI, or more realistically some preliminary | implementation of AI, based on athome or grid computational components | and using all subscribed PCs in the world as neurons? Now this would | be a global brain! | G. | | On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 16:31:37 -0600, Kevin Freels | wrote: | > | > A year or so ago I joined in the folding at home distributed computing project. | > I have been out for some time, but I thought I would check back in on it. | > | > I stumbled across "World Community Grid" that is doing the Human Proteome | > Folding Project. It seems like a similar project. I also found genome at home, | > and Einstein at home . Then I found Xgrid, Lifemapper, and a host of others. | > | > So now I have to decide. Which one of these is the most worthy? My first | > instinct is to go with folding at home and/or genome at home, but the World | > Community Grid seems to have a lot of backing and may move along faster. | > | > Does anyone have any input to offer on this? | _______________________________________________ | extropy-chat mailing list | extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org | http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat | From naddy at mips.inka.de Thu Nov 18 13:45:22 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:45:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory References: <1100755307.27591.306.camel@alito.homeip.net> <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: Spike wrote: > I'm thinking this over, and it does have some merits. > It actually competes with my big ass theory, which > condenses to something like this: humans have some > exaggerated features resulting from sex selection, > not from inherent functional usefulness, the two most > remarkable examples being pecs and gluts. The one glaring and uncontroversial (I think) example being women's breasts. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 18 15:48:02 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 07:48:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c4cd85$fc867070$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Christian Weisgerber > Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory > > > Spike wrote: > > > I'm thinking this over, and it does have some merits. > > It actually competes with my big ass theory, which > > condenses to something like this: humans have some > > exaggerated features resulting from sex selection, > > not from inherent functional usefulness, the two most > > remarkable examples being pecs and gluts. > > The one glaring and uncontroversial (I think) example being women's > breasts. > > -- > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber > naddy at mips.inka.de It may be *slightly* more subtle than it appears, for a female chimp's breasts enlarge noticably when they are fertile and receptive to mating. The alpha male chimp might look around and see who is in the mood. By choosing those, he would increase his chances of offspring. In humans, the breasts are enlarged always, so the female appears fertile and receptive 24/7. Coloring the lips red might also add to this perception, causing stable monogamous pairs to form, which increases the stability of a human group. spike From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Nov 18 16:14:05 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:14:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency In-Reply-To: <20041117184254.35052.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Mass and weight are only one factor in vehicle safety. Seeing as how I was hit by an oncoming chevy avalanche about two years ago and survived pretty much unscathed, I'll go with my saab over a heavier towncar (whose frame is not as intelligently designed with safety in mind). Do you know that the safety ratings are partly formed by side and front impact crash testing? It seems comical to ignore these tests just because one vehicle is heavier than another. It's not like a bunch of eggheads think up which is best, they smash them into stuff to figure out how the car responds. Additionally, saab keeps track of all saab accidents so they can refine design. So the relative safety of vehicles isn't just theoretical or on paper. BAL >From: Al Brooks >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency >Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:42:54 -0800 (PST) > >Your Saab may be safer on paper, but when the crunch came would you be >safer than if you were in a larger heavier vehicle? There is only one way >to find out. Safety ratings don't mean much until you are in an accident. >Personally I will choose a larger heavier auto over a Saab no matter what >the Saab's safety ratings are. >BTW an auto worker in Detroit told me he was making over $30 an hour. No >wonder the price of autos is so high. > > >Brian Lee wrote: >It's not just size and weight though. My saab 9-3 has better safety ratings >than a lincoln towncar and weighs 1000 lbs less (3285 vs. 4359). It is also >nimbler and faster so I can better avoid accidents. > >BAL > > >From: Al Brooks > >To: ExI chat list > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency > >Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:05:53 -0800 (PST) > > > >--- Alan Eliasen wrote: > >Yes, I was being hard on Detroit, they have to keep > >their prices affordable while paying high salaries to > >their workers. > >Anyhow, though heavy vehicles are fuel gulpers they do > >offer more protection in accidents. I got sideswiped > >by an 18 wheeler once while driving a Lincoln; could > >have been killed had I been driving a lighter vehicle. > > > > > > >Considering that the thruster has a thrust of a > > > whopping 70 millinewtons, > > > (that's the force exerted by about 7 U.S. dollar > > > bills, or about 7 raisins, > > > sitting in earth's gravity) a 2000-lb car could go > > > from 0 to 60 mph in ... 4 > > > days? If you eliminate all sources of friction, > > > that is. That's probably the > > > guy who was in front of me in traffic tonight. > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________ > >Do you Yahoo!? > >Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! > >http://my.yahoo.com > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 16:33:28 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:33:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: What makes one a libertarian? References: <20041118072247.57947.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006b01c4cd8c$59438810$8bb32643@kevin> You are suffering from a severe case of classificationia. You are classifying all of the libertarians as paranoid nuts. What you fail to realize is that many of the paranoid nut survivalists out there are fascist or republican as well. Some are even Democrats. Also, the NRA is partially composed of libertarians. You have made a logical fallicy by stating that libertarian fears of having the gov't take their firearms are misplaced since their gun rights are protected by the NRA. Yes, there is the fear that a robber could steal our guns, but that's how robbers get shot. The purpose of those weapons is to protect against such people. It is foolish to believe that the government can protect a person from these people. The point behind libertarianism is that people are responsible for their own well being and protection. Police are to investigate crimes and capture criminals AFTER they commit a crime. The judicial system is there to punish them. Now we have police writing people tickets for not taking care of their own well being by not wearing seatbelts in their own cars. One of the reasons supporters of seatbelt laws give is the cost to taxpayers of people not wearing their seatbelts. Noone ever bothers to ask "why is it costing taxpayers anything at all?" Libertarians are not anarchists and they are usually not militant. There are a few bad apples on any tree, which is what I suppose you have been exposed to. I am a libertarian. I supported Bush. You will find that some libertarians supported Kerry as well. You will never figure out what makes one a libertarian if you are looking to put every libertarian in the same neat little box. Instead you will find that we all agree on a few simple ideas. Mainly that it is generally wrong to take people's hard earned money and give it to others. Taxes are too high. That the function of the military is to protect the country from outside forces by having the ability to kill people and break things. That laws should only be enacted to protect people from others and not from themselves. That each person has a right to excercise free speech and freedom of religion. That everyone has a right to keep and bear arms. etc. Inside the party, there are debates as to what constitutes too much government involvement or not enough. For example, I think that public education is a necessity. Mike Lorrey disagrees with me. We both agree that the entire current system is screwed up and takes much more money than necessary. As much as we both support stem cell research, we both agree that it is wrong to take a person's money who is against something like stem cell research and use it for that purpose. We think the government should be out of the marriage business. I really hope this helps you to understand. We are not a bunch of ignorant yahoos running around playing survivalist in the woods. You can;t generalize us any more than you can generalize republicans, democrats, southerners, etc. Generalizing and lumping people into groups is perhaps one of the most foolish things that I see people do. Please don;t contribute to the problem. :-) Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Al Brooks" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 1:22 AM Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: What makes one a libertarian? > Sure, some. Nevertheless the widespread libertarian > fear of the state makes little sense; mistrust, yes, > fear, no. Their fear is justified-yet-misplaced, for > instance there is indeed a real risk of having > firearms taken, however with an organization such as > the NRA guarding second amendment rights the odds are > vastly greater a robber will break in to their homes > to remove firearms than the state will do so. Lib is > very attractive philosophically, who doesn't want more > personal liberty? What isn't at all attractive is the > antigovernment paranoia many libs suffer from. In the > '70s I liked libertarianism more than anything and > went to meetings. Thereafter, listening to > near-hysterical antistatist talk, I lost serious > interest. Orwell wrote how Christians are the worst > advertisements for their creed- same might be said for > libs. > > > Isn't it possible that some libertarians might just > be libertarian > > because they believe the idea to be sound, logical, > and better than >the alternatives? > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 17:23:18 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:23:18 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory References: <000001c4cd85$fc867070$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <00d001c4cd93$4c752a10$8bb32643@kevin> Lets try grouping several messages to make a single large post: > > It may be *slightly* more subtle than it appears, for > a female chimp's breasts enlarge noticably when they > are fertile and receptive to mating. The alpha male > chimp might look around and see who is in the mood. By > choosing those, he would increase his chances of offspring. > > In humans, the breasts are enlarged always, so the > female appears fertile and receptive 24/7. Coloring the > lips red might also add to this perception, causing > stable monogamous pairs to form, which increases > the stability of a human group. > > spike An intersting unique human feature to note is how our women have evolved to hide their "readiness". Even their menstrual cycles have moved to the point where they are infertile during the only time that they show any outward display of fertility. This allows a female human to have sex with many males at many times and not get pregnant. Men may never have learned woman's cycles until recently (last 20,000 years or so). If this is the case, then I see an interesting scenario: Women would have sex with men whom were socially important during their menstrual cycle. That man would think he was getting her pregnant and form a monogomous relatinship with her. Meanwhile, she is off mating with her REAL choice of mate during ovulation. The real choice would be someone more attractive physically, yet socially less important such as a younger male with more stamina and a better immune system. She would bear his child, but the child would be raised by the other male and be provided all the fruits of his social status. I have always wondered what would cause a species to give up speed in exchange for stamina. In order for a trait to become normalized in a population, that trait has to be useful and contribute to survival. What use is long distance running when you can;t outrun your predators? The only thing I can think of would be a huge, fast migration where only those with the most stamina would survive. This would then have to be repeated over hundres or even thousands of generations. This would hold to an in and out of Africa many times theory, which I am OK with, but at that speed? What could cause such a thing? I am more inclined to think that we were long distance walkers with stamina first. Running probably evolved with it for the short distance sprints necessary to get away from predators since going back to all fours was not an option. Long distance running would only be a neat little trick that we could do because of the combination we already had of long distance walking and sprinting abilities. I seriously dount that long distance running in itself was selected for. As for Spike's Big Ass Theory, I think it is at least partially true. I am guilty of selecting for the same reason and I am sure my daughters will inherit the trait from their mother. :-) Kevin From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 17:27:38 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:27:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <1100755307.27591.306.camel@alito.homeip.net> <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041118092036.02957de0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> RE a glut of pecs and knees 1. In stone age running starts in childhood and continues through all life. 2. Smaller stature means less pressure (square cube law) 3. Obesity rare, few people even have "normal weight" for height. 4. Cargo load really low, no shoes. Note that anything on feet moves rapidly and creates stronger radial forces. 5. Note sex pattern - slim men for hunting, fat women to bear and nurse children even in famine > > Alejandro Dubrovsky > > Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory spike sez: >I'm thinking this over, and it does have some merits. >It actually competes with my big ass theory, which >condenses to something like this: humans have some >exaggerated features resulting from sex selection, >not from inherent functional usefulness, the two most >remarkable examples being pecs and gluts. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From hal at finney.org Thu Nov 18 17:36:40 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:36:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory Message-ID: <20041118173640.39E5257E2F@finney.org> Kevin Freels writes: > I have always wondered what would cause a species to give up speed in > exchange for stamina. In order for a trait to become normalized in a > population, that trait has to be useful and contribute to survival. What use > is long distance running when you can;t outrun your predators? One thing to keep in mind is that humans have very few predators. We are one of the largest carnivorous animals in the world. Few species can confidently take on an adult human as prey. We are proud of our brains but probably our brawn played just as much a part in our survival. Imagine if we weighed 15 pounds rather than 150; we'd have had a much harder time becoming dominant. > The only > thing I can think of would be a huge, fast migration where only those with > the most stamina would survive. This would then have to be repeated over > hundres or even thousands of generations. This would hold to an in and out > of Africa many times theory, which I am OK with, but at that speed? What > could cause such a thing? I agree, it is hard to imagine a tribe running for hours day after day as part of a migration. Walking is far more energy efficient. I think the more common explanation is that running was used as a form of hunting. Humans can run down most animals, even though the prey is faster in a sprint. After a few hours the animal will be exhausted but the human can still be going strong. The main problem is tracking the prey over that period. It will run, get out of sight, and then stop. But if you're in a plain where tracks are visible, or if you're smart enough to figure out which way it went, it can be a successful hunting style. Hal From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Thu Nov 18 18:41:24 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:41:24 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing Message-ID: <1100803284.5043@whirlwind.he.net> Henrique Moraes Machado : > This would be interesting. and what if some guys (and girls) that > waste their time developing viruses and trojans started to develop > the ultimate trojan, based on AI to turn every infected computer > into a neuron of the world brain. Good plot for a SciFi novel. This is implausible. Latency bounds scalability for algorithm spaces like these. At some point, it costs more to distribute the work than to do it yourself. And for real people doing real work on real systems, shaving a microsecond off the interconnect latency is a big win in terms of overall performance, scalability, and how much work you can distribute. You'd be better off with a single machine with a gobs of disk swap space than a global cluster with hundreds of milliseconds or seconds of latency. You can no more geographically distribute a problem like this to make it scale than you can geographically distribute an ACID-compliant database to make it scale -- same theoretical limitation in both cases. j. andrew rogers From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 20:10:40 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 12:10:40 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: <20041118173640.39E5257E2F@finney.org> References: <20041118173640.39E5257E2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041118120802.0293a8b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Most sprints by prey are a few hundred yards at most. On the open plain, where all this evolved, there really is no cover, so tracking is easy. Also, tracking by stone age humans is a very fine art, most colonial empires hired native help to track fugitves that ran into the bush. >I think the more common explanation is that running was used as a form >of hunting. Humans can run down most animals, even though the prey is >faster in a sprint. After a few hours the animal will be exhausted but >the human can still be going strong. The main problem is tracking the >prey over that period. It will run, get out of sight, and then stop. >But if you're in a plain where tracks are visible, or if you're smart >enough to figure out which way it went, it can be a successful hunting >style. > >Hal ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 23:50:18 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:50:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now that's fuel efficiency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118235018.33469.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> All true, Brian, but on the expressway, I'll drive nothing but a large vehicle, preferably a truck. I feel safer in a truck & drive more safely in it not always being conscious of being in something that feels like a tin can. If I have to think at all about driving, and the vehicle itself, then it isn't automatic. --- Brian Lee wrote: > Mass and weight are only one factor in vehicle > safety. Do you know that the safety ratings are partly > formed by side and front > impact crash testing? It seems comical to ignore > these tests just because > one vehicle is heavier than another. It's not like a > bunch of eggheads think > up which is best, they smash them into stuff to > figure out how the car > responds. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 23:59:54 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:59:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: What makes one a libertarian? In-Reply-To: <006b01c4cd8c$59438810$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041118235955.19720.qmail@web51608.mail.yahoo.com> No doubt. But i go by inperfect but valuable experience, which tells me to keep libertarians, the religious and Marxoids at arms length. Do remember I said I am attracted to libertarianism or I wouldn't discuss it here (or even be here). Or it could be just nostalgia for the '70s when I met some libertarians who were moderate yet serious about, if nothing else, being as free as possible. The NRA does at this time adequately protect second amendment rights. Having a good security system at the location the guns are kept is a higher priority than fearin' the guvmint. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > You are suffering from a severe case of > classificationia. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 00:32:25 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 16:32:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] last message for the day In-Reply-To: <006b01c4cd8c$59438810$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041119003225.22664.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> Who said all or even most libertarians are paranoid? Nonetheless I've met enough rightwing paranoids to make me very leery of speaking with libertarians face-to-face, however this is not because lib does not interest me, quite the opposite. I emphatically do understand the need to be vigilant in regard to firearms legislation-- yet the NRA is very well funded; unless a national emergency arises, second amendment rights are safe. Though those who work for the government are as venal as the rest of us, they are not particularly interested in taking our rights away, much of the conflict is just for show. I've examined all this for almost 30 years, am convinced much of the heated rhetoric is based on nothing more than sound and fury. Don't reply to this message, three posts is enough for me today. Don't get me started. > You are classifying all of the libertarians as paranoid nuts. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 12:31:11 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:31:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: What makes one a libertarian?/was Re: [extropy-chat] Rand In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041117212935.029477e8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041118123111.57767.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hara Ra wrote: > Well, I am registered as one. How - ever, I can't say I fully agree > with them. Some issues are: > > 1) Very strange folk who become Lib candidates. Not very palatable, > just other parties are at least as bad. Some, yes, quite so. Libertarians generally being private people, it takes more than the usual to tick them off enough to want to run for office and expose themselves. Cussedness is not generally attractive. However, I know plenty of local office holders and candidates who are just fine, some who are libertarians who ran as republicans to get elected. People know where they stand and can count on them not to change their positions. > 2) No real way to deal with people who are hurt enough to need some > assistance, during some parts of my life, welfare and soc security > were a godsend, albeit inadequate. Without crushing tax regiemes, everyone has plenty of income to be as generous as they wish. It is well established that Americans are more generous than europeans because Americans are taxed less and europeans think that 'it's the government's job' and thus resent any request for help. I've, at a time when I was homeless, asked for and received private assistance when the state decided that being an able bodied single straight white male with no dependents made me a member of the oppressor class (ergo not capable of victimhood) and therefore ineligible. > 3) Lib and Anarchy both presume rational people and decision making. > Nice ideal, but unreal. Not required, but they work better with such. Lib and ancap society people would be well armed enough that the irrational people would learn to fake it, or at least be polite enough and understand they can no longer force irrationality on others with government. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 14:20:44 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:20:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118142044.74340.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Spike wrote: > > > I'm thinking this over, and it does have some merits. > > It actually competes with my big ass theory, which > > condenses to something like this: humans have some > > exaggerated features resulting from sex selection, > > not from inherent functional usefulness, the two most > > remarkable examples being pecs and gluts. > > The one glaring and uncontroversial (I think) example being women's > breasts. Our version of camel humps for long treks... gotta have a regulare source of protein for growing kids when the men are out on the hunt for days or weeks at a time. > > -- > Christian "naddy" Weisgerber > naddy at mips.inka.de > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From dgc at cox.net Fri Nov 19 01:34:51 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:34:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing In-Reply-To: <004201c4cd57$8b086ad0$03bb1b97@administxl09yj> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <004201c4cd57$8b086ad0$03bb1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <419D4DBB.8000509@cox.net> scerir wrote: >>A question: is there anything like AIathome? [...] >>Now this would be a global brain! >>Giu1iO >> >> > >In the mean time they are developing theoretical >models ... > > > Actually, the largest and most powerful distributed computing networks are all too easy to join. to join, just use a Windows PC and disable your firewall. you will automatically join multiple distributed computing systems. I refer of course to zombie pools. your computer will join multiple pools, some of which have hundreds of thousands of members. Each pool your computer joins will then use it as part of its particular endeavor. The endeavor is almost always the generation of email SPAM, but sometimes it will be a DDoS attack. From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 19 02:36:42 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:36:42 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 Message-ID: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> My little brother, Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, is dead. He died November 1st. His body was found without identification. The family found out on November 4th. I spent a week and a half with my family in Chicago, and am now back in Atlanta. I've been putting off telling my friends, because it's such a hard thing to say. I used to say: "I have four living grandparents and I intend to have four living grandparents when the last star in the Milky Way burns out." I still have four living grandparents, but I don't think I'll be saying that any more. Even if we make it to and through the Singularity, it will be too late. One of the people I love won't be there. The universe has a surprising ability to stab you through the heart from somewhere you weren't looking. Of all the people I had to protect, I never thought that Yehuda might be one of them. Yehuda was born July 11, 1985. He lived 7053 days. He was nineteen years old when he died. The Jewish religion prescribes a number of rituals and condolences for the occasion of a death. The rituals are pointless and tiring; the condolences are religious idiocies. Yehuda has passed to a better place, God's ways are mysterious but benign, etc. Does such talk really comfort people? I watched my parents, and I don't think it did. The blessing that is spoken at Jewish funerals is "Blessed is God, the true judge." Do they really believe that? Why do they cry at funerals, if they believe that? Does it help someone, to tell them that their religion requires them to believe that? I think I coped better than my parents and my little sister Channah. I was just dealing with pain, not confusion. When I heard on the phone that Yehuda had died, there was never a moment of disbelief. I knew what kind of universe I lived in, and I knew what I planned to do about that. How is my religious family to comprehend it, working, as they must, from the assumption that Yehuda was deliberately murdered by a benevolent God? The same loving God, I presume, who arranges for millions of children to grow up illiterate and starving; the same kindly tribal father-figure who arranged the Holocaust and the Inquisition's torture of witches. I would not hesitate to call it evil, if any sentient mind had committed such an act, permitted such a thing. But I have weighed the evidence as best I can, and I do not believe the universe to be evil, a reply which in these days is called atheism. Maybe it helps to believe in an immortal soul. I know that I would feel a lot better if Yehuda had gone away on a trip somewhere, even if he was never coming back. But Yehuda did not "pass on". Yehuda is not "resting in peace". Yehuda is not coming back. Yehuda doesn't exist any more. Yehuda was absolutely annihilated at the age of nineteen. Yes, that makes me angry. I can't put into words how angry. It would be rage to rend the gates of Heaven and burn down God on Its throne, if any God existed. But there is no God, so my anger burns to tear apart the way-things-are, remake the pattern of a world that permits this. I wonder at the strength of non-transhumanist atheists, to accept so terrible a darkness without any hope of changing it. But then most atheists also succumb to comforting lies, and make excuses for death even less defensible than the outright lies of religion. They flinch away, refuse to confront the horror of a hundred and fifty thousand sentient beings annihilated every day. One point eight lives per second, fifty-five million lives per year. Convert the units, time to life, life to time. The World Trade Center killed half an hour. As of today, all cryonics organizations together have suspended one minute. This essay took twenty thousand lives to write. I wonder if there was ever an atheist who accepted the full horror, making no excuses, offering no consolations, who did not also hope for some future dawn. What must it be like to live in this world, seeing it just the way it is, and think that it will never change, never get any better? Yehuda's death is the first time I ever lost someone close enough for it to hurt. So now I've seen the face of the enemy. Now I understand, a little better, the price of half a second. I don't understand it well, because the human brain has a pattern built into it. We do not grieve forever, but move on. We mourn for a few days and then continue with our lives. Such underreaction poorly equips us to comprehend Yehuda's death. Nineteen years of life and memory annihilated. A thousand years, or a million millennia, or a forever, of future life lost. The sun should have dimmed when Yehuda died, and a chill wind blown in every place that sentient beings gather, to tell us that our number was diminished by one. But the sun did not dim, because we do not live in that sensible a universe. Even if the sun did dim whenever someone died, it wouldn't be noticeable except as a continuous flickering. Soon everyone would get used to it, and they would no longer notice the flickering of the sun. My little brother collected corks from wine bottles. Someone brought home, to the family, a pair of corks they had collected for Yehuda, and never had a chance to give him. And my grandmother said, "Give them to Channah, and someday she'll tell her children about how her brother Yehuda collected corks." My grandmother's words shocked me, stretched across more time than it had ever occurred to me to imagine, to when my fourteen-year-old sister had grown up and had married and was telling her children about the brother she'd lost. How could my grandmother skip across all those years so easily when I was struggling to get through the day? I heard my grandmother's words and thought: she has been through this before. This isn't the first loved one my grandmother has lost, the way Yehuda was the first loved one I'd lost. My grandmother is old enough to have a pattern for dealing with the death of loved ones; she knows how to handle this because she's done it before. And I thought: how can she accept this? If she knows, why isn't she fighting with everything she has to change it? What would it be like to be a rational atheist in the fifteenth century, and know beyond all hope of rescue that everyone you loved would be annihilated, one after another, unless you yourself died first? That is still the fate of humans today; the ongoing horror has not changed, for all that we have hope. Death is not a distant dream, not a terrible tragedy that happens to someone else like the stories you read in newspapers. One day you'll get a phone call, like I got a phone call, and the possibility that seemed distant will become reality. You will mourn, and finish mourning, and go on with your life, and then one day you'll get another phone call. That is the fate this world has in store for you, unless you make a convulsive effort to change it. Since Yehuda's body was not identified for three days after he died, there was no possible way he could have been cryonically suspended. Others may be luckier. If you've been putting off that talk with your loved ones, do it. Maybe they won't understand, but at least you won't spend forever wondering why you didn't even try. There is one Jewish custom associated with death that makes sense to me, which is contributing to charity on behalf of the departed. I am donating eighteen hundred dollars to the general fund of the Singularity Institute, because this has gone on long enough. If you object to the Singularity Institute then consider Dr. Aubrey de Grey's Methuselah Foundation, which hopes to defeat aging through biomedical engineering. I think that a sensible coping strategy for transhumanist atheists, to donate to an anti-death charity after a loved one dies. Death hurt us, so we will unmake Death. Let that be the outlet for our anger, which is terrible and just. I watched Yehuda's coffin lowered into the ground and cried, and then I sat through the eulogy and heard rabbis tell comforting lies. If I had spoken Yehuda's eulogy I would not have comforted the mourners in their loss. I would have told the mourners that Yehuda had been absolutely annihilated, that there was nothing left of him. I would have told them they were right to be angry, that they had been robbed, that something precious and irreplaceable was taken from them, for no reason at all, taken from them and shattered, and they are never getting it back. If there should be a monument someday, somewhere on it will be "$1800, in memoriam Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, 1985-2004." It will not restore him to life. No sentient being deserves such a thing. Let that be my brother's true eulogy, free of comforting lies. When Michael Wilson heard the news, he said: "We shall have to work faster." Any similar condolences are welcome. Other condolences are not. Goodbye, Yehuda. There isn't much point in saying it, since there's no one to hear. Goodbye, Yehuda, you don't exist any more. Nothing left of you after your death, like there was nothing before your birth. You died, and your family, Mom and Dad and Channah and I, sat down at the Sabbath table just like our family had always been composed of only four people, like there had never been a Yehuda. Goodbye, Yehuda Yudkowsky, never to return, never to be forgotten. Love, Eliezer. From nanogirl at halcyon.com Fri Nov 19 03:27:25 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:27:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <004701c4cde7$b39ff2c0$1db71218@Nano> I am so sorry to hear of this news. I know what you are going through Eliezer, when I was fourteen I lost my sister who was 19. I always wonder what she would have become.I stood amid my family saying things like "God takes the good" or "God has something for her to do" and sensing their calming effect in the belief system that I did not embrace. I too, was wide awake to the truth of the matter, and I wanted her here. To this day I am struck by the biological errors that mother nature has dealt to us, leading to disease and finality, and of course also the importance of theories and research needed to overcome these problems. As you know, my husband is currently undergoing chemotherapy so I grapple with the frustration of advanced technologies such as nanotech and others, not yet being readily available to avoid this type of suffering. The concern also grows when I see the fear well up in the general population when it comes to current advances such as stem cell research. As far as the religious afterlife (or other) comfort, I think the problem is, no one has cheated death yet, so the meme continues (at least for some - well probably most) as a way to propagate suppressing the fear of the end. When we show scientific immortality is possible as opposed to religious immortality, there may be more for them to contemplate. I can't wait for the day that death is not inevitable. I am deeply touched by your words and emotions and I completely validate you. The emotions won't go away, but it will at least become more bearable over time. Perhaps what remains will help guide you even further down the road you have already begun to travel, with all of our future(s) in mind. I'd like to thank you for that. My condolences to you, as well as my constant support for humanity to move beyond this barrier. Again, I'm so sorry, warmest regards- Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org My New Project: Microscope Jewelry http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." ----- Original Message ----- From: Eliezer Yudkowsky To: sl4 at sl4.org Cc: World Transhumanist Association Discussion List ; ExI chat list Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:36 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 My little brother, Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, is dead. He died November 1st. His body was found without identification. The family found out on November 4th. I spent a week and a half with my family in Chicago, and am now back in Atlanta. I've been putting off telling my friends, because it's such a hard thing to say. I used to say: "I have four living grandparents and I intend to have four living grandparents when the last star in the Milky Way burns out." I still have four living grandparents, but I don't think I'll be saying that any more. Even if we make it to and through the Singularity, it will be too late. One of the people I love won't be there. The universe has a surprising ability to stab you through the heart from somewhere you weren't looking. Of all the people I had to protect, I never thought that Yehuda might be one of them. Yehuda was born July 11, 1985. He lived 7053 days. He was nineteen years old when he died. The Jewish religion prescribes a number of rituals and condolences for the occasion of a death. The rituals are pointless and tiring; the condolences are religious idiocies. Yehuda has passed to a better place, God's ways are mysterious but benign, etc. Does such talk really comfort people? I watched my parents, and I don't think it did. The blessing that is spoken at Jewish funerals is "Blessed is God, the true judge." Do they really believe that? Why do they cry at funerals, if they believe that? Does it help someone, to tell them that their religion requires them to believe that? I think I coped better than my parents and my little sister Channah. I was just dealing with pain, not confusion. When I heard on the phone that Yehuda had died, there was never a moment of disbelief. I knew what kind of universe I lived in, and I knew what I planned to do about that. How is my religious family to comprehend it, working, as they must, from the assumption that Yehuda was deliberately murdered by a benevolent God? The same loving God, I presume, who arranges for millions of children to grow up illiterate and starving; the same kindly tribal father-figure who arranged the Holocaust and the Inquisition's torture of witches. I would not hesitate to call it evil, if any sentient mind had committed such an act, permitted such a thing. But I have weighed the evidence as best I can, and I do not believe the universe to be evil, a reply which in these days is called atheism. Maybe it helps to believe in an immortal soul. I know that I would feel a lot better if Yehuda had gone away on a trip somewhere, even if he was never coming back. But Yehuda did not "pass on". Yehuda is not "resting in peace". Yehuda is not coming back. Yehuda doesn't exist any more. Yehuda was absolutely annihilated at the age of nineteen. Yes, that makes me angry. I can't put into words how angry. It would be rage to rend the gates of Heaven and burn down God on Its throne, if any God existed. But there is no God, so my anger burns to tear apart the way-things-are, remake the pattern of a world that permits this. I wonder at the strength of non-transhumanist atheists, to accept so terrible a darkness without any hope of changing it. But then most atheists also succumb to comforting lies, and make excuses for death even less defensible than the outright lies of religion. They flinch away, refuse to confront the horror of a hundred and fifty thousand sentient beings annihilated every day. One point eight lives per second, fifty-five million lives per year. Convert the units, time to life, life to time. The World Trade Center killed half an hour. As of today, all cryonics organizations together have suspended one minute. This essay took twenty thousand lives to write. I wonder if there was ever an atheist who accepted the full horror, making no excuses, offering no consolations, who did not also hope for some future dawn. What must it be like to live in this world, seeing it just the way it is, and think that it will never change, never get any better? Yehuda's death is the first time I ever lost someone close enough for it to hurt. So now I've seen the face of the enemy. Now I understand, a little better, the price of half a second. I don't understand it well, because the human brain has a pattern built into it. We do not grieve forever, but move on. We mourn for a few days and then continue with our lives. Such underreaction poorly equips us to comprehend Yehuda's death. Nineteen years of life and memory annihilated. A thousand years, or a million millennia, or a forever, of future life lost. The sun should have dimmed when Yehuda died, and a chill wind blown in every place that sentient beings gather, to tell us that our number was diminished by one. But the sun did not dim, because we do not live in that sensible a universe. Even if the sun did dim whenever someone died, it wouldn't be noticeable except as a continuous flickering. Soon everyone would get used to it, and they would no longer notice the flickering of the sun. My little brother collected corks from wine bottles. Someone brought home, to the family, a pair of corks they had collected for Yehuda, and never had a chance to give him. And my grandmother said, "Give them to Channah, and someday she'll tell her children about how her brother Yehuda collected corks." My grandmother's words shocked me, stretched across more time than it had ever occurred to me to imagine, to when my fourteen-year-old sister had grown up and had married and was telling her children about the brother she'd lost. How could my grandmother skip across all those years so easily when I was struggling to get through the day? I heard my grandmother's words and thought: she has been through this before. This isn't the first loved one my grandmother has lost, the way Yehuda was the first loved one I'd lost. My grandmother is old enough to have a pattern for dealing with the death of loved ones; she knows how to handle this because she's done it before. And I thought: how can she accept this? If she knows, why isn't she fighting with everything she has to change it? What would it be like to be a rational atheist in the fifteenth century, and know beyond all hope of rescue that everyone you loved would be annihilated, one after another, unless you yourself died first? That is still the fate of humans today; the ongoing horror has not changed, for all that we have hope. Death is not a distant dream, not a terrible tragedy that happens to someone else like the stories you read in newspapers. One day you'll get a phone call, like I got a phone call, and the possibility that seemed distant will become reality. You will mourn, and finish mourning, and go on with your life, and then one day you'll get another phone call. That is the fate this world has in store for you, unless you make a convulsive effort to change it. Since Yehuda's body was not identified for three days after he died, there was no possible way he could have been cryonically suspended. Others may be luckier. If you've been putting off that talk with your loved ones, do it. Maybe they won't understand, but at least you won't spend forever wondering why you didn't even try. There is one Jewish custom associated with death that makes sense to me, which is contributing to charity on behalf of the departed. I am donating eighteen hundred dollars to the general fund of the Singularity Institute, because this has gone on long enough. If you object to the Singularity Institute then consider Dr. Aubrey de Grey's Methuselah Foundation, which hopes to defeat aging through biomedical engineering. I think that a sensible coping strategy for transhumanist atheists, to donate to an anti-death charity after a loved one dies. Death hurt us, so we will unmake Death. Let that be the outlet for our anger, which is terrible and just. I watched Yehuda's coffin lowered into the ground and cried, and then I sat through the eulogy and heard rabbis tell comforting lies. If I had spoken Yehuda's eulogy I would not have comforted the mourners in their loss. I would have told the mourners that Yehuda had been absolutely annihilated, that there was nothing left of him. I would have told them they were right to be angry, that they had been robbed, that something precious and irreplaceable was taken from them, for no reason at all, taken from them and shattered, and they are never getting it back. If there should be a monument someday, somewhere on it will be "$1800, in memoriam Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, 1985-2004." It will not restore him to life. No sentient being deserves such a thing. Let that be my brother's true eulogy, free of comforting lies. When Michael Wilson heard the news, he said: "We shall have to work faster." Any similar condolences are welcome. Other condolences are not. Goodbye, Yehuda. There isn't much point in saying it, since there's no one to hear. Goodbye, Yehuda, you don't exist any more. Nothing left of you after your death, like there was nothing before your birth. You died, and your family, Mom and Dad and Channah and I, sat down at the Sabbath table just like our family had always been composed of only four people, like there had never been a Yehuda. Goodbye, Yehuda Yudkowsky, never to return, never to be forgotten. Love, Eliezer. _______________________________________________ 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: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 04:07:22 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:07:22 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] UN shoots down proposed US cloning ban Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041118220543.01c5d3c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=31&art_id=qw1100825102602B252 By Irwin Arieff United Nations - Efforts by the United States (US) to secure a global treaty banning the cloning of human embryos, including for stem cell research, were dealt a major setback on Thursday when United Nations (UN) diplomats agreed to work for a political declaration on the issue instead. "This is a done deal. We resume consideration in February on a declaration," said one envoy involved in last-minute negotiations before a showdown on the issue which had been expected at a United Nations committee on Friday. [etc] ======================= Phew! From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 19 05:01:29 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:01:29 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <419D7E29.90102@mac.com> Eliezer, I am extremely sorry for your [/our] loss. Death utterly sucks and humanity would be much better off never pretending otherwise. When I was 14 my cousin who was 17 died. He was in a motorcycle accident and lingered for some hours. We were told to pray for his healing. We prayed. He died. "It must not have been God's will" we were told. Or "we lacked sufficient faith" to pray effectively. I remember how twisted up inside I felt hearing these things, how helpless and how very angry. How could it be "God's will" to snuff out this wonderful young life? How was it up to us to twist ourselves into pretzels somehow in order to save my cousin Virgil or anyone else who need not have been put through such suffering to begin with if a "just" and "good" God was in charge as we were always told? How could the people say these expected things and be all somber and then immediately pretend nothing had happened a mere few hours later? How could they not scream and cry out as I screamed and cried inside? Were they all zombies? If more people stopped making pious or otherwise excuses for the horror of death and disease then we would finally move to end this suffering. When I was 14 I didn't know it was even possible to do so. Many people do not know it still. We must make sure they know. Many more who do know act as if it isn't so. We must never forget our dead and never ever resign ourselves, those we care about or anyone to death. We must truly embrace life not by acceptance of death but by extending life endlessly and without limitation. Eliezer, I salute your deep and utter dedication to life. You are a living inspiration to us all. - samantha From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 19 05:48:53 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:48:53 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? Message-ID: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> The Times: Professor Sir Martin Rees is to suggest that "life, the universe and everything" may be no more than a giant computer simulation with humans reduced to bits of software. Rees, Royal Society professor of astronomy at Cambridge University, will say that it is now possible to conceive of computers so powerful that they could build an entire virtual universe. The possibility that what we see around us may not actually exist has been raised by philosophers many times dating back to the ancient Greeks and appears repeatedly in science fiction. In a television documentary, What We Still Don't Know, to be screened on Channel 4 next month, he will say: "Over a few decades, computers have evolved from being able to simulate only very simple patterns to being able to create virtual worlds with a lot of detail. "If that trend were to continue, then we can imagine computers which will be able to simulate worlds perhaps even as complicated as the one we think we're living in. "This raises the philosophical question: could we ourselves be in such a simulation and could what we think is the universe be some sort of vault of heaven rather than the real thing. In a sense we could be ourselves the creations within this simulation." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1358588,00.html From megao at sasktel.net Fri Nov 19 06:12:06 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:12:06 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004, Greg's Project In-Reply-To: <419D7E29.90102@mac.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <419D7E29.90102@mac.com> Message-ID: <419D8EB6.2000704@sasktel.net> When people who just might have been able to catch the extreme lifespan wave or uploaded their consciousness die in 2004 it is far more tragic than in 1974 when such was only a fanciful dream. I too have lost people near to me who had a statistically better chance than even me to "make the cut". My wife at age 45 and a week this march 21. Only after the fact did I fully realize that there was a conscious knowledge among those caring for her that " simply tweaking treatments would put her out of her misery and bring her peace through death". I still do not forgive myself for not catching onto things ... it was no problem to install a 10,000$ baclofen pump but no one would prescribe the anti-seizure meds that might have stopped the devastating seizures that reduced her to a barely concious state during her last 2 months. I know death was never her wish. I now have a friend and business partner in his 70's who is in his last month due to late detected mesothelioma or asbestos caused lung cancer. He too fought to the end. About 3 weeks ago when I sent him a Kg of hemp bud and a small packet of marijuana to ease his pain he said " That should probably do me" and that was the first time that he accepted that he had lost the battle. Formal religeons are like opiates in that they dull the mind to the urgency of defeating death as we know it. Aethiesm and agnosticism does put the owness on the individual to seize the moment and strive to extend, improve and sustain consciousness. In some ways religeon has served some good purposes but we are now mature enough to survive without this old crutch. Science as the new religeon has now more hope to offer for eternal life than the comforting words of some prophet or other. By the way I have convinced my 17 year old son that he should take my help in a school science fair project . After going over my draft he decided that the theme might be: How can technology allow individuality to survive in a posthuman world. I suggested that he do a 3 sided backboard with a small centerpiece. I had suggested a progression from the history of technology between -100,000 BC until 1950 then 1950-2100 and then the posthuman singularity as a basic theme. Then to research the technological events which began the transhuman era in 1950. What I suggested to him was that it might make the display more dramatic if he make the claim that we are already part way into the transhuman era. He would then research how these events might progress till 2100 and similar to how Raymond Kurzweil says "cause the combined effect of the past human development to happen again before 2100. He changed the focus from a chronological progression to making the transhuman world the centerpiece with the past human and transhuman the flanking sections. Instead of simply researching the science he wants to ask the question...... How in a posthuman world where consciousness is uploaded and jacked into, where hive mind global consciousness composed of some melding of human mind and AI mind can the individual human mind keep its personal identity. He is asking ..... if the singularity might destroy the spark of humanity that has been both our best friend and worst enemy for the last 100,000 years is there a transhuman pathway which will enhance and preserve humanity instead of assimilating and destroying it. Morris Johnson Samantha Atkins wrote: > Eliezer, > > I am extremely sorry for your [/our] loss. Death utterly sucks and > humanity would be much better off never pretending otherwise. > When I was 14 my cousin who was 17 died. He was in a motorcycle > accident and lingered for some hours. We were told to pray for his > healing. We prayed. He died. "It must not have been God's will" > we were told. Or "we lacked sufficient faith" to pray effectively. > I remember how twisted up inside I felt hearing these things, how > helpless and how very angry. How could it be "God's will" to snuff > out this wonderful young life? How was it up to us to twist > ourselves into pretzels somehow in order to save my cousin Virgil or > anyone else who need not have been put through such suffering to begin > with if a "just" and "good" God was in charge as we were always > told? How could the people say these expected things and be all > somber and then immediately pretend nothing had happened a mere few > hours later? How could they not scream and cry out as I screamed and > cried inside? Were they all zombies? > > If more people stopped making pious or otherwise excuses for the > horror of death and disease then we would finally move to end this > suffering. When I was 14 I didn't know it was even possible to do > so. Many people do not know it still. We must make sure they > know. Many more who do know act as if it isn't so. > We must never forget our dead and never ever resign ourselves, those > we care about or anyone to death. We must truly embrace life not by > acceptance of death but by extending life endlessly and without > limitation. > Eliezer, I salute your deep and utter dedication to life. You are a > living inspiration to us all. > > - samantha > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 19 06:29:05 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:29:05 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041118222956c76137@mail.gmail.com> Dear Eliezer, I am so sorry, and I think I know how you are feeling. I felt the same whan my mother died three years ago. I was already a transhumanist long before that, but had not been an active one previously: I just lurked on the lists. But that changed after my mother's death: I felt that there was something that needed being done, and now. My mother was 73, but Yehuda was 19. What a waste, what a cruel thing. I think the best you can do to honor the memory of Yehuda is continuing your work to accelerate the process of overcoming the biologic limits of our species, defeating death, creating friendly superintelligences, merging with them, and moving on. The SIAI is your tribute to Yehuda's memory and your own battle against death: continue to fight it bravely as you have done so far. Giulio On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:36:42 -0500, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > My little brother, Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, is dead... From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 19 06:40:10 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:40:10 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Technothriller: Double Vision Message-ID: <470a3c52041118224071605d65@mail.gmail.com> Every day, billions of dollars are transmitted between businesses electronically using an "unbreakable" encryption technology. But what if that technology suddenly became breakable? Recent advances in quantum physics have shown that it will - sooner or later. That fact is the premise for DOUBLE VISION, a technothriller by physicist and award-winning novelist Randall Ingermanson. "DOUBLE VISION highlights the dark side of this promising new technology," says Ingermanson. "Note that I'm a physicist myself and I love scientific advances. Technology is terrific, but it sometimes has unintended consequences. Quantum computing has already been demonstrated in the lab on a small scale. In time, this technology will lead to machines able to crack our conventional encryption methods. That's going to cause huge problems. The good news is that a radically new and truly unbreakable encryption method has already been demonstrated using - you guessed it - quantum physics." In DOUBLE VISION (Bethany House, November 2004, ISBN 0764227335, $12.99), biophysicist Rachel Meyers uses biological nanoconstruction techniques to make a breakthrough in quantum computing. Teaming up with her eccentric co-worker, Dillon Richard, Rachel finds herself racing the clock when their high-tech startup company loses its funding. Rachel and Dillon find it impossible to work together, so their colleague, Keryn Wills, is called in to mediate. Soon enough, the three find themselves holding a trillion dollar secret that could leave the world's economy naked to any thief smart enough and daring enough to steal the technology. http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2004/11/emw179603.htm From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 19 06:58:25 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:58:25 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004, Greg's Project In-Reply-To: <419D8EB6.2000704@sasktel.net> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <419D7E29.90102@mac.com> <419D8EB6.2000704@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <470a3c5204111822583fc67fad@mail.gmail.com> Morris, I am so sorry to hear about your wife. Now on your son's schoolwork: These is an example of "intelligent objection" to transhumanism, but I think it indicates just lack of imagination. It is like a medieval person objecting to future traveling in a few hours to everywhere on the planet, like "it will eliminate the long journey toward the Holy Grail, the quest, the long lonely months on the road to reach the destination, ...". Indeed it does, but it is our way of travelling, we are used to it, and we have enough other interesting quests to fill our lives. Our posthuman childred will quickly become used to whatever magic technology will bring them, find ways to cope with it, and find new interesting things to do with their lives. G. > How in a posthuman world where consciousness is uploaded and jacked > into, where hive mind global consciousness > composed of some melding of human mind and AI mind can the individual > human mind keep its personal > identity. > He is asking ..... if the singularity might destroy the spark of > humanity that has been both our best friend and worst enemy > for the last 100,000 years is there a transhuman pathway which will > enhance and preserve humanity instead of assimilating and destroying it. From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 19 10:35:28 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:35:28 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 Message-ID: >Goodbye, Yehuda Yudkowsky, never to return, never to be forgotten. >Love, >Eliezer. Dear Eliezer, Now you carry Yehuda's traces of his life in your heart. Keep them sacred, remember him always. In time, the large hole that pains you will transform into something different. An extra source of strength to live every day fuller, stronger, better; so that the life you cherished will live through you and help you fight so that this doesn't happen to anyone again. I hate death. We should never have to experience this. I'm so sorry about Yehuda. Amara From natasha at natasha.cc Fri Nov 19 13:46:43 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:46:43 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <004701c4cde7$b39ff2c0$1db71218@Nano> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <004701c4cde7$b39ff2c0$1db71218@Nano> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041119074435.03bc07f8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> May Yehuda be indelibly engraved in the minds of those who knew him, and those of use who know him through you. love, N Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc [_______________________________________________ President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org [_____________________________________________________ Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From megao at sasktel.net Fri Nov 19 14:35:09 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:35:09 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greg's Project In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204111822583fc67fad@mail.gmail.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <419D7E29.90102@mac.com> <419D8EB6.2000704@sasktel.net> <470a3c5204111822583fc67fad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <419E049D.40309@sasktel.net> I think his whole presentation in our rural setting where some families send their children to religeous private schools so they get a "proper religeon based education" as well as subscribing to satellite TV but blanking out all but a few channels is going to get some interesting comments. Adding some novelty to the possible posthuman discoveries with suggestions that posthumans might discover for example that the universe is some sort of Holodeck remotely programmable by quantum entanglement mechanisms and that indeed the holodeck characters may learn what lies "beyond" by use of the same tool is an interesting thought. For his presentation I have suggested that he look for key changes in the speed, complexity and efficiency of communication (of information) as the turning points from basic human development to transhuman development. That would be the advent of miniturizable transisitors on a chip for computing, the discovery of the fundamental nature of DNA, and controlled nuclear disintegration to begin the transhuman era in 1950. For the posthuman turning point it might be the convergence of all current technologies into a single technology (the singularity) because of near instant communications between all the various components, and the first AI able to co-exist with the humans of the day, as well as one novel energy source not currently in use today. I also asked that he somehow make mention of possible catastrophic events which might prevent the advent of posthumans and reduce humans back to a society without technology .... an unforseen technological Faux-pas or a deliberate terrorist act by a radical-green anti-techno-civilzation fundamentalist-religeous group like "green anarchy". MFJ Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >Morris, >I am so sorry to hear about your wife. >Now on your son's schoolwork: >These is an example of "intelligent objection" to transhumanism, but I >think it indicates just lack of imagination. It is like a medieval >person objecting to future traveling in a few hours to everywhere on >the planet, like "it will eliminate the long journey toward the Holy >Grail, the quest, the long lonely months on the road to reach the >destination, ...". Indeed it does, but it is our way of travelling, we >are used to it, and we have enough other interesting quests to fill >our lives. >Our posthuman childred will quickly become used to whatever magic >technology will bring them, find ways to cope with it, and find new >interesting things to do with their lives. >G. > > > >>How in a posthuman world where consciousness is uploaded and jacked >>into, where hive mind global consciousness >>composed of some melding of human mind and AI mind can the individual >>human mind keep its personal >>identity. >>He is asking ..... if the singularity might destroy the spark of >>humanity that has been both our best friend and worst enemy >>for the last 100,000 years is there a transhuman pathway which will >>enhance and preserve humanity instead of assimilating and destroying it. >> >> >_______________________________________________ >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: From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 19 15:42:24 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 16:42:24 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scholar References: <470a3c52041118224071605d65@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002f01c4ce4e$5dd0ea40$7ac51b97@administxl09yj> http://scholar.google.com http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041115/full/041115-13.html From megao at sasktel.net Fri Nov 19 14:39:45 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:39:45 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.0.20041119074435.03bc07f8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <004701c4cde7$b39ff2c0$1db71218@Nano> <6.1.2.0.0.20041119074435.03bc07f8@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <419E05B1.5000903@sasktel.net> Incidentally, for Greg's project I brought out some things from Sasha Chislenko and FM2030 so , yes physical presences might stop but memories go on far into the future. Natasha Vita-More wrote: > > May Yehuda be indelibly engraved in the minds of those who knew him, > and those of use who know him through you. > > love, > N > > Natasha Vita-More > > http://www.natasha.cc > > [_______________________________________________ > > President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org > > [_____________________________________________________ > Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture > http://www.transhumanist.biz > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >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: From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 19 16:01:47 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:01:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Some of this stuff just irritates me. Sigh. Back in 1961, in high school english class, a big debate got raging about "Is God Real?". I stuck my hand up, and after forever got my turn (my prior last name always put me in the left back corner of the room), and I said "This could all be a simulation on a giant computer somewhere." Absolutely NOBODY understood what I meant, so the debate went on, and I was bored bored bored. These days, 20 years after Gibson's Neuromancer, these academics saying the same thing. Greg Egan having written of these things in his science fiction 10 years ago. I predict that in about 10 more years the Church of the Immaculate Upload will come along. Let's see now: "The Universe created thee Pure in DNA, in Original Awareness without Sin. Lay down thy conflicts and disputes, come into the house of Primal Upload...." At 09:48 PM 11/18/2004, you wrote: >The Times: Professor Sir Martin Rees is to suggest that "life, the >universe and everything" may be no more than a giant computer >simulation with humans reduced to bits of software. Rees, Royal >Society professor of astronomy at Cambridge University, will say that >it is now possible to conceive of computers so powerful that they >could build an entire virtual universe. >The possibility that what we see around us may not actually exist has >been raised by philosophers many times dating back to the ancient >Greeks and appears repeatedly in science fiction. >In a television documentary, What We Still Don't Know, to be screened >on Channel 4 next month, he will say: "Over a few decades, computers >have evolved from being able to simulate only very simple patterns to >being able to create virtual worlds with a lot of detail. >"If that trend were to continue, then we can imagine computers which >will be able to simulate worlds perhaps even as complicated as the one >we think we're living in. >"This raises the philosophical question: could we ourselves be in such >a simulation and could what we think is the universe be some sort of >vault of heaven rather than the real thing. In a sense we could be >ourselves the creations within this simulation." >http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1358588,00.html >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From mbb386 at main.nc.us Fri Nov 19 16:21:30 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:21:30 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: I am sorry for your pain. I too have had a beloved young person die. May his memory live long in your heart and be an inspiration to all who knew him. Regards, MB On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > My little brother, Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, is dead. > From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 19 17:08:38 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 09:08:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Scholar In-Reply-To: <002f01c4ce4e$5dd0ea40$7ac51b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <20041119170838.2512.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- scerir wrote: > http://scholar.google.com > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041115/full/041115-13.html Now *this* is cool. 8) From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 19 18:17:45 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:17:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> It is probably no condolence that there will be many more - *far* too many more - before we finish implementing a way around it. But at least there is a way to calculate it: multiply this tragedy by the several million (billion?) between now and then, and one starts to appreciate the magnitude of the horror we seek to strike down. I wonder if this is something like the fictional Cthuluoid horrors: a terror so deep and profound that most people can't even acknowledge it, but just go ever so slowly insane trying to deal with it. (Like, say, by inventing a God that causes death and then believing in God despite all evidence to the contrary.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 19 18:27:35 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:27:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing In-Reply-To: <419D4DBB.8000509@cox.net> Message-ID: <20041119182735.45747.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Dan Clemmensen wrote: > Actually, the largest and most powerful distributed > computing networks > are all too easy to join. to join, just use a > Windows PC and disable > your firewall. > you will automatically join multiple distributed > computing systems. > > I refer of course to zombie pools. your computer > will join multiple pools, > some of which have hundreds of thousands of members. The problem, of course, being that the owners of said computers did not agree to have their computers in said pools. At the moment, those using pools for honest work disavow dishonest recruiting methods, but one of the dangers of luddites in power is that they may drive honest scientific work to such methods if the work is to be done at all - and with odds like the survival of the human race (and of individual humans themselves) on the line, one could well argue that these would be justified if they indeed become the only possible ways. From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 18:43:31 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:43:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> The real tragedy, the tragedy that will continue to evade future effective life extension treatments and any system of Big Benevolent AI intervention short of total surveillance and dictatorial control, is that those who choose to end their own lives will do so. Arguably we must respect their decision, while grieving that it is so. We can hope to help and support them in their suffering or misery or despair--if they choose to let us know about it--but death remains a choice always available to every individual (except for those who most wish it, trapped in a hospital or hospice bed). Damien Broderick From hal at finney.org Fri Nov 19 19:16:39 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:16:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future Message-ID: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> One thing we should keep in mind when writing here or in any online forum is that we are writing not only for the present, but for the future. Our words may well be read many times, even far into the future. They are recorded in public and private archives and will be available indefinitely. Given the likely increase in future levels of intelligence and attention, it may even turn out that more eyes see our writings in the far future than in the near present. I grew up loving books and loving to read, but in our house we didn't have many books. My parents mostly read housekeeping and sports magazines. My mom's mother had been a school librarian and we did have some old books from her time, and my mom's father was an amateur magician and I loved to read his old magic books. But mostly I spent hours each week at the library reading on a variety of topics. I particularly liked project books with things to build and do; but I always had difficulty because most of the books I was reading were old. They often referred to materials that were no longer in common use or went by different names. I remember one of the magic books described the creation of a "magical explosive" which could produce a small puff of smoke to add to an effect. This was ammonium triiodide, a low power explosive for which instructions are widely available today on the net. But the book I had described taking "a few flakes of ordinary iodine" and putting them into ammonia. My only exposure to iodine was as the astringent liquid used for disinfection. Asking at the drugstore for "iodine flakes" didn't help. If iodine ever came in flake form, it was no longer the case. (Eventually I learned that I could purchase iodine crystals and managed to produce small quantities of the explosive material.) As I would read these old books I gradually realized that their authors seemed to share a common misconception, which was that their readers were contemporaneous. The authors would make casual references to current issues, popular music or shows which were completely opaque to me. None of the authors seemed to anticipate their books sitting for decades on library shelves, being found and devoured by curious young readers years later. They didn't realize that they were writing for the future. This is understandable, for practical reasons. Commercially, these authors were writing books that would sell, and most copies would be bought in the months immediately after the book was released. And it's probably true that even though a book may last for 100 years and be read many times over that period, most readings of any given book do occur within a short time of its publication. A book may sell thousands of copies, but only a small percentage will end up on library shelves where they may be read a few times a year. All those future readers probably don't add up to more than ten percent or so of the total readers of the book. Nevertheless I often found myself wishing that the authors would at least give some indication that they recognized readers like me. They should have known that they were writing, to some extent, for the ages; and that while their future readers might not equal the numbers of the present-day ones, they would amount to a not insignificant percentage over time. Today, when we write online, I see the issue as arising even more strongely. Books are written on a physical medium. When the last copy is destroyed, the book is essentially lost. But our words have at least the potential to live on as long as humanity and its offspring survive. The physical media may wear out but the data can be copied and replicated indefinitely. (In fact, I suspect that most books which survive another couple of decades will attain this form of immortality as well.) This means that rather than my off-the-cuff estimate of 10% of readership as far-future readers, things written today may have a much higher percentage. These words may be read by some hundreds of people today. But they will go into the archives and be available for decades. If only a few people per year read them, then even without great changes, by a hundred years from now the future readers will have outnumbered the present ones. And if, as with most Extropians, we anticipate great increases in human and machine intelligence levels, it is likely that the amount of attention and analysis given to our writings today will be greatly exceeded in the future world. In that sense, we really are writing for the future, even more than for the present. That's where most of our readers are. Those who read our words today are almost incidental by comparison. I am admittedly being inconsistent about this, because I have not said much in this message to future readers. For them, everything I have said about the nature of the audience is glaringly obvious and superfluous, just as it would have been for me as a kid reading those old books. To my future readers, then, I will offer greetings, and note that my life, combined with that of the books which influenced me, spans most of the 20th century. I don't write about personal matters very often, but when I do, as I have done in this message, hopefully it will offer most of my readers a better picture of life not only today but over the past century as well. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 19:40:47 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:40:47 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future In-Reply-To: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:16 AM 11/19/2004 -0800, Hal wrote: >To my future readers, then, I will offer greetings, and note that my >life, combined with that of the books which influenced me, spans most >of the 20th century. I don't write about personal matters very often, >but when I do, as I have done in this message, hopefully it will offer >most of my readers a better picture of life not only today but over the >past century as well. With any luck, many of those future readers will either be people who are alive now, or new people who can recover/experience our memories in enormous if filtered detail. I often groan at an associated problem: communal loss of memory and the endlessly reinvented wheel. In science fiction, the majority of new readers and viewers seem utterly innocent of all the rich, elaborate work of the past half century. Teleportation is a Star Trek idea, cloning is something invented by George Lucas, etc; what Hara Ra said earlier about the universe as a computation, and the tedious way certain scientists (or at any rate the journalists reporting them) apparently believe they have only just dreamed up this amazing gosh-wow idea. No memory of Fredkin or his predecessors, let alone sf versions. Confusion is rife even when an attempt is made to allocate prior fictional credit: I've seen an article in which the computational model of reality is equated with HITCHHIKER'S GUIDE where the Earth and all its species comprise a computer built by mice. *Not* the point; the *opposite* of the point. Oh well. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 19:51:41 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:51:41 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future In-Reply-To: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119134803.01a45f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com> > >To my future readers, then, I will offer greetings Oh, and to Hal's greetings I meant to append this poem by James Elroy Flecker (1884 - 1915), which I think is wonderful despite its weaknesses. I used it to close my anthology of sf stories about the Dying Earth, EARTH IS BUT A STAR--a title taken from one of his most haunting verses: To a Poet a Thousand Years Hence I who am dead a thousand years, ...And wrote this sweet archaic song, Send you my words for messengers ...The way I shall not pass along. I care not if you bridge the seas, ...Or ride secure the cruel sky, Or build consummate palaces ...Of metal or of masonry. But have you wine and music still, ...And statues and a bright-eyed love, And foolish thoughts of good and ill, ...And prayers to them who sit above? How shall we conquer? Like a wind ...That falls at eve our fancies blow, And old Maeonides the blind ...Said it three thousand years ago. O friend unseen, unborn, unknown, ...Student of our sweet English tongue, Read out my words at night, alone: ...I was a poet, I was young. Since I can never see your face, ...And never shake you by the hand, I send my soul through time and space ...To greet you. You will understand. From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 21:26:48 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:26:48 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] the question of self-termination In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> My earlier post might be regarded as cruelly tactless at this sad moment. But the fact and ethics of suicide need to be confronted. But not now, not at this terrible moment? Well, if we scoff at the religious for their death-bed and graveside evasions we dare not go into denial mode ourselves over this aspect of our unyielding realities of life and death. And while we hope to make death yield, still there will be those who chose it (in whatever remediable or persuadable state of mind we will never know). For a list as adamantly wedded to individual choice as this one, suicide remains what Albert Camus called it more than 60 years ago in the opening of Le Mythe de Sisyphe: "There is only one really serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide." "A world which can be explained, even through bad reasoning, is a familiar one. On the other hand, in a world suddenly devoid of illusion and light, man feels like a stranger." His answer? "The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. We have to imagine Sisyphus happy." Sometimes, though, Sisyphus finds the task unendurable. What can we do to help him? As I said to a friend last night: What we need are healthy memes, satisfying work, and lots of hugs. Less bullshit and as much love as we can manage. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 19 21:34:26 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:34:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] the question of self-termination In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041119213426.60597.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > Sometimes, though, Sisyphus finds the task > unendurable. > > What can we do to help him? As I said to a friend > last night: What we need > are healthy memes, satisfying work, and lots of > hugs. Less bullshit and as > much love as we can manage. Reason: that which gives us the strength to love. Love: that which gives us the strength to reason. 'Tis a cycle, and we may be focused on the reasoning side of it (that being neglected by that which has come before), but the cycle persists. It is human nature - and though we might plan for what comes after, we have not yet changed it, and for now we must work with what we have. (And, once again, are we not essentially about doing that which works?) From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 19 21:42:38 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:42:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> Damien Broderick > ... and the tedious way certain scientists > (or at any rate the journalists reporting them) > apparently believe they have only just dreamed up > this amazing gosh-wow idea. No memory of Fredkin > or his predecessors, let alone sf versions. [..] > .. Oh well. "Once, at the afternoon tea, in the Institute [Copenhagen] E. Teller [yes, that Teller] tried to explain to Bohr why he thought Bohr was wrong in thinking that the historical set-up of classical concepts would forever dominate our way of expressing our sense experience. Bohr listened with closed eyes and finally only said: "Oh, I understand. You might as well say that we are not sitting here, drinking tea, but that we are just dreaming all that." In 'The Copenhagen Interpretation', by C.F.von Weizsaecker, in 'Quantum Theory and Beyond', Ted Bastin ed., Cambridge U.P., 1971. >From the past, s. Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 21:45:57 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:45:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:42 PM 11/19/2004 +0100, Serafino quoted: >Bohr listened with closed eyes and finally only said: >"Oh, I understand. You might as well say that we are >not sitting here, drinking tea, but that we are just >dreaming all that." > > >Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. >Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? Wigner's Friend: Ermph? Chaps, I just had the most peculiar dream. Chaps? Now where have they gone? Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 21:49:32 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:49:32 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future In-Reply-To: <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154748.01c04d58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> But seriously: >Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. >Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? We'll run into a combinatorial explosion of Feynman diagrams nested dreadfully deep and broad? Damien Broderick From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 19 21:58:45 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 16:58:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] the question of self-termination In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <419E6C95.9060801@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > My earlier post might be regarded as cruelly tactless at this sad > moment. But the fact and ethics of suicide need to be confronted. But > not now, not at this terrible moment? Well, if we scoff at the religious > for their death-bed and graveside evasions we dare not go into denial > mode ourselves over this aspect of our unyielding realities of life and > death. And while we hope to make death yield, still there will be those > who chose it (in whatever remediable or persuadable state of mind we > will never know). You should know better than to invoke the unknowable. Not all attempted suicides succeed. > For a list as adamantly wedded to individual choice as > this one, suicide remains what Albert Camus called it more than 60 years > ago in the opening of Le Mythe de Sisyphe: "There is only one really > serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide." I recall reading from a media story on suicide, that a study on suicide had found that very few failed suicides try again. In the case of people who survived a jump, most reported regretting the decision almost the instant they started to fall. "What the hell am I doing?" is the quote that sticks in my mind, and "As soon as I jumped, I realized that everything that had gone wrong in my life was fixable, except my decision to jump." Is a decision that changes so predictably volitional? If the report is correct, most people who jumped off bridges died involuntarily. I can imagine a mind committing fully volitional suicide, a mind that has finished what it regards as its life. I question whether this is the case for people who jump off bridges. I question whether, in a more sensible world, the action would carry through without a check on volition. What about people who commit suicide thinking there's an afterlife, or without realizing how much they might be missing? How young is old enough to die? 6 years? 18 years? 100 years? My personal opinion on this had previously changed - sometime before July 2004 - to say that if I, myself, had to generate an opinion right now, I would require the same kind of driver's license to commit suicide as to engage in other radical self-alterations. If I had to opine right now, I would opine that I'd grant anyone who could build a *Friendly* seed AI an unrestricted right to self-modification, not because it's enough knowledge to do it, but because it's enough knowledge to be scared, plus a fully-understood FAI system that you can use to check your consequences for you. I don't know if I'd opine that there should be lesser tests for lesser abilities. There's a strong argument for people's lives belonging to themselves as soon as possible, but on the other hand, "as soon as possible" could just as well mean, "pick a threshold such that not a single member of the human species actually commits suicide, unless they really mean it". I had come, even before this point, to the conclusion that death is the worst thing in the world because it can never be repaired, never be made up for afterward. Philosophical angst seems to me a lesser problem than death. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 19 22:07:12 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:07:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org><6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <001e01c4ce84$1f754300$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> > Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. > > > Damien Broderick It's turtles all the way down. It's turtles all the way up. ( Sometimes you also find chameleons http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0110086 ) Science and the unknowable - Martin Gardner http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_n6_v22/ai_21275519 From scerir at libero.it Fri Nov 19 22:35:56 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:35:56 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org><6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154748.01c04d58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <007a01c4ce88$23060e10$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> > >Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. > >Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? > We'll run into a combinatorial explosion of Feynman diagrams > nested dreadfully deep and broad? > Damien Broderick More or less, if you try to measure yourself :-) But, in general, models ( like Schulman's http://www.clarkson.edu/~physics/schulman.htm ) avoid 'grotesque' states of the system to be measured X the measurement apparatus. "There is, to be sure, a genuine problem in the phenomenon of quantum measurement, but I will not discuss it here. It concerns *introspective* systems, where subject = object so that the basic conception of a single subject observing an ensemble of objects must be modified." - David Finkelstein in "The Physics of Logic" [in "Paradigms and Paradoxes", ed. R. G. Colodny, 1971, pag. 60] From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 19 23:36:05 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:36:05 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] the question of self-termination In-Reply-To: <419E6C95.9060801@pobox.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <419E6C95.9060801@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119172153.01b51ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 04:58 PM 11/19/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote: >>while we hope to make death yield, still there will be those who chose it >>(in whatever remediable or persuadable state of mind we will never know). > >You should know better than to invoke the unknowable. Not all attempted >suicides succeed....a study on suicide had found that very few failed >suicides try again. In the case of people who survived a jump, most >reported regretting the decision almost the instant they started to fall. We can't know the thoughts of the dead. True, we may infer certain second-thoughts from the responses of those who survived an attempt. But perhaps those individuals were largely the ones who allowed themselves some leeway, aware, at some level, of their ambiguous motives. Still, this would be the best grounds for intervening to stop the vulnerable, especially the young, from taking an irrevocable step (as one would stop children sniffing petrol, and then doing what's possible to resolve their unhappiness and despair). >I had come, even before this point, to the conclusion that death is the >worst thing in the world because it can never be repaired, never be made >up for afterward. Philosophical angst seems to me a lesser problem than death. Angst in one form or another, including intolerable suffering, is surely the *cause* of many suicides, and we need to address it *as a community*, as thinking and feeling and caring persons.... as philosophers of the real. Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 23:56:19 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:56:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Scholar In-Reply-To: <20041119170838.2512.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041119235619.86855.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- scerir wrote: > > http://scholar.google.com > > > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041115/full/041115-13.html > > Now *this* is cool. 8) Speaking of cool, it shows just how much the US Navy continues to investigate cold fusion to this day.... to little public fanfare. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Sat Nov 20 00:06:32 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:06:32 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] the question of self-termination In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119172153.01b51ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <419E6C95.9060801@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119172153.01b51ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <419E8A88.7060504@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 04:58 PM 11/19/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote: > >> I had come, even before this point, to the conclusion that death is >> the worst thing in the world because it can never be repaired, never >> be made up for afterward. Philosophical angst seems to me a lesser >> problem than death. > > Angst in one form or another, including intolerable suffering, is surely > the *cause* of many suicides, and we need to address it *as a > community*, as thinking and feeling and caring persons.... as > philosophers of the real. Great. You do that. Sorry, Damien, but you know my feelings about "we need to". "Beware `we should...', extend a hand to `how do I...'" - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22799&cid=2452675 "Susan was bright enough to know that the phrase 'Someone ought to do something' was not, by itself, a helpful one. People who used it never added the rider 'and that someone is me.' But someone ought to do something, and right now the whole pool of someones consisted of her, and no one else." -- Terry Pratchett, "Hogfather" -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From Walter_Chen at compal.com Sat Nov 20 00:12:11 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 08:12:11 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scholar Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601AFA4@tpeex05> Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 11:42 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [extropy-chat] Scholar http://scholar.google.com http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041115/full/041115-13.html _______________________________________________ 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: From pharos at gmail.com Sat Nov 20 00:45:37 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:45:37 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] the question of self-termination In-Reply-To: <419E8A88.7060504@pobox.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119123523.01c1fec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119150922.01c576e8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <419E6C95.9060801@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119172153.01b51ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <419E8A88.7060504@pobox.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:06:32 -0500, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > > Great. You do that. > > Sorry, Damien, but you know my feelings about "we need to". > > "Beware `we should...', extend a hand to `how do I...'" > - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22799&cid=2452675 > Interesting. I believe this comment originally came from a short but famous article (1998) by Alan Cox, entitled "Cathedrals, Bazaars and the Town Council" It is well worth reading for anyone not familiar with it. Basically it concerns the problems encountered during running a software development project. The summary list, at the end of the article, of the lessons learned, should be nailed to the wall of every new project -- SIAI included :) BillK From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 03:33:47 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:33:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Um, who observes the observer? At 01:45 PM 11/19/2004, Damien Broderick wrote: >At 10:42 PM 11/19/2004 +0100, Serafino quoted: > >>Bohr listened with closed eyes and finally only said: >>"Oh, I understand. You might as well say that we are >>not sitting here, drinking tea, but that we are just >>dreaming all that." >> >>Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. >>Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? > >Wigner's Friend: Ermph? Chaps, I just had the most peculiar dream. Chaps? >Now where have they gone? > >Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. > ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 03:33:47 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:33:47 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Um, who observes the observer? At 01:45 PM 11/19/2004, Damien Broderick wrote: >At 10:42 PM 11/19/2004 +0100, Serafino quoted: > >>Bohr listened with closed eyes and finally only said: >>"Oh, I understand. You might as well say that we are >>not sitting here, drinking tea, but that we are just >>dreaming all that." >> >>Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. >>Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? > >Wigner's Friend: Ermph? Chaps, I just had the most peculiar dream. Chaps? >Now where have they gone? > >Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. > ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 03:37:44 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:37:44 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Writing for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154748.01c04d58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154748.01c04d58@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193713.029529a8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Its a feynamite issue.... At 01:49 PM 11/19/2004, you wrote: >But seriously: > >>Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. >>Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? > >We'll run into a combinatorial explosion of Feynman diagrams nested >dreadfully deep and broad? > >Damien Broderick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 03:32:22 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:32:22 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> <20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119192923.0293c838@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, personally I am a cryonicist. I was appalled at the low number of extropians who have signed up. If I ever get a chance to do something more about this, I will certainly tell the list about it. At 10:17 AM 11/19/2004, Adrian Tymes wrote: >It is probably no condolence that there will be many >more - *far* too many more - before we finish >implementing a way around it. But at least there is >a way to calculate it: multiply this tragedy by the >several million (billion?) between now and then, and >one starts to appreciate the magnitude of the horror >we seek to strike down. > >I wonder if this is something like the fictional >Cthuluoid horrors: a terror so deep and profound that >most people can't even acknowledge it, but just go >ever so slowly insane trying to deal with it. (Like, >say, by inventing a God that causes death and then >believing in God despite all evidence to the >contrary.) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From nanogirl at halcyon.com Sat Nov 20 03:44:13 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:44:13 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com><20041119181745.81269.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119192923.0293c838@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01aa01c4ceb3$3407f0e0$1db71218@Nano> I'm signed up for cryonics, and my husband is signed up. Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org My New Project: Microscope Jewelry http://www.nanogirl.com/crafts/microjewelry.htm Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." ----- Original Message ----- From: Hara Ra To: ExI chat list Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 7:32 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 Well, personally I am a cryonicist. I was appalled at the low number of extropians who have signed up. If I ever get a chance to do something more about this, I will certainly tell the list about it. At 10:17 AM 11/19/2004, Adrian Tymes wrote: >It is probably no condolence that there will be many >more - *far* too many more - before we finish >implementing a way around it. But at least there is >a way to calculate it: multiply this tragedy by the >several million (billion?) between now and then, and >one starts to appreciate the magnitude of the horror >we seek to strike down. > >I wonder if this is something like the fictional >Cthuluoid horrors: a terror so deep and profound that >most people can't even acknowledge it, but just go >ever so slowly insane trying to deal with it. (Like, >say, by inventing a God that causes death and then >believing in God despite all evidence to the >contrary.) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== _______________________________________________ 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: From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 20 03:49:15 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:49:15 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119214813.01dffec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:33 PM 11/19/2004 -0800, HR wrote: >>Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. >> >Um, who observes the observer? The turtle. Or perhaps the mock turtle. Damien Broderick From regimeoftruth at hotmail.com Sat Nov 20 04:03:57 2004 From: regimeoftruth at hotmail.com (Beef Machine) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:03:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory Message-ID: I think males today have big pecs because we've invented weights, excercises, and weight machines which deliberately increase their size. I'm not sure how long the pushup excercise has existed, but I would imagine that some of the earliest militaries used it to train their men. The difference between my own pecs after a month of no exercise and after a month of excercise three times a week is astonishing, even if no weights or machines are used (I remember this from boot camp, though that was working out a lot more than three times a week). _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 05:57:08 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:57:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119214813.01dffec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041120055708.31935.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:33 PM 11/19/2004 -0800, HR wrote: > > >>Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. > >> > > >Um, who observes the observer? > > The turtle. Or perhaps the mock turtle. Which one? It's turtles all the way down... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 20 06:18:03 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:18:03 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <20041120055708.31935.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119214813.01dffec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041120055708.31935.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041120001504.01a8d6d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:57 PM 11/19/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >Um, who observes the observer? > > > > The turtle. Or perhaps the mock turtle. > >Which one? It's turtles all the way down... Of course, but as Wheeler and Feynman argued, all the turtles are the same turtle moving back and forth in time everywhere and everywhen. The universe is a soup of turtle, a Tureen of Everything. Damien Broderick From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Nov 20 06:23:05 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 07:23:05 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Protandim Anti-Aging Dietary Supplement to Be Released in February 2005 Message-ID: <470a3c52041119222318978588@mail.gmail.com> Lifeline Therapeutics, Inc. (LFLT-OTCBB) announced today that Protandim, the first scientifically-based anti-aging dietary supplement is scheduled to be released in February 2005. The prevailing view is that aging is caused by the body's oxidation, or oxidative stress. Scientific studies have found that oxidation is also a precursor to many major diseases. It has been reported that approximately three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000) is being spent annually in the US alone on antioxidants such as vitamins A, C and E and Coenzyme Q-10 to fight oxidation. But studies have shown that taking these synthetic antioxidants results in no measurable difference in oxidative stress. In contrast, Protandim has been demonstrated to decrease oxidation by as much as 60% in humans in just the first 30 days of intake. This percentage is expected to increase even further after prolonged supplementation. Protandim is not an antioxidant, but its patent-pending formulation induces the body to produce more of its own natural antioxidant enzymes, thereby utilizing biology not chemistry to fight oxidation. http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/041119/195335_1.html From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 06:34:31 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:34:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? Message-ID: <20041120063431.31521.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> After so many months of europeans (and wanna-bes) going on how terribly nationalist the US is getting.... I can help but wonder... why they are all so silent now... European headlines on Drudgereport.com: EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... FANS HURL RACIST EPITHETS AT BLACK SOCCER STARS... Popular politician wants Holland shut to non-Westerners... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Nov 20 07:09:13 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 08:09:13 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: <20041120063431.31521.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041120063431.31521.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041119230921db9675@mail.gmail.com> You provided a demonstration that there are racists also in Europe. So what? Take a sample of apples large enough, and you find some rotten apples. I am not against the US, I am against racists wherever they are. G. On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:34:31 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > After so many months of europeans (and wanna-bes) going on how terribly > nationalist the US is getting.... I can help but wonder... why they are > all so silent now... > > European headlines on Drudgereport.com: > > EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... > > FANS HURL RACIST EPITHETS AT BLACK SOCCER STARS... > > Popular politician wants Holland shut to non-Westerners... > > ===== > Mike Lorrey From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 20 07:09:14 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:09:14 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: <20041120063431.31521.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000501c4cecf$dabedc70$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Mike Lorrey > > EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... I don't think the EU officials get it. The immigrants are not interested in adopting European values. They want to transform Europe to Muslim values. They come as Muslim missionaries to convert the heathen. spike From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 20 07:51:19 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 08:51:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org><6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com><000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj><6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <013701c4ced5$b90ba300$56b71b97@administxl09yj> From: "Hara Ra" > Um, who observes the observer? The environment knows everything (*). But for a different view see H.E.Brandt, 'Deconstructing Wigner's Density Matrix concerning the Mind-Body Question' in http://quantum.ttk.pte.hu/~wigner/proceedings/ or B.d'Espagnat, 'Consciousness and the Wigner's friend problem' http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402121 (*) Even Young two-slit interferometers work in the air. From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 09:05:15 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:05:15 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041120001504.01a8d6d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119214813.01dffec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041120055708.31935.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120001504.01a8d6d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041120010444.02954d88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> When turtle and anti turtle meet? shell if i know >Of course, but as Wheeler and Feynman argued, all the turtles are the same >turtle moving back and forth in time everywhere and everywhen. The >universe is a soup of turtle, a Tureen of Everything. > >Damien Broderick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 09:05:15 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:05:15 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041120001504.01a8d6d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119214813.01dffec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041120055708.31935.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120001504.01a8d6d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041120010444.02954d88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> When turtle and anti turtle meet? shell if i know >Of course, but as Wheeler and Feynman argued, all the turtles are the same >turtle moving back and forth in time everywhere and everywhen. The >universe is a soup of turtle, a Tureen of Everything. > >Damien Broderick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 09:04:02 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:04:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Protandim Anti-Aging Dietary Supplement to Be Released in February 2005 In-Reply-To: <470a3c52041119222318978588@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c52041119222318978588@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041120010138.0293d1a0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, I found using antioxidants has kept colds and flu away for years now. And Extend, by VRP, costs all of $1.25 per day. Kinda doubt this new thing will be as cheap. And I am wary of a press release which knocks something which works for me. ahem. At 10:23 PM 11/19/2004, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >Lifeline Therapeutics, Inc. (LFLT-OTCBB) announced today that >Protandim, ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 09:04:02 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:04:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Protandim Anti-Aging Dietary Supplement to Be Released in February 2005 In-Reply-To: <470a3c52041119222318978588@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c52041119222318978588@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041120010138.0293d1a0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, I found using antioxidants has kept colds and flu away for years now. And Extend, by VRP, costs all of $1.25 per day. Kinda doubt this new thing will be as cheap. And I am wary of a press release which knocks something which works for me. ahem. At 10:23 PM 11/19/2004, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >Lifeline Therapeutics, Inc. (LFLT-OTCBB) announced today that >Protandim, ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From samantha at objectent.com Sat Nov 20 10:06:20 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:06:20 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Nov 19, 2004, at 8:01 AM, Hara Ra wrote: > > These days, 20 years after Gibson's Neuromancer, these academics > saying the same thing. Greg Egan having written of these things in his > science fiction 10 years ago. I predict that in about 10 more years > the Church of the Immaculate Upload will come along. Let's see now: > "The Universe created thee Pure in DNA, in Original Awareness without > Sin. Lay down thy conflicts and disputes, come into the house of > Primal Upload...." You might want to soup up the liturgy a bit. If one of us is sufficiently seduced by the Dark Side expect to see this is more like three years. :-) - samantha From samantha at objectent.com Sat Nov 20 10:20:49 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:20:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: <000501c4cecf$dabedc70$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000501c4cecf$dabedc70$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: Hmm. Many of the people I know from Muslim countries immigrated to escape so-called "Muslim values". It takes a pretty wide brush to paint over 1.2 billion people. - s On Nov 19, 2004, at 11:09 PM, Spike wrote: > >> Mike Lorrey >> >> EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... > > > I don't think the EU officials get it. The immigrants > are not interested in adopting European values. They > want to transform Europe to Muslim values. They come > as Muslim missionaries to convert the heathen. > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From samantha at objectent.com Sat Nov 20 10:25:51 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 02:25:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8D6B588A-3ADE-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> On Nov 19, 2004, at 7:33 PM, Hara Ra wrote: > Um, who observes the observer? > The observer of course. recursively yours, samantha From scerir at libero.it Sat Nov 20 11:04:45 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:04:45 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041119214813.01dffec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><20041120055708.31935.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com><6.1.1.1.0.20041120001504.01a8d6d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041120010444.02954d88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001a01c4cef0$beaba790$34c01b97@administxl09yj> > When turtle and anti turtle meet? "I think we have learned from experiments that by getting to smaller and smaller units, we do not come to fundamental units, or indivisible units, but we do come to a point where division has no meaning. This is a result of the experiments of the last twenty years, and I am afraid that some physicists simply ignore this experimental fact." Who said that? Mr. HUP http://www.fdavidpeat.com/interviews/heisenberg.htm From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 12:36:15 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:36:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Nope. They're bombing synagogues, assaulting jews, and marching to demand sharia across europe. Sounds to me like muslim values are what they are after... What is happening to 'tolerant' europe, though? Why are you so upset over the murder of one film maker who obviously asked for what was coming to him in making racist, running-dog imperialist films presuming to just muslim society by infidel european values? Tolerance isn't entirely gone, I suppose. Some reporters referred to the van Gogh murderer's use of an 8" dagger plunged into his chest to afix a note as 'pinning'. If the killer had skinned van Gogh, do you think the reporters would have called it 'exfoliation'? --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Hmm. Many of the people I know from Muslim countries immigrated to > escape so-called "Muslim values". It takes a pretty wide brush to > > paint over 1.2 billion people. > > - s > > On Nov 19, 2004, at 11:09 PM, Spike wrote: > > > > >> Mike Lorrey > >> > >> EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... > > > > > > I don't think the EU officials get it. The immigrants > > are not interested in adopting European values. They > > want to transform Europe to Muslim values. They come > > as Muslim missionaries to convert the heathen. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 13:11:41 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:11:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <8D6B588A-3ADE-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <20041120131141.65696.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2004, at 7:33 PM, Hara Ra wrote: > > > Um, who observes the observer? > > > > The observer of course. > > recursively yours, Ouch, that requires the observer into the contorted position of collapsing his own wave function, a recursiveness of having one's head up one's own petard. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From Steve365 at btinternet.com Sat Nov 20 13:35:50 2004 From: Steve365 at btinternet.com (Steve Davies) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:35:50 -0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? References: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000501c4cf05$dd28ef10$731f8751@oemcomputer> Mike Lorrey said > Nope. They're bombing synagogues, assaulting jews, and marching to > demand sharia across europe. Sounds to me like muslim values are what > they are after... Bit more complicated than either that or Samantha's view imho. What we have is the classic pattern that you get with a migrant group. The initial migrants are mainly motivated by economic concerns, they want to improve their economic condition. They also keep their traditional beliefs and values, so they aren't ideological refugees, but they aren't particularly interested in proselytising. The difficulties arise in the second and third generations. Here a split emerges. Some become assimilated to one aspect or other of the host culture. So for example the majority of second generation British Muslims (mainly of Pakistani or Bangladeshi origin) have little or no knowledge or understanding of their religion and in fact pretty much ignore it (most of the young men are devotees of the religion of hip-hop). A substantial minority however define their identity in opposition to the culture around them by asserting a very militant and traditionalist form of their ancestral culture. They are typically more traditionalist and militant than either their parent's generation or the population back in the country of origin. This is a typical response in the second and subsequent generations of a migrant group. This means inter alia that organisations like Al Queda have more chance of getting motivated recruits in Europe than they do in the Middle East or Pakistan because it's amongst migrant populations that you find self-conscious and militant believers in larger numbers. Still a minority but a substantial one. Almost all of them are men, and my own suspicion is that a lot of this is driven by sexual politics and a reaction on the part of young men to the way modernity undermines their traditional position vis a vis their female relatives. > What is happening to 'tolerant' europe, though? Why are you so upset > over the murder of one film maker who obviously asked for what was > coming to him in making racist, running-dog imperialist films presuming > to just muslim society by infidel european values? Interesting isn't it? There's a number of reasons imo. One is that freedom of speech is something the Dutch take VERY seriously. Another is that Van Gogh, despite his self-defined 'gadfly' persona, was very much a member of the Dutch establishment. Also, he made this movie with a Dutch MP of Somali origin and this highlighted for many Dutch something that hasn't got much attention in the coverage outside the Netherlands, the contrast between different groups of immigrants and their degree of assimilation. The Netherlands has had a lot of immigration from Indonesia and Surinam (for obvious reasons) and they have generally assimilated - the Indonesians of course being overwhelmingly Muslim). The difficulty has arisen with Arab migrants, particularly Moroccans. The assasin was a second generation Dutch citizen of Moroccan origin - see my point above. One thing I'd say - the Dutch are fearfully nice and polite but you really don't want to piss them off. More generally, there's an increasing tendency as events like this take place to define a set of common 'European' (actually enlightenment) values against the values of the conservative or militant Muslims. > Tolerance isn't entirely gone, I suppose. Some reporters referred to > the van Gogh murderer's use of an 8" dagger plunged into his chest to > afix a note as 'pinning'. If the killer had skinned van Gogh, do you > think the reporters would have called it 'exfoliation'? > > --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > Hmm. Many of the people I know from Muslim countries immigrated to > > escape so-called "Muslim values". It takes a pretty wide brush to > > > > paint over 1.2 billion people. > > > > - s > > > > On Nov 19, 2004, at 11:09 PM, Spike wrote: > > > > > > > >> Mike Lorrey > > >> > > >> EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... > > > > > > > > > I don't think the EU officials get it. The immigrants > > > are not interested in adopting European values. They > > > want to transform Europe to Muslim values. They come > > > as Muslim missionaries to convert the heathen. > > > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! > http://my.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From matus at matus1976.com Sat Nov 20 14:38:28 2004 From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:38:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <005401c4cf0e$99850560$6501a8c0@hplaptop> Eliezer, Thank you for your words, and I am sorry for the tragic event which has brought them out. You have captured what makes me an extropian and I think you capture the motivating principle behind each of us here. We love life, and we want to live it. Whatever we all may disagree on, it is only the means to achieve this end. We love life, and we hate its cessation. There is no greater horror or travesty of justice than the death of someone. All the intricacies of the universe can not compare to the beauty and value of a single sentient being. I have seen enough death of friends and loved ones myself. Everyone who will listen I try to convince them to be cryogenically suspended, on the premise that they want to live. But most grope for excuses not to, disguising their disregard for their own existence with appeals to mysticism or dystopian futures. All ideologies prescribe these self delusional condolences and practices, it can be no more clear than what Adrian said: a terror so deep and profound that most people can't even acknowledge it, but just go ever so slowly insane trying to deal with it. When faced with the death of a loved one, most people get through it by hiding reality, by doing whatever they can to *not* think about the obvious. Death is eternal and final, and when faced with such a thing people can not come up with any answer that goes beyond any self doubt. To take the pain of death away, they must devalue life. One is faced with a choice, acknowledge you love life and death is abhorrent, be indifferent to life and thus indifferent to death, or despise life and welcome death, there are no other alternatives, the view of one precludes the inverse on the other. There seems to be an active effort to create and spread a nihilistic world view. Consider the Buddhist mantra of 'life is suffering' consider it's widespread modern appeal, and then consider its negation, 'death is joy' Indeed, Nirvana is the absence of a desire for existence. This nihilistic movement is not acting volitionally, its scared and confused and stumbling through philosophy. All they know is they don't like death, and through its stumbling come to find that to deal with that it must not care about life. Socrates last words come to mind "I have found the cure for life, and it is death" I think this is a major part of the reason we have such difficulty spreading our ideas and values. Why in the very secular European area of the world does Cryonics have little to no support? If people accept our worldview, that life is good and technology can help us extend it indefinitely, then they must come to full terms with the finality and horror of death. That is what they have difficulty in doing. I think at some level they know that, it is the logical extension of their beliefs, and as such is manifested as a very negative emotional visceral reaction to our ideas, because of our implied valuation of life. But just as many of us here put up a great deal of money and effort for a non-zero chance of defeating our first death through cryonics, we need to acknowledge the non-zero possibility of doing something about past deaths. In this I am very fond of Nikolai Fedorovich Fedorov's "The Common Task". Even though it is derived from his religious background, the motivation, a deep appreciation for the intrinsic value of life, and the goal, bringing back the past dead with technology, I share. The application of science to 'resurrect' the past dead. Is it possible? If it is, it should be our ultimate goal. Some here devote their efforts to the development of a singularity AI, and others toward defeating aging biologically; I devote my efforts to the great common task. It is my ultimate goal to find out if it is possible, to learn everything I need to know to determine that, and more, and then to do it, one person at a time if necessary. I can find no words to offer to ease that suffering, there are none, and it is not possible. I can only say that it is my life goal, and I think others, and eventually the goal of any sentient being who loves life, singularity AI or otherwise, to do what they can to accomplish this common task, if the laws of physics allow it. Regards Michael Dickey Aka Matus > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat- > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eliezer Yudkowsky > Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:37 PM > To: sl4 at sl4.org > Cc: World Transhumanist Association Discussion List; ExI chat list > Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 > > My little brother, Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, is dead. > > He died November 1st. His body was found without identification. The > family found out on November 4th. I spent a week and a half with my > family > in Chicago, and am now back in Atlanta. I've been putting off telling my > friends, because it's such a hard thing to say. > > I used to say: "I have four living grandparents and I intend to have four > living grandparents when the last star in the Milky Way burns out." I > still have four living grandparents, but I don't think I'll be saying that > any more. Even if we make it to and through the Singularity, it will be > too late. One of the people I love won't be there. The universe has a > surprising ability to stab you through the heart from somewhere you > weren't > looking. Of all the people I had to protect, I never thought that Yehuda > might be one of them. Yehuda was born July 11, 1985. He lived 7053 days. > He was nineteen years old when he died. > > The Jewish religion prescribes a number of rituals and condolences for the > occasion of a death. The rituals are pointless and tiring; the > condolences > are religious idiocies. Yehuda has passed to a better place, God's ways > are mysterious but benign, etc. Does such talk really comfort people? I > watched my parents, and I don't think it did. The blessing that is spoken > at Jewish funerals is "Blessed is God, the true judge." Do they really > believe that? Why do they cry at funerals, if they believe that? Does it > help someone, to tell them that their religion requires them to believe > that? I think I coped better than my parents and my little sister > Channah. > I was just dealing with pain, not confusion. When I heard on the phone > that Yehuda had died, there was never a moment of disbelief. I knew what > kind of universe I lived in, and I knew what I planned to do about that. > How is my religious family to comprehend it, working, as they must, from > the assumption that Yehuda was deliberately murdered by a benevolent God? > The same loving God, I presume, who arranges for millions of children to > grow up illiterate and starving; the same kindly tribal father-figure who > arranged the Holocaust and the Inquisition's torture of witches. I would > not hesitate to call it evil, if any sentient mind had committed such an > act, permitted such a thing. But I have weighed the evidence as best I > can, and I do not believe the universe to be evil, a reply which in these > days is called atheism. > > Maybe it helps to believe in an immortal soul. I know that I would feel a > lot better if Yehuda had gone away on a trip somewhere, even if he was > never coming back. But Yehuda did not "pass on". Yehuda is not "resting > in peace". Yehuda is not coming back. Yehuda doesn't exist any more. > Yehuda was absolutely annihilated at the age of nineteen. Yes, that makes > me angry. I can't put into words how angry. It would be rage to rend the > gates of Heaven and burn down God on Its throne, if any God existed. But > there is no God, so my anger burns to tear apart the way-things-are, > remake > the pattern of a world that permits this. > > I wonder at the strength of non-transhumanist atheists, to accept so > terrible a darkness without any hope of changing it. But then most > atheists also succumb to comforting lies, and make excuses for death even > less defensible than the outright lies of religion. They flinch away, > refuse to confront the horror of a hundred and fifty thousand sentient > beings annihilated every day. One point eight lives per second, fifty- > five > million lives per year. Convert the units, time to life, life to time. > The World Trade Center killed half an hour. As of today, all cryonics > organizations together have suspended one minute. This essay took twenty > thousand lives to write. I wonder if there was ever an atheist who > accepted the full horror, making no excuses, offering no consolations, who > did not also hope for some future dawn. What must it be like to live in > this world, seeing it just the way it is, and think that it will never > change, never get any better? > > Yehuda's death is the first time I ever lost someone close enough for it > to > hurt. So now I've seen the face of the enemy. Now I understand, a little > better, the price of half a second. I don't understand it well, because > the human brain has a pattern built into it. We do not grieve forever, > but > move on. We mourn for a few days and then continue with our lives. Such > underreaction poorly equips us to comprehend Yehuda's death. Nineteen > years of life and memory annihilated. A thousand years, or a million > millennia, or a forever, of future life lost. The sun should have dimmed > when Yehuda died, and a chill wind blown in every place that sentient > beings gather, to tell us that our number was diminished by one. But the > sun did not dim, because we do not live in that sensible a universe. Even > if the sun did dim whenever someone died, it wouldn't be noticeable except > as a continuous flickering. Soon everyone would get used to it, and they > would no longer notice the flickering of the sun. > > My little brother collected corks from wine bottles. Someone brought > home, > to the family, a pair of corks they had collected for Yehuda, and never > had > a chance to give him. And my grandmother said, "Give them to Channah, and > someday she'll tell her children about how her brother Yehuda collected > corks." My grandmother's words shocked me, stretched across more time > than > it had ever occurred to me to imagine, to when my fourteen-year-old sister > had grown up and had married and was telling her children about the > brother > she'd lost. How could my grandmother skip across all those years so > easily > when I was struggling to get through the day? I heard my grandmother's > words and thought: she has been through this before. This isn't the first > loved one my grandmother has lost, the way Yehuda was the first loved one > I'd lost. My grandmother is old enough to have a pattern for dealing with > the death of loved ones; she knows how to handle this because she's done > it > before. And I thought: how can she accept this? If she knows, why isn't > she fighting with everything she has to change it? > > What would it be like to be a rational atheist in the fifteenth century, > and know beyond all hope of rescue that everyone you loved would be > annihilated, one after another, unless you yourself died first? That is > still the fate of humans today; the ongoing horror has not changed, for > all > that we have hope. Death is not a distant dream, not a terrible tragedy > that happens to someone else like the stories you read in newspapers. One > day you'll get a phone call, like I got a phone call, and the possibility > that seemed distant will become reality. You will mourn, and finish > mourning, and go on with your life, and then one day you'll get another > phone call. That is the fate this world has in store for you, unless you > make a convulsive effort to change it. > > Since Yehuda's body was not identified for three days after he died, there > was no possible way he could have been cryonically suspended. Others may > be luckier. If you've been putting off that talk with your loved ones, do > it. Maybe they won't understand, but at least you won't spend forever > wondering why you didn't even try. > > There is one Jewish custom associated with death that makes sense to me, > which is contributing to charity on behalf of the departed. I am donating > eighteen hundred dollars to the general fund of the Singularity Institute, > because this has gone on long enough. If you object to the Singularity > Institute then consider Dr. Aubrey de Grey's Methuselah Foundation, which > hopes to defeat aging through biomedical engineering. I think that a > sensible coping strategy for transhumanist atheists, to donate to an > anti-death charity after a loved one dies. Death hurt us, so we will > unmake Death. Let that be the outlet for our anger, which is terrible and > just. I watched Yehuda's coffin lowered into the ground and cried, and > then I sat through the eulogy and heard rabbis tell comforting lies. If I > had spoken Yehuda's eulogy I would not have comforted the mourners in > their > loss. I would have told the mourners that Yehuda had been absolutely > annihilated, that there was nothing left of him. I would have told them > they were right to be angry, that they had been robbed, that something > precious and irreplaceable was taken from them, for no reason at all, > taken > from them and shattered, and they are never getting it back. > > If there should be a monument someday, somewhere on it will be "$1800, in > memoriam Yehuda Nattan Yudkowsky, 1985-2004." It will not restore him to > life. No sentient being deserves such a thing. Let that be my brother's > true eulogy, free of comforting lies. > > When Michael Wilson heard the news, he said: "We shall have to work > faster." Any similar condolences are welcome. Other condolences are not. > > Goodbye, Yehuda. There isn't much point in saying it, since there's no > one > to hear. Goodbye, Yehuda, you don't exist any more. Nothing left of you > after your death, like there was nothing before your birth. You died, and > your family, Mom and Dad and Channah and I, sat down at the Sabbath table > just like our family had always been composed of only four people, like > there had never been a Yehuda. Goodbye, Yehuda Yudkowsky, never to > return, > never to be forgotten. > > Love, > Eliezer. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 15:11:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 07:11:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] PRIVACY: RFID Tyranny on the rise... Message-ID: <20041120151147.4463.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> The following is a newsletter which I suggest that people subscribe to. CASPIAN is doing great work as a watchdog group warning about the orwellian abuses of chipping technologies. Preventing luddite backlash against technology requires that we act to prevent its abuse in violating individual liberties. I met it's director, Katherine Albrecht, when she spoke at the last LPNH convention. CASPIAN NEWSLETTER, 11/19/04: Consumer Power, Privacy, and RFID ===================================================================== Consumer privacy and RFID newsletter Edited by Sunni Maravillosa (Yay! She's back! -KA) NEWS: 1- Houston kids tagged and tracked like inventory 2- FDA supports RFID tags on pharmaceuticals 3- Wal-Mart's data outstrips entire Internet 4- Airlines must turn over passenger data to TSA next week 5- U.S. passports to get RFID chips 6- Wal-Mart expands RFID use to Sam's Club 7- Albertsons moving forward with RFID tagging plans 8- Should you get a chip in your shoulder? 9- Will your cell phone become your wallet? 10- Lessons from Lexmark 11- FDA gives RFID big push in pharmaceutical labeling 12- What RFID rights? CASPIAN ACTIVISTS UPDATE 1- Katherine Albrecht is all over the media! 2- Australian CASPIAN member publishes novel 3- CASPIAN members sound off TOOLS YOU CAN USE: 1- CASPIAN member's novel a great educational tool 2- Arguments against national sales tax 3- PBS show "The Persuaders" available online ===================================================================== HOUSTON SCHOOLKIDS TAGGED AND TRACKED LIKE INVENTORY by Katherine Albrecht, CASPIAN Director ===================================================================== Why do creepy RFID initiatives seem to gravitate to Texas, even though Texans are among the most privacy and freedom-loving people in the nation? The latest assault involves the children of the Spring Independent School District, just north of Houston, where 28,000 students will soon be issued RFID badges that will track them as they get on and off school buses. Apparently, RFID reader devices in the buses scan the kids and send their data across town to police and school officials. (Excuse me, did I read that right? Police?!?) Of course, since the kids could lose or trade their cards, some bright bulbs are already considering RFID implants as a more secure alternative. Despite the fact that no child has ever been lost or abducted in the Spring district, students are being RFID tagged "just in case" (and at a considerable cost, too). This program, if allowed to continue, would mark a disastrous turn for privacy and civil liberties in this country and set a terrible precedent. The tracking of school children is especially loathsome, since not only are kids a captive audience (in this regard, public school students are second only to prisoners and the military), but they are not old enough to vote out the perpetrators -- or even to take their grievances against them to a court of law. The program's impact on kids is summed up in the words of a 15-year-old, quoted as saying the program "makes me feel kind of like an animal." Is this how we, as a society, actually plan to treat the next generation of Americans? Are we really so intent on numbering, watching, and dehumanizing kids that we will ignore the impact of our technology on their independence and psychological wellbeing? Kids must rely on adults to let them know what is and isn't appropriate in a free society. We adults, who are older and wiser and know the historical dangers of unchecked government power, have an obligation to look out for their interests. We must take a stand to protect our kids -- and indeed, ourselves -- from the busybodies who would have us all under lock and key (for our own safety, of course) the moment we let our guard down. CASPIAN has many committed, freedom-loving members in the Houston area. If you wonderful folks want to plan a time and a date to rally to these kids' defense, CASPIAN will get the word out to the media and spread the message around the world not to mess with Texas. (And especially not its kids!) Write us at "Houston @/at nocards.org" if you want to take a stand. Source: New York Times via CNET, November 17, 2004 http://news.com.com/In+Texas,+28,000+students+test+an+electronic+eye/2100-1039_3-5456061.html or http://tinyurl.com/6etrq ========================= MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD ========================= Are you as disgusted as I am with plans to monitor kids like cattle? If so, write an email to the people behind this program: Dr. Michael Hinojosa Spring Independent School District Superintendent michaelh at springisd.org Brian Weisinger Spring ISD Transportation Director brianW at springisd.org Alan Bragg Spring Police Chief alanb at springisd.org Regina Curry Assistant Superintendent reginac at springisd.org Cindy Doyle Director of Community Relations cdoyle at springisd.org To write to all of these people at once, copy the email addresses below and paste into the "TO:" line in your email: michaelh at springisd.org, brianW at springisd.org, alanb at springisd.org,reginac at springisd.org, cdoyle at springisd.org If you'd like us to publish your comments in an upcoming newsletter, send a carbon copy to CASPIAN by pasting "sunni @/at nocards.org" in the "CC:" line of your email. Note that unless you state otherwise, we will print your first name and city with your message, but we'll keep your last name and email address confidential. ===================================================================== FDA CALLS FOR RFID TAGS ON PHARMACEUTICALS ===================================================================== The FDA gave its blessing to using RFID chips in pharmaceutical labels, using the justification of drug counterfeiting. However, by the FDA's own admission in this article, fewer than 1% of American drugs are counterfeit. Pfizer and Purdue are among the drug makers who have announced they'll start using RFID. Scary quote: "Right away, for the first time ever, a cop can say 'that bottle came from a crime scene and this suspect is in possession of stolen property'" Katherine attended a meeting recently where an industry executive outlined his vision for RFID tagged drugs. His plan involved RFID reader devices in patients' homes to allow officials to monitor people's use of prescription drugs. The reason? Increased "compliance" means more money for the industry. Source: Yahoo News, November 15, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=571&ncid=751&e=1&u=/nm/20041115/hl_nm/health_tags_dc or http://tinyurl.com/4aa2c ===================================================================== WAL-MART'S DATA OUTSTRIPS ENTIRE INTERNET ===================================================================== Straight from the New York Times article: "Plenty of retailers collect data about their stores and their shoppers, and many use the information to try to improve sales, but Wal-Mart amasses more data about the products it sells and its shoppers' buying habits than any other company, so much so that some privacy advocates worry about potential for abuse." Since, as the next paragraph in the article states, the data include Social Security numbers, drivers' license numbers and more, what reasonable person wouldn't be concerned? The article continues, stating that the amount of information Wal-Mart "houses indefinitely" (yes, you read that right; the information is apparently never discarded) is more than double the entire content on the Internet! Again, from the article: "By next October, the company will require its biggest suppliers to tag shipments to some of its distribution centers with tiny transmitters that would eventually let Wal-Mart track every item that it sells." The article includes a quote from CASPIAN founder Katherine Albrecht who points to the huge variety of personal information Wal-Mart could amass on customers once they have their SSNs and driver's license numbers. Even though the piece focuses on the powerful use of consumer data by Wal-Mart, it's a good way to introduce individuals to the realities of consumer privacy and data-mining. Source: New York Times/Denver Post, November 15, 2004 http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~33~2534195,00.html ===================================================================== AIRLINES MUST TURN OVER PASSENGER DATA TO TSA NEXT WEEK ===================================================================== November 23 is the deadline for all U.S. airlines to turn over passenger data so that the Transportation Security Administration can test the Secure Flight passenger pre-screening system. Here are the details of the information to be shared: "Once each of the 72 domestic airlines submits data, including passenger name, reservation date, travel itinerary, and form of payment for domestic flights between June 1 and June 30 of this year, testing is expected to last through the end of January." The data they get will also be compared to existing "no-fly" lists. Source: InformationWeek, November 15, 2004 http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=52601881 ===================================================================== U.S. PASSPORTS TO GET RFID CHIPS ===================================================================== The U.S. government appears to have taken the worst possible route to "provide security" by putting RFID chips into passports. They've chosen to use a remote-reading chip that beams unencrypted information to a reader. That means that unless you've taken pains to protect your chipped passport from being read without your knowledge and consent, it will beam "the passport holder's name, address, date and place of birth, and send along a digital photograph." The new chipped passports will go first to diplomats and State Department employees; citizen passports will start to be chipped in spring 2005. Sounds like a good reason not to procrastinate on getting a passport. Source: Wired, October 21, 2004 http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,65412,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1 ===================================================================== WAL-MART EXPANDS RFID USE TO SAM'S CLUB STORE ===================================================================== Wal-Mart continues its RFID push, announcing that RFID-tagged cases and pallets will be shipped to a Sam's Club store in Plano, TX. Since Sam's Club is a bulk-discount store, there's a good possibility that those RFID chips will go home with many consumers. According to the article: "Wal-Mart will alert customers of cases that contain RFID tags via signs and literature that explains RFID, and they can remove the tags after purchase, a spokesman says." The Plano store where the chipped packaging will be for sale is located at Highway 121 and Ohio Drive. This looks like a good target for an educational campaign or protest. Anyone in Plano game? Source: InformationWeek, November 1, 2004 http://www.informationweek.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=51201650 ===================================================================== ALBERTSONS MOVING FORWARD WITH RFID TAGGING PLANS ===================================================================== I guess their loyalty card woes weren't enough to convince Albertsons to listen to consumers; the company has recently released its plan for RFID tagging of shipments of merchandise to their warehouse. The pilot project will begin in early 2005 and will focus on Dallas/Fort Worth Albertsons stores. They hope to have all suppliers tagging crates and pallets by October of 2005. Source: RFID Journal, November 12, 2004 http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/1227/1/1/ ===================================================================== SHOULD YOU GET A CHIP IN YOUR SHOULDER? ===================================================================== Presumably, if you're a subscriber to this newsletter you know the answer to that question ... but this MSN article does a good job of presenting a balanced view of chipping individuals. Author Josh McHugh saves the best for last: his final two paragraphs provide good information on how readers can be used, and links to various models. MSN often changes their links, so check this one before it goes 404. Source: Slate/MSN, November 10, 2004 http://slate.msn.com/id/2109477/ Incidentally, Josh featured our work in a great piece he wrote for Wired this summer. See it here: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.07/shoppers.html?pg=1 ===================================================================== WILL YOUR CELL PHONE BECOME YOUR WALLET? ===================================================================== >From the article: "Some big players in telecommunications and finance, including Motorola, Nokia, Sony, and MasterCard, think ... that people will rush to make their phones into a kind of magic wand that effortlessly makes purchases or retrieves information for them." Putting all of your sensitive information into one unit -- especially one that can be easily identified (and therefore targeted) is a phenomenally bad idea. Doesn't using the Social Security number as a nearly-universal ID demonstrate that well enough? Security and privacy concerns are being downplayed here in favor of the gee-whiz factor of yet another use for RFID (which the reporter refers to as "an RF chip") technology. Source: Christian Science Monitor, November 15, 2004 http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1115/p13s02-wmgn.html?s=u2 ===================================================================== LESSONS FROM LEXMARK ===================================================================== Printer company Lexmark is getting another black eye, courtesy of consumers, for its questionable practices. The company was accused of "planting spyware" on customers' computers. At issue is "undocumented software that monitors the use of its printers and silently reports back to a Lexmark-owned company Web site," according to the first article linked below. However, Lexmark says that users are informed of the software, named Lexmark Connect, in the driver installation process. (Of course, we all read these things carefully, right?) The second article, by Mr. Goodwins, is an excellent overview of the issues involved. He ends it by stating, "In the end, it's up to the users." But what if they are unaware of what is happening? Source: ZD Net, November 11 and 16, 2004 http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39173517,00.htm http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/rupertgoodwins/0,39020691,39174087,00.htm ===================================================================== WHAT RFID RIGHTS? ===================================================================== Simson Garfinkel offers a thoughtful analysis of the current state of voluntary RFID notification in situations where consumers may unknowingly purchase RFID-tagged products. In doing so, he makes an important distinction between proprietary RFID devices, and the EPC chips that are intended to replace the UPC bar codes. He also recounts some adventures Katherine Albrecht has had in uncovering questionable business practices with RFID chips. Source: Technology Review, November 3, 2004 http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/11/wo_garfinkel110304.asp ===================================================================== CASPIAN ACTIVISTS UPDATE ===================================================================== 1. KATHERINE ALBRECHT has been busy speaking out on consumer privacy issues. It's hard to find an article on consumer privacy that doesn't include a quote from her. In recent weeks she has discussed the VeriChip and pharmaceutical tagging on the NBC Nightly News, NPR, CNN, and NBC's Squawkbox; she has been quoted in the New York Times, Investor's Business Daily and a host of other domestic publications, and she has been cited in publications as far away as France, Australia and India. In addition, Katherine recently participated in an eye-opening yet entertaining segment on shopper cards by the Canadian Broadcasting Company. The written version of the CBC piece is online here: http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/services/privacy/loyalty.html The streaming video (RealPlayer) version of the CBC piece is online here: http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/services/privacy/cards20041024.ram 2. AUSTRALIAN CASPIAN MEMBER publishes a novel. It's a terrific examination of a boy coming of age in a consumerism-centric society. Psychologist Shaun Saunders drew on his doctoral dissertation data in creating the novel, so there's a real feel of imminence to the book, titled "Mallcity 14". Dr. Saunders was kind enough to send me a copy of the book, which I have reviewed: http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/04/10/20/sunni.htm 3. CASPIAN MEMBERS SOUND OFF Here is just one of the hundreds of email messages of support we receive each month: "I will buy a sheep, shear it, card it, spin it, and learn how to knit before I knowingly buy any clothing with an RFID tag in it." -Lynn, in Wisconsin ===================================================================== ACTIVISM TOOLS YOU CAN USE ===================================================================== 1: CASPIAN member's novel a great educational tool As mentioned above, Dr. Saunders' book "Mallcity 14" is a novel that touches on many of the privacy issues we're facing today. A novel based on research may sound intimidating, but Saunders did an excellent job of creating an interesting story and characters. If you're having trouble convincing people of the state of consumer privacy today, consider giving them "Mallcity 14". It's available online from Trafford Publishers: http://www.trafford.com/4dcgi/view-item?item=6169 2: Arguments against a national sales tax Claire Wolfe & Aaron Zelman have written a great article detailing many reasons to oppose national sales tax. Their article, titled "The FairTax: A Trojan Horse for America?" echoes CASPIAN founder Katherine Albrecht's concern that a national sales tax could lead to unprecedented government surveillance of our purchases and personal belongings, among other problems. Read it online here: http://www.jpfo.org/fairtax.htm 3: PBS show "The Persuaders" available online "The Persuaders" is an interesting examination of the worlds of marketing and advertising in the U.S. The claim is made that Americans increasingly rely on advertising for more than purchase information, but for broader uses, including what to think and whom to trust. If you missed it last week, it's available from the PBS web site, in either Windows Media or RealPlayer format, and via high or low-bandwidth connections. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/ ===================================================================== CASPIAN: Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering Opposing supermarket "loyalty" cards and other retail surveillance schemes since 1999 http://www.spychips.com/ http://www.nocards.org/ You're welcome to duplicate and distribute this message to others who may find it of interest. ===================================================================== To subscribe or unsubscribe to the CASPIAN mailing list, click the following link or copy and paste it into your browser: http://www.nocards.org/cgi/mojo/mojo.cgi If you have difficulty with the web-based interface, you may also subscribe or unsubscribe via email by writing to: admin at nocards.org ===================================================================== ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 20 15:44:25 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:44:25 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: <000501c4cf05$dd28ef10$731f8751@oemcomputer> References: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> <000501c4cf05$dd28ef10$731f8751@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041120094130.01bf6698@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:35 PM 11/20/2004 +0000, Steve Davies wrote: >What we have >is the classic pattern that you get with a migrant group. Another excellent, sensible and informed post from Steve! Good stuff. Damien Broderick From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 20 16:53:02 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 08:53:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Nov 19, 2004, at 8:03 PM, Beef Machine wrote: > I think males today have big pecs because we've invented weights, > excercises, and weight machines which deliberately increase their > size. There are a number of types of physical labor that will cause large pectorals to develop e.g. one can find century old photographs of laborers working in the fields with shirts off who have a gym monkey's physique. Our bodies have evolved to withstand much more physical strain than we actually tend to put on them these days, hence the responsiveness of the muscle when one puts it to use. The state of the average human body today is a long way from the evolutionary mean that gave us the bodies we have. j. andrew rogers From riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 17:25:34 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:25:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Nov 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Nope. They're bombing synagogues, assaulting jews, and marching to > demand sharia across europe. Sounds to me like muslim values are what > they are after... "They" would have to be the fundamentalist 5% (if that) of the population. Most people, including immigrants from muslim countries, seem to be pretty tolerant of others. > What is happening to 'tolerant' europe, though? Apathy ? 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 riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 17:30:45 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:30:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Hara Ra wrote: > I predict that in about 10 more years the Church of the Immaculate > Upload will come along. Ten years ?! I'd have hoped we could move the religious fanatics to a place where they can't harm us much sooner... ;) 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 riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 17:39:07 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:39:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Spike wrote: > Here the argument sounds a little circular, so > please ponder before responding. If large pecs and > gluts helps the hunter hurl and run, then potential > mates capable of logic might reason that the individual > with these traits might be a superior choice for > a mate. There's no need for logic. The offspring of people who chose their partner poorly have less survival chance than the offspring of strong parents. Occam's razor strikes again ;) > Today we do not criticize one for choosing a > mate with more earning potential. If life were > dependent upon hunting, so much the more advisable > for choosing one with the wherewithal to hunt. In fact, some of these selecting factors have been so ingrained into our culture that many people aren't consciously aware of them. cheers, 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 riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 18:01:15 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:01:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 In-Reply-To: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > I heard my grandmother's words and thought: she has been through this > before. This isn't the first loved one my grandmother has lost, the way > Yehuda was the first loved one I'd lost. My grandmother is old enough > to have a pattern for dealing with the death of loved ones; she knows > how to handle this because she's done it before. And I thought: how can > she accept this? If she knows, why isn't she fighting with everything > she has to change it? You need to accept reality; whether or not to fight it is a decision to make after having accepted reality. I would guess that everybody will have picked their own things they want to change in reality, but nobody has tried to change absolutely everything. Some people want to change capitalism, others want to change healthcare, many people are content to change just their own family and make a difference in their children's upbringing. The number of people who have chosen to change mortality is probably much smaller... In order to change reality, you need to have traction with it, accept contact with it, etc. > What would it be like to be a rational atheist in the fifteenth century, > and know beyond all hope of rescue that everyone you loved would be > annihilated, one after another, unless you yourself died first? That is > still the fate of humans today; the ongoing horror has not changed, for all > that we have hope. Death is not a distant dream, not a terrible tragedy > that happens to someone else like the stories you read in newspapers. Not sure about the fifteenth century, but with the advent of biology and natural selection I realise that one day the carbon atoms in my body will need to be recycled for use in our descendants. Would I want to live forever? Maybe. Would I want to live forever if it meant holding up evolution and the spreading of life ? No. For me, it is the totality of life that is special. That peculiar ordering of matter and energy that spreads consciousness through the universe. Some things are more important than my own life. I still would like a very long lifespan, but immortality might prove to be a drain on life itself... 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 harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 18:12:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 10:12:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: References: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041120100523.029485f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Then there's the press release: Balkan Scientists discover new Gene, Liturgene. When fed to a control group of skeptics, their output of dogmatized text went up by 10000% they report. Dalka Krankor, chief instigator, says: "We may have saved the economy of Trans-Kikkianistan here, as we can now reliably outsource technical help on any subject. Just feed them a dose of Liturgene and give them a users manual." It was reported that the control group was composed of random extropians, transhumanists and libertarians from the notorious Exi Chat list.... >>These days, 20 years after Gibson's Neuromancer, these academics saying >>the same thing. Greg Egan having written of these things in his science >>fiction 10 years ago. I predict that in about 10 more years the Church of >>the Immaculate Upload will come along. Let's see now: "The Universe >>created thee Pure in DNA, in Original Awareness without Sin. Lay down thy >>conflicts and disputes, come into the house of Primal Upload...." > >You might want to soup up the liturgy a bit. If one of us is >sufficiently seduced by the Dark Side expect to see this is more like >three years. :-) > >- samantha ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Nov 20 18:11:02 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:11:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dreaming for the Future In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041119191639.DF15D57E2F@finney.org> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119132950.01ada440@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000601c4ce80$b1401840$1ec31b97@administxl09yj> <6.1.1.1.0.20041119154206.01a8dec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119193303.0292b018@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041120120904.021f5ec0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Please do not cc the list if you are sending messages to the list. It is happening too often and the moderators already spoke to you about this. I just don't want to see you or anyone removed from the list for overposting in this manner, but it does happen. Thank you. Natasha At 09:33 PM 11/19/2004, Hara Ra wrote: >Um, who observes the observer? > >At 01:45 PM 11/19/2004, Damien Broderick wrote: >>At 10:42 PM 11/19/2004 +0100, Serafino quoted: >> >>>Bohr listened with closed eyes and finally only said: >>>"Oh, I understand. You might as well say that we are >>>not sitting here, drinking tea, but that we are just >>>dreaming all that." >>> >>>Bohr: We must treat the measuring device classically. >>>Wigner: Why must we? What will happen to us if we don't? >> >>Wigner's Friend: Ermph? Chaps, I just had the most peculiar dream. Chaps? >>Now where have they gone? >> >>Schrodinger's Cat: Mroww. Mroww. Um, Woof. >> > >================================== >= Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = >= harara at sbcglobal.net = >= Alcor North Cryomanagement = >= Alcor Advisor to Board = >= 831 429 8637 = >================================== > >_______________________________________________ >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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 18:12:46 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:12:46 -0500 (EST) Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > A question: is there anything like AIathome? I mean some project aimed > at developing a conscious AI, or more realistically some preliminary > implementation of AI, Based on what I understand, intelligence appears to be based on information processing and communication, not computation. Distributed computing of the @home variety is based on having thousands of fast computing nodes, connected to each other with the brain equivalent of a wet piece of string. All working on nicely self contained pieces of the puzzle, in effect a fairly static setup. Computers are great at this. Human intelligence, on the other hand, seems to be best at fitting together the pieces of the puzzle. Not at complex calculations. Power through correlation. A very dynamic setup. I would expect that AI will have similar needs: lots of data available at low latencies, with lots of fuzzy matching to fit pieces of data together. A lot more dynamic than any @home style distributed computing network could be, on today's internet. Mmm, maybe I should check around, to see if AI research is still thinking in terms of programming, or more in terms of processing data ... Rik -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 18:49:24 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:49:24 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <001001c4cf31$a802f610$da494842@kevin> > > > What would it be like to be a rational atheist in the fifteenth century, > > and know beyond all hope of rescue that everyone you loved would be > > annihilated, one after another, unless you yourself died first? That is > > still the fate of humans today; the ongoing horror has not changed, for all > > that we have hope. Death is not a distant dream, not a terrible tragedy > > that happens to someone else like the stories you read in newspapers. > Take any century prior to this one. I often wonder if that isn't exactly what happened with Alexander, Genghis Khan, or more recently, Hitler and Stalin. History is full of such people. They may have simply went nuts after thinking this through and finding that there was nothing they could do and that life did not matter. Fortunately we are now on the verge of the ability to put an end to this. Now is the time to push dorward, not give up. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 20 18:51:16 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:51:16 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory References: <000001c4cd36$9ea6b4f0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <001601c4cf31$eb1f2310$da494842@kevin> > > > Today we do not criticize one for choosing a > > mate with more earning potential. If life were > > dependent upon hunting, so much the more advisable > > for choosing one with the wherewithal to hunt. > > In fact, some of these selecting factors have been > so ingrained into our culture that many people > aren't consciously aware of them. > Taller people have greater earning potential. People who are "attractive" generally earn more. It's the sane traits over and over again. From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 20 20:21:15 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:21:15 -0800 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Nov 20, 2004, at 10:12 AM, Rik van Riel wrote: > Based on what I understand, intelligence appears to be based > on information processing and communication, not computation. As a technical nit, I challenge you to define "information processing", "communication", and "computation" such that they are truly distinct entities in some kind of rigorous fashion. > Human intelligence, on the other hand, seems to be best at > fitting together the pieces of the puzzle. Not at complex > calculations. Power through correlation. A very dynamic > setup. This is generally true. The brain is essentially a giant context-sensitive pattern index that does everything using a few primitive operations on that index. If you think of it this way, the limitations start to become obvious. > Mmm, maybe I should check around, to see if AI research is > still thinking in terms of programming, or more in terms of > processing data ... Most AI research is still thinking in terms of computation, or at the very least they view computational power as the limit on intelligence. If you look at the models used by most researchers, you can see why they might come to that conclusion. Newer foundational mathematical models based in algorithmic information theory would strongly suggest that this view is quite incorrect. I actually may have been the first hardcore theorist in the field of AI to assert that there is almost no "computation" in "intelligence", something which is considered less controversial and outlandish today than when I started publicly making such assertions five years ago. Still, old ideas die hard. As one of the first people to take a serious stab at defining intelligent systems and AI in terms of algorithmic information theory, it became obvious to me that the pervasive view that intelligence is bound by computational power was not supportable in the mathematics. As a foundational mathematical model of intelligence, this general area has done very well; there are far more reasons to think it is correct today than when it was first proposed, and it has generated the first really new directions in ages. It is worth pointing out that if you take these models into consideration, which really are the only mathematical framework for generally intelligent systems we currently have, the popular models of what constitutes a "human-equivalent computer" (e.g. Moravec) are completely and deeply broken. The closest direct metric of intelligence capability for silicon would be cache line fill rate and total RAM; TFLOPS are almost totally irrelevant as a practical matter. cheers, j. andrew rogers From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 20 21:02:32 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 15:02:32 -0600 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:21 PM 11/20/2004 -0800, j. andrew rogers wrote: >I actually may have been the first hardcore theorist in the field of AI to >assert that there is almost no "computation" in "intelligence", something >which is considered less controversial and outlandish today than when I >started publicly making such assertions five years ago. I'm not certain, but I suspect that Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela, among others, were there many years ahead of you (although in cogsci and biology rather than AI). http://www.inteco.cl/biology/ Damien Broderick From riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 21:09:25 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:09:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Nov 2004, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > On Nov 20, 2004, at 10:12 AM, Rik van Riel wrote: > > Based on what I understand, intelligence appears to be based > > on information processing and communication, not computation. > > As a technical nit, I challenge you to define "information processing", > "communication", and "computation" such that they are truly distinct > entities in some kind of rigorous fashion. Mmmm, the only easily understandable way in which I can explain the difference is by pointing out where the bottlenecks are in each paradigm. With computation, the bottleneck is the CPU, or how fast calculations can be performed inside some relativel small components. With information processing, the bottleneck is how fast an entity can go over all the information it has, finding patterns and correlating data, quite possibly in computationally simple ways. Communication I would define as how fast different logical entities can exchange information between them. > > Mmm, maybe I should check around, to see if AI research is > > still thinking in terms of programming, or more in terms of > > processing data ... > > Most AI research is still thinking in terms of computation, or at the > very least they view computational power as the limit on intelligence. > If you look at the models used by most researchers, you can see why > they might come to that conclusion. It's also a language thing. Both computer languages and natural languages tend to be formed around the paradigm of processing identifyable objects. In most computer languages, you instruct the computer to inflict a number of (complex) transformations on a piece of data. In natural language, you describe what happens to objects, and who does what. I'm not sure either set of languages is suitable for introspection into the process of intelligence. 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 nanogirl at halcyon.com Sat Nov 20 21:13:23 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:13:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 References: <419D5C3A.2030201@pobox.com> Message-ID: <006b01c4cf45$c5122410$1db71218@Nano> Those of you interested in immortality, societies belief systems and cryonic suspension might want to take a look at my paper "Cryonics: Background, Overview, and Bioethical Implications" http://www.nanoindustries.com/feature/cryoethics.html . P.S. for those of you who have been following my animation progress, I have new works here (the rotary has been Drexler and Freitas approved - I'm very excited about that): http://www.nanogirl.com/museumfuture/index.htm . These will be easier to download if you have a high speed connection. Regards, Gina ----- Original Message ----- From: Rik van Riel To: ExI chat list Cc: World Transhumanist Association Discussion List ; sl4 at sl4.org Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:01 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Yehuda Yudkowsky, 1985-2004 On Thu, 18 Nov 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > I heard my grandmother's words and thought: she has been through this > before. This isn't the first loved one my grandmother has lost, the way > Yehuda was the first loved one I'd lost. My grandmother is old enough > to have a pattern for dealing with the death of loved ones; she knows > how to handle this because she's done it before. And I thought: how can > she accept this? If she knows, why isn't she fighting with everything > she has to change it? You need to accept reality; whether or not to fight it is a decision to make after having accepted reality. I would guess that everybody will have picked their own things they want to change in reality, but nobody has tried to change absolutely everything. Some people want to change capitalism, others want to change healthcare, many people are content to change just their own family and make a difference in their children's upbringing. The number of people who have chosen to change mortality is probably much smaller... In order to change reality, you need to have traction with it, accept contact with it, etc. > What would it be like to be a rational atheist in the fifteenth century, > and know beyond all hope of rescue that everyone you loved would be > annihilated, one after another, unless you yourself died first? That is > still the fate of humans today; the ongoing horror has not changed, for all > that we have hope. Death is not a distant dream, not a terrible tragedy > that happens to someone else like the stories you read in newspapers. Not sure about the fifteenth century, but with the advent of biology and natural selection I realise that one day the carbon atoms in my body will need to be recycled for use in our descendants. Would I want to live forever? Maybe. Would I want to live forever if it meant holding up evolution and the spreading of life ? No. For me, it is the totality of life that is special. That peculiar ordering of matter and energy that spreads consciousness through the universe. Some things are more important than my own life. I still would like a very long lifespan, but immortality might prove to be a drain on life itself... 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 _______________________________________________ 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: From sjatkins at gmail.com Sat Nov 20 21:21:08 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:21:08 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: References: <470a3c5204111821486f10b561@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041119075143.0291f0b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04112013215f65de48@mail.gmail.com> Personally i hope we can get around such polarized positioning sooner still. -s On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:30:45 -0500 (EST), Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Hara Ra wrote: > > > I predict that in about 10 more years the Church of the Immaculate > > Upload will come along. > > Ten years ?! > > I'd have hoped we could move the religious fanatics > to a place where they can't harm us much sooner... ;) > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 22:04:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:04:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <948b11e04112013215f65de48@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Personally i hope we can get around such polarized positioning sooner > still. > > On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:30:45 -0500 (EST), Rik van Riel > wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Hara Ra wrote: > > > > > I predict that in about 10 more years the Church of the > > > Immaculate Upload will come along. > > > > Ten years ?! > > > > I'd have hoped we could move the religious fanatics > > to a place where they can't harm us much sooner... ;) Oh my, are we making positive commentary about the forced uploading (i.e. genocide) of that majority of humanity that are devoutly religious? How very..... Bradburian of you.... Of course, you are also essentially proposing that we put a couple billion intelligent religious viruses onto the world computer system. Great going guys, you just brought it all down... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sat Nov 20 22:09:03 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:09:03 -0800 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Nov 20, 2004, at 1:02 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > I'm not certain, but I suspect that Humberto Maturana and Francisco > Varela, among others, were there many years ahead of you (although in > cogsci and biology rather than AI). /me googles furiously From what I can gather, their models have some vague similarities but makes no assertions of the type I was referring to. The only thing that led me to believe that the notion that intelligence is not mathematically bound in any significant sense by computational complexity was new, ignoring Penrosian theories of a "something else", was the uniform reaction to the idea across a broad swath of AI people who I would expect to be familiar with the idea in the abstract if someone else had promoted the idea. It has simply been assumed that computational complexity is the bounding problem on normal machinery. There are two aspects that together distinguish the idea: that intelligence scalability is not bound by computational complexity AND that this is true on ordinary finite state machinery without invoking special physics, spirituality, or anything else. In the past, the only people who generally asserted that intelligence was not a function of computation also asserted that this was because there was ineffable "magic" of some sort that was generating the intelligence. In other words, they simply delegated intelligence to something else. My assertion was that computational complexity is not a limit to the expression of intelligence in a *conventional* finite state machine context. Or to put it another way, there is no theoretical reason that one could not create a human-level intelligence on an old 486 computer. The speed of the computer is orthogonal to the problem space, and only weakly relevant as a practical matter. j. andrew rogers From riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 20 22:10:21 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:10:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Nov 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Oh my, are we making positive commentary about the forced uploading > (i.e. genocide) of that majority of humanity that are devoutly > religious? How very..... Bradburian of you.... Nope, just trying to make a joke (see the smiley). I hadn't expected people to take it seriously. 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 fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 20 22:56:20 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:56:20 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] New Google Tool Message-ID: <001001c4cf54$27fb9c60$6600a8c0@brainiac> Interesting ... http://scholar.google.com/ Olga From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 21 02:08:26 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 19:08:26 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Software firm joins search for aliens. Message-ID: <419FF89A.CBCD8FCE@mindspring.com> Flying Saucer Review, Vol 49/1, Spring 2004, pp. 17&18 < http://www.fsr.org.uk > Software firm joins search for aliens. But are they already here? A special report compiled by FSR The following story broke on 22nd of March 2004, and in some ways is very surprising, for Microsoft should be well aware that in the next few decades computers will be ready to take us on to the next stage of human, or human-computer, evolution. Soon, computers will be in a position - perhaps with our help, or perhaps not - to take computing into realms that were only recently considered science-fiction. As a result, the subject of consciousness -- and where we could put it -- should become much better understood. Futurologists believe that in the next 100 years or less, computing will have the ability to transfer our consciousness into software; or rather, into hardware-software, and/or energy fields. Consequently, we should acknowledge the possibility that aliens more advanced than us have already mastered techniques which will allow them to perform what to us would appear to be magic. They may be able to communicate in ways far in advance of old-fashioned radio communication. They may have transferred their consciousness into their environment and the wider environment and, over millions or billions of years, involved in many quantum leaps to something which will be completely foreign to us and which we are unlikely to be aware of -- unless they occasionally present themselves to us as 'aliens'. Microsoft might do better putting its money into research that looks for other modes of communication. In parallel, less advanced aliens may be using techniques that we might recognise as being something of alien origin. These techniques may have resulted in the wave of apparent alien technology-oriented sightings that have persisted for the last 50 plus years. I saw "apparent alien technology" because that is not always how it appears. We may be seeing their software too. That software would of course be non-physical and might represent an alien intrusion into our space-time frame. On the other hand, some ufos may be physical craft from worlds that are not much more advanced than ours, while others may represent an interaction -- intentional or otherwise -- with an intelligence millions or billions of years ahead of us. The search for alien radio transmission can therefore probably only lead us to know of the existence of aliens that are at a similar technology level to us. By the time we get the signal, though, the species behind it may have evolved considerably and be using other techniques, and/or expanding its presence exponentially across our galaxy. The problem any species has with developing computers is that progress towards mega advanced computing -- involving perhaps a species-computer 'life form' -- can probably happen in quantum leaps very rapidly, so much so that before they know it, they have something on their hands which they had difficulty envisaging in the first place. We may be only brief decades away from that situation ourselves, or sooner if 'black' projects are currently working on mega advanced computers. We would be foolish indeed if we presumed they were not. PW, FSR. -- "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 Sun Nov 21 02:33:35 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:33:35 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] on Spike's big ass theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <002901c4cf72$80559410$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Rik van Riel > > There's no need for logic. The offspring of people > who chose their partner poorly have less survival > chance than the offspring of strong parents. > >... > > In fact, some of these selecting factors have been > so ingrained into our culture that many people > aren't consciously aware of them. Rik Both of these points I acknowledge, but what I am really getting at is this: there are human characteristics which are driven by mate selection that may or may not have survival value. Before when this discussion came up, I suggested an experiment to demonstrate that our enormous gluteus maxima do very little when we walk. Just grab them (or have a cooperative coexperimenter grab them) and walk across the room, and see how un-stressed they are. Now this latest paper suggests that human gluts are huge because it helps us run. Granted sprinters have large gluts, but champion long distance runners have small buns. (If one were to repeat the experiment above while running, one might need to do so outdoors, for one's house is probably too small to get up much speed. This might accomplish little other than to make the neighbors afraid of you. But think of how much one might save on Halloween candy alone. But I digress) Here is the reason I focus on rears: some physical characteristics are balanced by gender selection, such as shoulder width. Females may prefer males with broad shoulders while males may prefer females with narrow shoulders. That characteristic might reach a balance for that reason. But both genders like mates with protruding buttocks and large heads, which may explain why humans have enormous butts and brains so large that they represent a very significant risk to mothers in childbirth. Or rather did represent significant risk until very recently, with the advent of surgical birth, which appears to clear the path for a new phase of human evolution. spike From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Nov 21 06:50:22 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 07:50:22 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Here come the chimeras Message-ID: <470a3c520411202250322e5a29@mail.gmail.com> Washington Post, via BoingBoing: In Minnesota, pigs are being born with human blood in their veins. In Nevada, there are sheep whose livers and hearts are largely human. In California, mice peer from their cages with human brain cells firing inside their skulls. These are not outcasts from "The Island of Dr. Moreau," the 1896 novel by H.G. Wells in which a rogue doctor develops creatures that are part animal and part human. They are real creations of real scientists, stretching the boundaries of stem cell research. Biologists call these hybrid animals chimeras, after the mythical Greek creature with a lion's head, a goat's body and a serpent's tail. They are the products of experiments in which human stem cells were added to developing animal fetuses. Chimeras are allowing scientists to watch, for the first time, how nascent human cells and organs mature and interact -- not in the cold isolation of laboratory dishes but inside the bodies of living creatures. Some are already revealing deep secrets of human biology and pointing the way toward new medical treatments. But with no federal guidelines in place, an awkward question hovers above the work: How human must a chimera be before more stringent research rules should kick in? http://www.boingboing.net/2004/11/20/here_come_the_chimer.html From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 21 07:00:54 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 01:00:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] an unusual NASA mission; from Google news Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041121010010.01a342d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Observatory launched by NASA to look for emerging black ho From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Nov 21 07:38:34 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 08:38:34 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system Message-ID: <470a3c5204112023385ae61b20@mail.gmail.com> CRNano blog: To make a difference you have to be in the system. -- That's the message from George Atkinson, science and technology advisor to the U.S. Secretary of State, in a keynote address at NanoForum 2004, an annual conference sponsored by SEMI (Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International). Atkinson said scientists and engineers must become a part of 'the system' if they are to wield political influence. "If the science and technology community is unable or unwilling to effectively become more engaged in the political process then I'm not so sure we're going to enjoy the same level of success." The level of success he refers to is the longstanding United States lead in research, development, and deployment of new technologies. Several speakers at the conference expressed concerns about losing that edge. http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/11/working_within_.html From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 21 08:22:39 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 02:22:39 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] an unusual NASA mission; from Google news In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041121010010.01a342d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041121010010.01a342d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041121021824.01a0c280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:00 AM 11/21/2004 -0600, I wrote: >Observatory launched by NASA to look for emerging black ho Just in case anyone didn't rush immediately to Google News to check: this was their (truncated) headline, not my typo. It was funny. Yo ho ho. Damien Broderick < Krusty the Clown deflating noises > From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sun Nov 21 17:58:18 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:58:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: No CNN reports of Wormsign in Iraq Iss yet Message-ID: <41A0D73A.BDAAF999@mindspring.com> It's long struck me that, for those who like to look for conspiracies, propaganda, and subversion under every bed and every rock, Frank Herbert's whole "Dune" series might be seen as diabolically clever Muslim and jihadist propaganda! The whole culture and ecology of Arrakis/Dune and its inhabitants are essentially Middle Eastern and specifically Arabic, a sort of extraterrestrial far-future Saudi Arabia or super-Sahara, the language is a sort of pig-Arabic, the religion is a sort of para-Islam, etc. Frank Herbert was obviously fascinated by Arabic and Muslim culture and attitudes, and felt that any future Galactic human civilization would include a prominent Middle Eastern component that would dominate some inhabited worlds. He may have even specifically thought of worm spice as a far-future counterpart of petroleum--just as 20th century industrial Earth civilization ran on Middle Eastern oil, so far-future space-faring Galactic civilization ran on worm vomit from Dune! Of course, Herbert died long before 9/11, and had apparently no idea how prevalent and virulent jihads would in fact become within just a few years of his own time! I sort of wonder how (or whether!) he would have revised or rewritten his "Dune" series if he had lived into and past 9/11?? Salaam alaikum, T. Peter lawrie wrote: >Just been watching the fiction called dune >about prescience and fat domineering >Harkonens and an Emperor attack peaceful >Iraq-iss for spice and how the freedom >fighters declare jihad (that is the word >they used) and fought them off with the help >of god and by throwing shattering voices at >the invaders. > >A curious mix that gave me a bad case of >dissonance. > >Lawrie _____ -- "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 scerir at libero.it Sun Nov 21 19:00:20 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:00:20 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI (was COMP: DistributedComputing) References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin><470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com><6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <004d01c4cffc$59cb9940$ebb01b97@administxl09yj> From: "J. Andrew Rogers" > In the past, the only people who generally asserted > that intelligence was not a function of computation > also asserted that this was because there was ineffable > "magic" of some sort that was generating the intelligence. Let me point out the Neapolitan philosopher Giambattista Vico http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/vico/ who published (1710) a treatise on the ***construction*** of knowledge http://www.umass.edu/srri/vonGlasersfeld/onlinePapers/html/117.html This "operational" perspective has been developed by Silvio Ceccato (1914-1997) and his 'Italian Operational School' http://www.oikos.org/vGmemory.htm From samantha at objectent.com Sun Nov 21 18:56:48 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:56:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112023385ae61b20@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c5204112023385ae61b20@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <18C25744-3BEF-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> This effectively says that scientists and engineers must play politics instead of doing science and engineering. If so then this is a symptom of an incredibly broken system that needs to be repaired as quickly as possible. Simply playing the broken system may do little more than legitimize the brokenness and leave one's own work undone. - samantha On Nov 20, 2004, at 11:38 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > CRNano blog: To make a difference you have to be in the system. -- > That's the message from George Atkinson, science and technology > advisor to the U.S. Secretary of State, in a keynote address at > NanoForum 2004, an annual conference sponsored by SEMI (Semiconductor > Equipment and Materials International). > Atkinson said scientists and engineers must become a part of 'the > system' if they are to wield political influence. "If the science and > technology community is unable or unwilling to effectively become more > engaged in the political process then I'm not so sure we're going to > enjoy the same level of success." > The level of success he refers to is the longstanding United States > lead in research, development, and deployment of new technologies. > Several speakers at the conference expressed concerns about losing > that edge. > http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/11/working_within_.html > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From samantha at objectent.com Sun Nov 21 19:04:02 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:04:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1B84B3BE-3BF0-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> It depends. A technological rapture fills the bill of some religions rather nicely. :-) However, the polarization where one sees people like oneself as reasonable and everyone else as bloody weights on the human potential needs to be examined and if possible overcome long before we have the ability to upload anyone. - s On Nov 20, 2004, at 2:04 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> Personally i hope we can get around such polarized positioning sooner >> still. >> >> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:30:45 -0500 (EST), Rik van Riel >> wrote: >>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Hara Ra wrote: >>> >>>> I predict that in about 10 more years the Church of the >>>> Immaculate Upload will come along. >>> >>> Ten years ?! >>> >>> I'd have hoped we could move the religious fanatics >>> to a place where they can't harm us much sooner... ;) > > Oh my, are we making positive commentary about the forced uploading > (i.e. genocide) of that majority of humanity that are devoutly > religious? How very..... Bradburian of you.... > > Of course, you are also essentially proposing that we put a couple > billion intelligent religious viruses onto the world computer system. > Great going guys, you just brought it all down... > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! > http://my.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From samantha at objectent.com Sun Nov 21 19:21:37 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:21:37 -0800 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <90AAB62F-3BF2-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> On Nov 20, 2004, at 2:09 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > Or to put it another way, there is no theoretical reason that one > could not create a human-level intelligence on an old 486 computer. > The speed of the computer is orthogonal to the problem space, and only > weakly relevant as a practical matter. > > Go ahead then. If by human-level intelligence you mean remotely equivalent in terms of cognitive operations per unit time then I would be very surprised if any such thing could be acheived on such an architecture. I don't see that the grater switching speed vs lack of significant parallelism is in favor of such. - s From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 19:23:55 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:23:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: No CNN reports of Wormsign in Iraq Iss yet In-Reply-To: <41A0D73A.BDAAF999@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041121192355.974.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Hebert, long before his death, disputed any associations between the spice melange and petroleum oil. The middle east is not the only location for oil, merely one of the cheapest (and most of that is the sour crudes that are more expensive to refine than the sweet crudes of the north sea, Nigeria, and Venezuela). Nor was the spice an energy source, it was merely a key to interstellar navigation, much as the GPS system of satellite based navigation we use today: you can use other methods, but they are much more difficult to use and more fraught with risk. --- "Terry W. Colvin" wrote: > It's long struck me that, for those who like to look for > conspiracies, > propaganda, and subversion under every bed and every rock, Frank > Herbert's whole "Dune" series might be seen as diabolically clever > Muslim and jihadist propaganda! The whole culture and ecology of > Arrakis/Dune and its inhabitants are essentially Middle Eastern and > specifically Arabic, a sort of extraterrestrial far-future Saudi > Arabia > or super-Sahara, the language is a sort of pig-Arabic, the religion > is > a sort of para-Islam, etc. Frank Herbert was obviously fascinated by > > Arabic and Muslim culture and attitudes, and felt that any future > Galactic human civilization would include a prominent Middle Eastern > > component that would dominate some inhabited worlds. He may have > even > specifically thought of worm spice as a far-future counterpart of > petroleum--just as 20th century industrial Earth civilization ran on > Middle Eastern oil, so far-future space-faring Galactic civilization > ran > on worm vomit from Dune! Of course, Herbert died long before 9/11, > and > had apparently no idea how prevalent and virulent jihads would in > fact > become within just a few years of his own time! I sort of wonder how > (or > whether!) he would have revised or rewritten his "Dune" series if he > > had lived into and past 9/11?? > > Salaam alaikum, > T. Peter > > lawrie wrote: > > >Just been watching the fiction called dune > >about prescience and fat domineering > >Harkonens and an Emperor attack peaceful > >Iraq-iss for spice and how the freedom > >fighters declare jihad (that is the word > >they used) and fought them off with the help > >of god and by throwing shattering voices at > >the invaders. > > > >A curious mix that gave me a bad case of > >dissonance. > > > >Lawrie _____ > > > -- > "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.] > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sun Nov 21 19:42:51 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:42:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI (was COMP: DistributedComputing) In-Reply-To: <004d01c4cffc$59cb9940$ebb01b97@administxl09yj> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin><470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com><6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <004d01c4cffc$59cb9940$ebb01b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <87FFA94F-3BF5-11D9-9F4A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 21, 2004, at 11:00 AM, scerir wrote: > Let me point out the Neapolitan philosopher Giambattista Vico > http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/vico/ who published (1710) > a treatise on the ***construction*** of knowledge Interestingly, Vico distilled some observations into concepts that have a close resemblance to some elegant theorems in algorithmic information theory, in the same way as Occam's Razor. Remarkable really, since we did not even have anything even close to the mathematics to describe such things at the time. Vico was trying to figure out the theoretical relationships between universal machinery centuries before Turing. > http://www.umass.edu/srri/vonGlasersfeld/onlinePapers/html/117.html > This "operational" perspective has been developed by > Silvio Ceccato (1914-1997) and his 'Italian Operational School' > http://www.oikos.org/vGmemory.htm I must have mis-stated myself somewhere -- tricky semantics. Even among constructionists and "operational" perspectives, there has been a pervasive assumption the computational complexity is a defining factor in the expression of intelligence in machinery. Even when the models are not explicitly computation intensive, the expressions of such models are assumed to be. This is really only important if, given some arbitrary model of intelligence, one asks why computational complexity is considered a defining factor in implementation. It is a question of perspective, and one can gain some interesting insights by asking this question which is almost never asked in a conventional context. j. andrew rogers From samantha at objectent.com Sun Nov 21 19:43:09 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:43:09 -0800 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9238B3DC-3BF5-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> On Nov 20, 2004, at 12:21 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > Most AI research is still thinking in terms of computation, or at the > very least they view computational power as the limit on intelligence. > If you look at the models used by most researchers, you can see why > they might come to that conclusion. Newer foundational mathematical > models based in algorithmic information theory would strongly suggest > that this view is quite incorrect. > > I actually may have been the first hardcore theorist in the field of > AI to assert that there is almost no "computation" in "intelligence", > something which is considered less controversial and outlandish today > than when I started publicly making such assertions five years ago. > Still, old ideas die hard. As one of the first people to take a > serious stab at defining intelligent systems and AI in terms of > algorithmic information theory, it became obvious to me that the > pervasive view that intelligence is bound by computational power was > not supportable in the mathematics. As a foundational mathematical > model of intelligence, this general area has done very well; there are > far more reasons to think it is correct today than when it was first > proposed, and it has generated the first really new directions in > ages. > > Interesting. Please provide some citations to the relevant work. Googling I find a great deal by GJ Chaitin and others on "Algorithmic Information Theory". Can you point out what you believe is the most accessible and AI relevant material? Such pointers would be much appreciated. - s From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sun Nov 21 21:54:46 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 13:54:46 -0800 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: <90AAB62F-3BF2-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <90AAB62F-3BF2-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: On Nov 21, 2004, at 11:21 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > On Nov 20, 2004, at 2:09 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: >> Or to put it another way, there is no theoretical reason that one >> could not create a human-level intelligence on an old 486 computer. >> The speed of the computer is orthogonal to the problem space, and >> only weakly relevant as a practical matter. > > Go ahead then. If by human-level intelligence you mean remotely > equivalent in terms of cognitive operations per unit time then I would > be very surprised if any such thing could be acheived on such an > architecture. I don't see that the grater switching speed vs lack of > significant parallelism is in favor of such. As a practical matter I wouldn't want to do anything on a 486, if only because the memory systems it supports are terribly inadequate. You could, but you wouldn't want to, though a simple and slow core by today's standards should provide plenty of IPC if the rest of the architecture was in order. There were two points here: 1.) There is nothing in "intelligence" that has a time dimension in the theoretical. In any finite context, there is no "intelligence per unit time" that reflects on the intrinsic intelligence of the system being measured. For any time-bounded intelligence metric you can think of, there is a "fast and stupid" machine that will appear more intelligent than a "slow and smart" machine, for the purposes of black box comparison. Of course, the point of AI is to come up with an algorithm that will be smart in any context, not to game intelligence metrics. 2.) If you have a system that has O(log n) complexity in one dimension and O(n^k) or O(k^n) complexity in another dimension, the latter function will dominate scaling for some non-trivial "n". For systems that must express some approximation of universal induction, a general mathematical requirement for AI, space complexity is a problem that dwarfs time complexity. An extreme and relevant example of this in literature is the sequential universal predictor algorithm -- logarithmic traversal time, geometric space (hence its intractability). On real silicon, this severely bottlenecks on memory latency, since you only need to dispatch a handful of machine code instructions per memory address. It becomes literally the case that a few GB worth of patterns can be exhaustively searched using fewer clock cycles than are wasted in a single memory stall, and with data structures of this type, cache misses are the rule. Practical AI will have to have a similar complexity profile as a consequence of approximating some mathematical requirements, though obviously not as severe. cheers, j. andrew rogers From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sun Nov 21 22:50:16 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:50:16 -0800 Subject: Structure of AI (was: Re: [extropy-chat] COMP: Distributed Computing) In-Reply-To: <9238B3DC-3BF5-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <9238B3DC-3BF5-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: On Nov 21, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > Interesting. Please provide some citations to the relevant work. > Googling I find a great deal by GJ Chaitin and others on "Algorithmic > Information Theory". Can you point out what you believe is the most > accessible and AI relevant material? Such pointers would be much > appreciated. Chaitin is mostly unrelated to these specific issues, even though it is the same field of mathematics. His popularity and fame in various matters google bombs the rest of the field. Directly pertinent to what I was talking about would be Hutter's and Schmidhuber's work at IDSIA. Hutter has some papers on a universal theory of AI based on algorithmic probability and decision theory from circa 2000 that are both accessible and frame some aspects of the problem very well, and the references in the appendices will point you to most of the foundational mathematics (Kolmogorov, Solomonoff, and Levin mostly). The de facto standard text for algorithmic information theory is Li and Vitanyi, which is also quite good. To sum up rather crudely, you can formally integrate universal induction, decision theory, and some other bits into an elegant universal mathematical definition of intelligence, and derive system models from it that one can prove are universally optimal predictors and decision makers. Unfortunately, while we can show that all intelligent systems have to be a derivative system of this in some fashion, the theoretically pure system derivation is utterly intractable due primarily to the universal induction aspect. The nature and shape of the algorithm space suggested by this mathematics is very different than the traditional assumptions of AI research. It is interesting to note that while the basic theory of universal induction was published in the late 1970s, to date no useful and tractable approximation has ever been described in literature despite the fact that this was a thoroughly trod area even prior to the mathematical formalization. From the standpoint of the above mathematics, the problem of general AI is reduced to a long-standing theoretical computer science problem of tractable induction. cheers, j. andrew rogers From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Nov 21 23:43:52 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:43:52 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: No CNN reports of Wormsign in Iraq Iss yet In-Reply-To: <41A0D73A.BDAAF999@mindspring.com> References: <41A0D73A.BDAAF999@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041121153714.0292f0c0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, the original Dune was well written, sparse on words, rich of implications. The sequels he wrote were much less interesting, and the interminable prequels done by his son and such have IMO spiraled into the MEGO zone. I finally quit reading the last one (Battle of Corrin) because each chapter about put me to sleep, and the whole set of Sci-Fi cliches along with a really stupid and cruel pov is just too much. M'aud Dib I suspect would agree. At 09:58 AM 11/21/2004, you wrote: >It's long struck me that, for those who like to look for conspiracies, >propaganda, and subversion under every bed and every rock, Frank >Herbert's whole "Dune" series might be seen as diabolically clever >Muslim and jihadist propaganda! ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From marudubshinki at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 00:27:37 2004 From: marudubshinki at yahoo.com (Maru) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:27:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Re: No CNN reports of In-Reply-To: <200411211900.iALJ07013480@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <20041122002737.79973.qmail@web14713.mail.yahoo.com> Peter, it's hardly propaganda; it is more truly a warning of how a jihad by a marginal 'edge' people can conquer the central, but militarily weakened civilzation. Wouldn't propaganda have a central hero (Paul Atereides/Muad'Dib) who we would admire and also admire his war, not pity him and watch as he struggled to escape his prescient trap? ~Maru > It's long struck me that, for those who like to look for > conspiracies, > propaganda, and subversion under every bed and every rock, > Frank > Herbert's whole "Dune" series might be seen as diabolically > clever > Muslim and jihadist propaganda! .... ... > Salaam alaikum, > T. Peter __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 22 02:00:11 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:00:11 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: <1B84B3BE-3BF0-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <1B84B3BE-3BF0-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Samantha Atkins wrote: > However, the polarization where one sees people like oneself as > reasonable and everyone else as bloody weights on the human potential > needs to be examined and if possible overcome long before we have the > ability to upload anyone. Enforcing tolerance is a form of intolerance itself. I don't think I would want to force anybody to give up their ideas, beliefs and/or delusions. My feeling is that we will have to live with the fact that there will always be people around who are intolerant of some thing or another - especially of other people's religious or social ideologies. Add to that the fact that many people, especially religious ones, are not in search of immediate paradise for themselves. They are securing their place in the afterlife. An afterlife that cannot be reached if they choose immortality; an afterlife that might be risked by abandoning the body that god gave them, to upload themselves into "some soulless machine". These people have good grounds for viewing our transhumanist and/or extropian beliefs with distrust. Until either point of view is proven true, they both hold similar validity. I am firmly on the extropian side with my personal beliefs, but that doesn't mean that my extropian beliefs are any more (or any less) valid than other beliefs. kind regards, 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 riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 22 02:01:04 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:01:04 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system In-Reply-To: <18C25744-3BEF-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <470a3c5204112023385ae61b20@mail.gmail.com> <18C25744-3BEF-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Samantha Atkins wrote: > This effectively says that scientists and engineers must play politics > instead of doing science and engineering. If so then this is a symptom > of an incredibly broken system that needs to be repaired as quickly as > possible. Simply playing the broken system may do little more than > legitimize the brokenness and leave one's own work undone. However, the only way of fixing the system is to play politics. Oh, the irony... 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 02:26:15 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:26:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041122022615.57392.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > This effectively says that scientists and engineers must play > > politics instead of doing science and engineering. If so then > > this is a symptom of an incredibly broken system that needs to > > be repaired as quickly as possible. Simply playing the broken > > system may do little more than legitimize the brokenness and > > leave one's own work undone. > > However, the only way of fixing the system is to play > politics. Oh, the irony... Samantha's gripe is one typical of many libertarians, independents, and apoliticals which are merely, IMHO, excuse making to rationalize inaction. The real irony is that the more you get involved, as I have in the last few years, the more you discover how truly broken things really are beyond what you thought from the outside, but you also discover that you can be just as powerful and effective as anybody else in the system if you only try, and that there are a lot of people already involved who feel the same way as you and have been pining for reinforcements for a long time. There is no such thing as 'legitimizing brokenness' by getting involved. By not getting involved, you assent to the brokenness by your inaction. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Mon Nov 22 03:31:31 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:31:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <90AAB62F-3BF2-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <41A15D93.1070909@pobox.com> J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > 1.) There is nothing in "intelligence" that has a time dimension in the > theoretical. In any finite context, there is no "intelligence per unit > time" that reflects on the intrinsic intelligence of the system being > measured. For any time-bounded intelligence metric you can think of, > there is a "fast and stupid" machine that will appear more intelligent > than a "slow and smart" machine, for the purposes of black box > comparison. Of course, the point of AI is to come up with an algorithm > that will be smart in any context, not to game intelligence metrics. Nitpicks: 1) The point of AI is to come up with an algorithm that will be smart in any of the tiny set of contexts that represent low-entropy universes. We may make this assumption since a maxentropy universe could not contain an AI. If we do not make this assumption we run into no-free-lunch theorems. It may not sound practically important (how many maxentropy universes did we plan to run into, anyway?) but from a theoretical standpoint this is one hell of a huge nitpick: The real universe is an atypical special case. 2) The goal of FAI is not the same as the point of AI. The point of AI, if you implement it successfully, just stabs you. The optimization target of an FAI is an unusual special case of optimization targets, with complex, relevant properties. We must devise an AI that is "smart" according to an unusually difficult criterion, to operate in an unusually easy universe. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Mon Nov 22 03:48:15 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:48:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <9238B3DC-3BF5-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <41A1617F.4090705@pobox.com> J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > To sum up rather crudely, you can formally integrate universal > induction, decision theory, and some other bits into an elegant > universal mathematical definition of intelligence, and derive system > models from it that one can prove are universally optimal predictors and > decision makers. Unfortunately, while we can show that all intelligent > systems have to be a derivative system of this in some fashion, the > theoretically pure system derivation is utterly intractable due > primarily to the universal induction aspect. The nature and shape of > the algorithm space suggested by this mathematics is very different than > the traditional assumptions of AI research. > > It is interesting to note that while the basic theory of universal > induction was published in the late 1970s, to date no useful and > tractable approximation has ever been described in literature despite > the fact that this was a thoroughly trod area even prior to the > mathematical formalization. From the standpoint of the above > mathematics, the problem of general AI is reduced to a long-standing > theoretical computer science problem of tractable induction. This is an example of what I mean by nitpick #2, that FAI is a special case of AI. Saying that your ideal criterion of decision-making can be summed up in a von Neumann-Morgenstern utility measure, from which we derive a measure of expected utility, and thence a total ordering over actions, which we use to derive a greatest action, (takes breath), is a special case of decision-making that empirically does not hold true of humans, and thus the "Collective Volition" proposal is based around the general problem of abstracting, transforming, and approximating a generalized decision function, with expected utility being a special case of a decision function that can be abstracted in an unusually simple way. Also, classical induction and classical decision theory make broken assumptions such as that the AI is hermetically sealed from the rest of the universe except for an input channel and an output channel. AIXI cannot model the consequences for its own cognitive process of hitting itself over the head with a hammer. I think this is as broken for real-world AI, as a reward channel riveted to the input channel is broken for Friendly AI. If you actually instantiated AIXI, it would commit suicide. If AIXI didn't commit suicide, it would kill you. Neither of these are trivial problems. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Mon Nov 22 05:26:25 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:26:25 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A15D93.1070909@pobox.com> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <90AAB62F-3BF2-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A15D93.1070909@pobox.com> Message-ID: <0DBC6073-3C47-11D9-9F4A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 21, 2004, at 7:31 PM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > 1) The point of AI is to come up with an algorithm that will be smart > in any of the tiny set of contexts that represent low-entropy > universes. We may make this assumption since a maxentropy universe > could not contain an AI. If we do not make this assumption we run > into no-free-lunch theorems. It may not sound practically important > (how many maxentropy universes did we plan to run into, anyway?) but > from a theoretical standpoint this is one hell of a huge nitpick: The > real universe is an atypical special case. Very true, but there is some audience context to consider. I would assume that the above would be obvious to anyone who understood the math well enough to really consider it, and confusing to those that didn't. I could make quite a number of shocking mathematical assertions, but I do not see that it would serve any purpose. My technical omissions were intentional. There are many, many layers, something you already know. Hell, I only mentioned intelligent systems in the abstract and didn't even mention that the entire universe of mathematics within that class of system (e.g. where Friendliness comes in). There are a lot of sacred cows one could slay in this space e.g. the theoretical implications of algorithmically finite systems on intelligent agents within those systems, but I was trying to keep it somewhat conversational. How far down the rabbit hole do we want to go? j. andrew rogers From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 22 06:37:53 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:37:53 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within thesystem References: <20041122022615.57392.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001b01c4d05d$cbf789f0$e1964c44@kevin> I second this. > > The real irony is that the more you get involved, as I have in the last > few years, the more you discover how truly broken things really are > beyond what you thought from the outside, but you also discover that > you can be just as powerful and effective as anybody else in the system > if you only try, and that there are a lot of people already involved > who feel the same way as you and have been pining for reinforcements > for a long time. > > There is no such thing as 'legitimizing brokenness' by getting > involved. By not getting involved, you assent to the brokenness by your > inaction. > > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! > http://my.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 22 06:47:09 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:47:09 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <0DBC6073-3C47-11D9-9F4A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> References: <006301c4ccf5$3450f070$8bb32643@kevin> <470a3c520411172226219a621c@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041120145802.01a145c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <90AAB62F-3BF2-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A15D93.1070909@pobox.com> <0DBC6073-3C47-11D9-9F4A-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041121224633.0291baa0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> to the bottomost turtle, obviously >How far down the rabbit hole do we want to go? > >j. andrew rogers ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 22 07:31:07 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 08:31:07 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hawkins: On Intelligence Message-ID: <470a3c52041121233139a07d82@mail.gmail.com> >From Tech Central Station, good review of an interesting book: In an important new book, On Intelligence, written with assistance from Sandra Blakeslee, Jeff Hawkins, the inventor of the Palm Pilot, takes the view that abstract thinking and sensory perception are aspects of the same mental process. Hawkins believes that by studying the architecture of the brain we can learn better ways to build intelligent machines. Accordingly, his book tries to provide the reader with a state-of-the-art view of how the brain functions. Hawkins focuses on the brain as constantly trying to establish patterns and using trial-and-error exploration to fit those patterns to real-world experience. http://www.techcentralstation.com/112204B.html From sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Nov 22 10:49:52 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:49:52 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system In-Reply-To: References: <470a3c5204112023385ae61b20@mail.gmail.com> <18C25744-3BEF-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04112202497f4fefb3@mail.gmail.com> You cannot "fix the system" by playing into its brokenness however. There is for instance no point in pretending that it is legitimate for the State to overrule on manners of scientific fact. Any pretense that there is a reasonable debate here would only help the enemies of science and technology and greatly harm us. Similarly any pretense that it is reasonable for some to limit the ability of all to benefit from new technology or even explore it on grounds of the religious beliefs of the would be controlling group is pure poison for the kind of world we wish to inhabit and create. Science is not a democratic process. Freedom to grow to one's fullest potential is not a matter that should be subject to majority opinion. - samantha On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:01:04 -0500 (EST), Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > This effectively says that scientists and engineers must play politics > > instead of doing science and engineering. If so then this is a symptom > > of an incredibly broken system that needs to be repaired as quickly as > > possible. Simply playing the broken system may do little more than > > legitimize the brokenness and leave one's own work undone. > > However, the only way of fixing the system is to play > politics. Oh, the irony... > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Nov 22 10:57:28 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:57:28 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system In-Reply-To: <20041122022615.57392.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041122022615.57392.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04112202571a824939@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:26:15 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > Samantha's gripe is one typical of many libertarians, independents, and > apoliticals which are merely, IMHO, excuse making to rationalize > inaction. > Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. It is fine to go on about points you believe in of course. Just don't pretend something unrelated I said is a reasonable springboard. It is learning not to spend time in rituals that don't really cleanly address the problem. Yes, that can lead to inaction if one cannot find a useful action to perform. But better inaction than a lot of action just for action's sake. > The real irony is that the more you get involved, as I have in the last > few years, the more you discover how truly broken things really are > beyond what you thought from the outside, but you also discover that > you can be just as powerful and effective as anybody else in the system > if you only try, and that there are a lot of people already involved > who feel the same way as you and have been pining for reinforcements > for a long time. > > There is no such thing as 'legitimizing brokenness' by getting > involved. By not getting involved, you assent to the brokenness by your > inaction. > If you are involved in broken processes and your involvement brands the process as legitimate when it is not then you are legitimizing brokenness. It is hardly remotely true that "there is nos such thing as legitimizing brokenness". That said there are still some good ways of being involved and in fact I do take part in some of them. - samantha From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 22 11:07:17 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:07:17 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Clear Pictures of How We Think Message-ID: <470a3c52041122030746d8c197@mail.gmail.com> Wired News: Sometimes we are forced to make a decision but we feel ourselves to be pulled in opposite directions by reason and emotion. Thanks to an innovation that has transformed the study of the mind, scientists are now able to see precisely what happens in the brain in situations like this. For the first time in history we are getting close to answering the question of whether the heart rules the head. The progress is due to functional magnetic-resonance imaging, or fMRI. This technique allows the measurement of the level of oxygen in the blood, and tells scientists which parts of the brain are most active. It can show, for example, the parts of the brain that operate when we fall in love and when we have food cravings. It has even recently revealed the differences in the brains of Democrats and Republicans. Before fMRI, information about the parts of the brain involved in different tasks could only be gathered by studying people who had suffered brain damage from trauma or stroke, and seeing how their brain function changed. Now, the brains of healthy people can be scanned as they are given different tasks. http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,65775,00.html From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 22 11:20:37 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:20:37 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Clear Pictures of How We Think In-Reply-To: <470a3c52041122030746d8c197@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c52041122030746d8c197@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:07:17 +0100, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > It has even recently > revealed the differences in the brains of Democrats and Republicans. > Before fMRI, information about the parts of the brain involved in > different tasks could only be gathered by studying people who had > suffered brain damage from trauma or stroke, and seeing how their > brain function changed. Now, the brains of healthy people can be > scanned as they are given different tasks. Yes. If I recall correctly, the brainscan of Republicans showed very little activity, with most of the brainspace apparently just dead weight or padding. Whereas the brainscan of Democrats showed furious activity at random all over the brain, often sparking off multiple contradictory opinions at the same time. :) BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 13:03:34 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 05:03:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Scientists and engineers must work within the system In-Reply-To: <948b11e04112202571a824939@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041122130334.19927.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote:> > If you are involved in broken processes and your involvement brands > the process as legitimate when it is not then you are legitimizing > brokenness. You are being absurd here. Does a pshrink legitimize dysfunctional families or domestic abuse by helping those suffering from it or committing it? No. Does a an engineer redesigning a product legitimize its previous, flawed, design? No. The only thing illegitimate here is the pop psych bogosity about 'legitimizing processes'. Such terms are all fine and dandy for agit-prop, but they break down when their adherents start acting as if they are so valid that they define some sort of immutable reality. Your involvement or non-involvement in the political process doesn't legitimize anything for anybody. The system frankly couldn't care less whether you were involved or not. Stop being so full of yourself, so solipsistic. It isn't about you. No one person is absolutely necessary for the system to function, it is built to function no matter who sits in the various positions of involvement. That being said, there IS a butterfly effect. Non-involvement is slavish assent. Involvement is claiming the responsibility of citizenship for what the outcomes of the system are. Your impact among millions of others may not seem like much, but it all comes down to how, where, and how much you choose to get involved. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Nov 22 14:27:09 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:27:09 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] EU: What is going wrong? In-Reply-To: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041120123615.81971.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <97A33EE0-3C92-11D9-8F24-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 20 Nov 2004, at 13:36, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Nope. They're bombing synagogues, assaulting jews, and marching to > demand sharia across europe. Sounds to me like muslim values are what > they are after... Is there any moderation on this list? If I were to say that the US South is full of rednecks wanting to lynch blacks I would be bombarded with hate mail, but Mike can say that Islamic immigrants in Europe are full of hate, bombing synagogues etc. and that's OK. A few simple facts: I live just outside Berlin. Berlin has the largest Turkish population of any city outside of Ankara. This population moved to Berlin not recently but in the 1960s. I work with a guy who recently became one of the youngest neuroscience professors in the country. Not bad for a guy who's family were poor Turkish immigrants in the sixties. He got married last week and had a secular wedding, because like many Europeans he's not religious. Mike I don't know if you have ever been outside of the US, but certainly if I was jewish I would not be frightened of walking the streets of Berlin because of the Turks. Its the ultra-right-wing white nationalists that exist in relatively small numbers that are a real danger. And there is no widespread movement to institute Sharia in Europe. That's just a ridiculous comment. Europe does have real problems learning to deal with immigrants from non-European countries. I think that's something that Australians, Canadians and Americans and others from immigrant countries probably have a lot of difficulty understanding. best, patrick From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 22 19:27:17 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:27:17 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] all you needed to know about clones Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041122132544.01aa88f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.badmags.com/images/myronfass/clone.jpg (back in 1978...) Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 20:10:27 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:10:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Merry Christmas SoCal: No Global Warming In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041122132544.01aa88f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041122201027.93270.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> In an unusual once a decade "inside slider" storm system out of BC, southern california was blanketed with 3 inches up to 3 feet of snow... Twentynine Palms received 6 inches, while the San Gabriels and San Bernardinos got as much as 3 feet. Who wants to place bets some git journalist is going to be yakking about the coming ice age? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Nov 22 21:12:13 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:12:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A15D93.1070909@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041122211213.71065.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > It may not sound practically important (how many > maxentropy universes did > we plan to run into, anyway?) but from a theoretical > standpoint this is one > hell of a huge nitpick: The real universe is an > atypical special case. It's also the only one that matters. Any and all efforts to deal with universes radically different than the one we actually face are wasted. That this type of analysis is even considered in the SIAI's effort to build FAI leads me to conclude that the SIAI is not worth funding, even if FAI itself would be a desirable goal. From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 22 21:21:01 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:21:01 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] but speaking of clones... Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041122151314.01c08a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> ...does anyone here know if former respected science writer David Rorvik has yet confessed that IN HIS IMAGE (the 1978 allegedly faked book about a millionaire who'd been successfully cloned) is indeed bogus? Or have recent findings tended to *support* his much-ridiculed account? I know that some of the then-preposterous procedures he described turned out to be rather close to those devised by Roslin Institute; now that more work has been done toward human cloning, I wonder if he's due for rehabilitation (and if so the implications are startling)? Google suggests that as late as 1997 he was still claiming it was true: http://www.msu.edu/~millettf/cloning.html Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 21:38:54 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:38:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IWF Denounces Racist Depictions of Dr. Condoleezza Rice Message-ID: <20041122213854.33765.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.iwf.org/articles/article_print.asp?ArticleID=699 IWF Denounces Racist Depictions of Dr. Condoleezza Rice in Popular Editorial Cartoons 11/17/2004 Contact: Louise Filkins Phone: 202-419-1820 WASHINGTON, DC -- The Independent Women's Forum today denounced as blatantly racist several editorial cartoons featuring Dr. Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor and President Bush's nominee for Secretary of State. These cartoons clearly draw upon centuries of deep-rooted, wicked and indefensible portrayals of black women. "The depiction of Dr. Condoleezza Rice by Jeff Danziger, Pat Oliphant and Garry Trudeau as an ebonics speaking, big-lipped, black mammy who just loves her 'massa' is a disturbing trend in editorial cartoons," said Michelle D. Bernard, senior vice president of the Independent Women's Forum. "These cartoons take the racism of the liberals who profess respect and adoration for black Americans to a new level. It is revolting." Danziger, Oliphant and Trudeau, whose editorial cartoons are very popular in the United States, are also renowned all over the world. "The most powerful woman in the United States is young, gifted and black. Given our nation's history of race-based slavery, the ensuing civil rights movement and our continual battle against race- and sex- based discrimination, every citizen in our nation should take pride in Dr. Rice's accomplishments," said Bernard. "She is a representation of America's past and future all at once. One must ask where is the outrage of the nation's civil rights leadership, feminist organizations, and the so-called liberals who only seem to embrace black America in election years?" "Condoleezza Rice was the first woman ever appointed as National Security Advisor. After Secretary of State Colin Powell, Dr. Rice will be the second African American to hold both posts," said Bernard. "These cartoons are decidedly unfunny." ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From samantha at objectent.com Tue Nov 23 02:54:16 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:54:16 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Top scientist asks: is life all just a dream? In-Reply-To: References: <20041120220400.32348.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <1B84B3BE-3BF0-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: On Nov 21, 2004, at 6:00 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> However, the polarization where one sees people like oneself as >> reasonable and everyone else as bloody weights on the human potential >> needs to be examined and if possible overcome long before we have the >> ability to upload anyone. > > Enforcing tolerance is a form of intolerance itself. > I don't think I would want to force anybody to give > up their ideas, beliefs and/or delusions. > Did I say anything though about "enforcing tolerance"? I don't believe I did. What I talked about cannot be achieved by force. It can only be done by self-examination and transformation. I doubt we can afford to neglect this work for much longer. > My feeling is that we will have to live with the fact > that there will always be people around who are > intolerant of some thing or another - especially of > other people's religious or social ideologies. Yep. But we do get to decide if we are going to do so ourselves or not. It is a good question how to arrange the world, physical and/or virtual, so that even rather xenophobic and aggressive groups can exist relatively peacefully without significant danger to others. > > Add to that the fact that many people, especially > religious ones, are not in search of immediate > paradise for themselves. They are securing their > place in the afterlife. > But why are they securing their place in the afterlife if not because they do not believe that any sort of relative paradise is possible here in "this vale of tears"? What if they discovered they were wrong about that? They also believe that death from old age/disease is inevitable. Many of us would like to show that that isn't so either. > An afterlife that cannot be reached if they choose > immortality; an afterlife that might be risked by > abandoning the body that god gave them, to upload > themselves into "some soulless machine". > That is one possibility. However I doubt if many would cling to that interpretation if actually convinced a paradise better than what they imagined was possible without dying and without being at the caprice of an unknowable and inscrutable god. > These people have good grounds for viewing our > transhumanist and/or extropian beliefs with distrust. > There are indeed ample grounds for viewing our beliefs and ideas with distrust. We should view them with distrust ourselves as they are in some respects quite raw and not fully formed. > Until either point of view is proven true, they both > hold similar validity. I am firmly on the extropian > side with my personal beliefs, but that doesn't mean > that my extropian beliefs are any more (or any less) > valid than other beliefs. Hmm. A POV is neither true nor false per se. Personal beliefs are not sacrosanct territory not open to examination by self and others. If you don't think your own beliefs are valid then you frankly have no business holding them! Now on the other hand, I do believe that a particular POV is a point in a process space of learning and growing. People do evolve through different POVs over time some more, some less. At any particular moment it can't be said that one POV is "invalid" because later one will see things differently. POV is contextual with one's knowledge, freedom to question/examine, psychological structures of the moment, culture and so on. What I was attempting to get at with the comment starting this thread is that the entire spiral of human development is in fact valid at every point. But this does not mean that some points are not higher/more inclusive/more capable of producing greater possibilities than others. We must stop warring with and disowning one another because we have different POVs/believes. Of course you don't see that except from a certain point in the spiral. Make sense? - samantha From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 23 04:51:37 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:51:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <20041122211213.71065.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041122211213.71065.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A2C1D9.8080104@pobox.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > >> It may not sound practically important (how many maxentropy universes >> did we plan to run into, anyway?) but from a theoretical standpoint >> this is one hell of a huge nitpick: The real universe is an atypical >> special case. > > It's also the only one that matters. Any and all efforts to deal with > universes radically different than the one we actually face are wasted. I wasn't previously planning to work on that, but now that you mention it, it might be a good way to stress-test the basic concepts, for the same reason that people run really weird HTML through their browsers to see if they crash. How do you get an exact analysis of which universe you live in? Human minds can imagine alternate possibilities, and this is a fine talent to have, especially if you're not sure which possibility is real. > That this type of analysis is even considered in the SIAI's effort to > build FAI leads me to conclude that the SIAI is not worth funding, even > if FAI itself would be a desirable goal. Now you're just being silly. Don't tell me what I may or may not imagine to kick-start my thinking. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 23 05:43:25 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:43:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A2C1D9.8080104@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > >> It may not sound practically important (how many > maxentropy universes > >> did we plan to run into, anyway?) but from a > theoretical standpoint > >> this is one hell of a huge nitpick: The real > universe is an atypical > >> special case. > > > > It's also the only one that matters. Any and all > efforts to deal with > > universes radically different than the one we > actually face are wasted. > > I wasn't previously planning to work on that, but > now that you mention it, > it might be a good way to stress-test the basic > concepts, for the same > reason that people run really weird HTML through > their browsers to see if > they crash. How do you get an exact analysis of > which universe you live > in? Human minds can imagine alternate > possibilities, and this is a fine > talent to have, especially if you're not sure which > possibility is real. There are many possibilities. I prefer the scientific one: you come up with experiments to test and measure the differences, and if you can't - which is logically equivalent to there being no way to tell the difference, since nothing you could detect would be the slightest bit different - then the difference is acknowledged and ignored, at least unless and until a way to measure the difference is discovered. For example: are we in a highly detailed computer simulation, or is this reality just what it appears to be? Answer: if the simulation is detailed enough that we can never tell the difference, then it does not matter - any and every action we do has the same effect, and the universe we perceive behaves in exactly the same way. (Note that this specifically excludes, for example, Agent Smith like characters: if they were present, we could eventually detect them, and thus we would have a way to find out that we were in a sim.) It could be that way, but we can show that trying to determine that is futile - so we move on to questions where our efforts are not wasted. (By analogy to your browser example, this would be like not caring what the content of a document is, if the document is unavailable. A 404 error is a 404 error, no matter what you were supposed to get - although there is special code in browsers to handle what happens if there is an error when reading an image that is to be displayed within a HTML document.) By eliminating the unanswerable questions, and focusing on ways to find the answers where answers can be found, this mindset has proven to be very useful in dealing with reality. It is, of course, far from the only one that humans can use. > > That this type of analysis is even considered in > the SIAI's effort to > > build FAI leads me to conclude that the SIAI is > not worth funding, even > > if FAI itself would be a desirable goal. > > Now you're just being silly. Don't tell me what I > may or may not imagine > to kick-start my thinking. *shrugs* Only if I don't give you my money - which I haven't. There are, I have found, certain things that increase the likelihood of project success, and one of them is staying focussed on the project itself; if you really need to stray into something like this to kick-start your thinking, then you have - perhaps permanently - lost sufficient focus that the odds of your particular effort succeeding are virtually zero. This is only my opinion, of course, but my opinion helps direct my spending. If you honestly disagree, and believe that it will help you, it is not my place to stop you - only to spend my money elsewhere. From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 23 06:43:50 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 01:43:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A2DC26.6030504@pobox.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: >> >> I wasn't previously planning to work on that, but now that you mention >> it, it might be a good way to stress-test the basic concepts, for the >> same reason that people run really weird HTML through their browsers >> to see if they crash. How do you get an exact analysis of which >> universe you live in? Human minds can imagine alternate >> possibilities, and this is a fine talent to have, especially if you're >> not sure which possibility is real. > > There are many possibilities. I prefer the scientific one: you come up > with experiments to test and measure the differences, and if you can't - > which is logically equivalent to there being no way to tell the > difference, since nothing you could detect would be the slightest bit > different - then the difference is acknowledged and ignored, at least > unless and until a way to measure the difference is discovered. Mm, a fine rule for human arguments about goblins and fairies. In probability theory we need to deal with the issue of hypotheses that give the same predictions for all phenomena up until now, then diverge at a future date; we want a prediction in advance. Vide "grue" and so on. What we use for this is Occam's Razor, formalized by something like Kolmogorov complexity. Remember, a properly designed AI is not going to argue with you about fairies and goblins to begin with, so the conversational reply you give to humans may not be the appropriate answer. I'm not talking about a problem where some silly human is trying to come up with hypotheses and then protect them from falsification. I am talking about a case where you are *genuinely unsure* which universe you live in, and Occam's Razor won't always save you. Suppose that you're in the eighteenth century, weighing Newton's gravitation and Einstein's relativity as mutually exclusive alternatives. Occam's Razor, historically, would have given you the wrong answer because they couldn't perform measurements precise enough to see the superiority of Einstein's predictions. That you could test the theories *eventually* would not change the fact that, right *now*, the now of this hypothetical eighteenth century, you would either be uncertain which universe you lived in, or wrong about it. For this reason do we need to entertain alternatives. Also, note my use of a hypothetical, alternative eighteenth century in this explanation. > For example: are we in a highly detailed computer simulation, or is this > reality just what it appears to be? Answer: if the simulation is > detailed enough that we can never tell the difference, then it does not > matter - any and every action we do has the same effect, and the > universe we perceive behaves in exactly the same way. (Note that this > specifically excludes, for example, Agent Smith like characters: if they > were present, we could eventually detect them, and thus we would have a > way to find out that we were in a sim.) It could be that way, but we > can show that trying to determine that is futile - so we move on to > questions where our efforts are not wasted. Nick Bostrom would probably say, "What if we have the experimentally testable prediction that building a superintelligence wastes so much sim-computing-power that the sim gets shut down shortly thereafter?" Now you have an alarming prediction, and you need an advance expectation on it. Wei Dai would probably say that all the different contexts simulating Adrian Tymes exist in superposition from the perspective of the agglomerate "Adrian" while he has not yet performed any test that distinguishes them, and then diverges as soon as the test is performed, so that here, now, you should anticipate all those futures; that is, the superposition of possible substrates is analogous to the superposition of quantum states in many-worlds theory. > By eliminating the unanswerable questions, and focusing on ways to find > the answers where answers can be found, this mindset has proven to be > very useful in dealing with reality. It is, of course, far from the > only one that humans can use. I agree. Wisely restricting ourselves to this mode of thinking, we still find that we are unsure of exactly which universe we live in. That is what probability theory is for. >> Now you're just being silly. Don't tell me what I may or may not >> imagine to kick-start my thinking. > > *shrugs* Only if I don't give you my money - which I haven't. There > are, I have found, certain things that increase the likelihood of > project success, and one of them is staying focussed on the project > itself; if you really need to stray into something like this to > kick-start your thinking, then you have - perhaps permanently - lost > sufficient focus that the odds of your particular effort succeeding are > virtually zero. This is only my opinion, of course, but my opinion helps > direct my spending. If you honestly disagree, and believe that it will > help you, it is not my place to stop you - only to spend my money > elsewhere. I see. Well, in that case, it is clearly no service to humanity for me to waste my time talking to someone who will make no difference to the outcome of the Singularity. Goodbye, discussion over. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 23 09:42:37 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:42:37 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> From: "Adrian Tymes" > For example: are we in a highly detailed computer > simulation, or is this reality just what it appears > to be? Answer: if the simulation is detailed enough > that we can never tell the difference, then it does > not matter - any and every action we do has the same > effect, and the universe we perceive behaves in > exactly the same way. (Note that this specifically > excludes, for example, Agent Smith like characters: if > they were present, we could eventually detect them, > and thus we would have a way to find out that we were > in a sim.) Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever it means) would be allowed. From sentience at pobox.com Tue Nov 23 10:51:39 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:51:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> scerir wrote: > From: "Adrian Tymes" > > >>For example: are we in a highly detailed computer >>simulation, or is this reality just what it appears >>to be? Answer: if the simulation is detailed enough >>that we can never tell the difference, then it does >>not matter - any and every action we do has the same >>effect, and the universe we perceive behaves in >>exactly the same way. (Note that this specifically >>excludes, for example, Agent Smith like characters: if >>they were present, we could eventually detect them, >>and thus we would have a way to find out that we were >>in a sim.) > > Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation > 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation > would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever > it means) would be allowed. This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until you can give me an experimental test for the presence or absence of free will, you're not allowed to talk about it. :) -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 13:27:18 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:27:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041123132718.45412.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote:> > For example: are we in a highly detailed computer > simulation, or is this reality just what it appears > to be? Answer: if the simulation is detailed enough > that we can never tell the difference, then it does > not matter - any and every action we do has the same > effect, and the universe we perceive behaves in > exactly the same way. (Note that this specifically > excludes, for example, Agent Smith like characters: if > they were present, we could eventually detect them, > and thus we would have a way to find out that we were > in a sim.) It could be that way, but we can show that > trying to determine that is futile - so we move on to > questions where our efforts are not wasted. Agent Smith characters would not be detectable in a simulation, because you would have software running that would check memories and other data against a set of rules described as 'physics' and edit the data after the fact to make things conform. This leads to interesting questions about revisionism. If you observe a fortean event witnessed by a number of others, tape it on your video camera immediately, and have it broadcast to millions via tv, you've written the data of that event to such a broad scale that perhaps it exceeds the capacity of revisionist software to catch up to the ongoing memory propagation rate without some major disturbance in the simulation. If we are in a simulation, this could explain the disappearance of mystical phenomena over the ages as communications media/technology developed: the revisionist software, instead of editing memory, has gone to the root of the problem and removed or retired all/almost all Agent Smiths and other programs capable of violating 'physics' and disturbing the stability of reality. > (By analogy to your browser example, this would be > like not caring what the content of a document is, if > the document is unavailable. A 404 error is a 404 > error, no matter what you were supposed to get - > although there is special code in browsers to handle > what happens if there is an error when reading an > image that is to be displayed within a HTML document.) Depends. I recall the bugginess of Corel Ventura 6 when I was writing software manuals with it. Particularly, I discovered that one sequence of ten characters, if spell checked, could cause your whole system to crash. I drove the Corel engineers batty when I discovered that. They had not considered that a person might write code in their publications and did not protect their software against code embedded in text altering the syntax/operations of the code in the software. Similarly, using certain characters in your table of contents would cause the document to be incapable of postscripting to PDF without serious errors. These two examples demonstrate that, at least for that application, it was possible for a user to 'cast spells' within the simulation environment that seriously effected that environment framework itself. Eli's suggestion of testing reality for similar bugs has merit, but is likely to lead him down Mr. Crowleys rabbit hole. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From russell.wallace at gmail.com Tue Nov 23 13:54:28 2004 From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:54:28 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <8d71341e041123055424b893c0@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:42:37 +0100, scerir wrote: > Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation > 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation > would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever > it means) would be allowed. Is a 'detailed enough' simulation of all the molecules in a glass of water the same as a simulation 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation would be too strong, that is to say no 'wetness' (whatever it means) would be allowed. - Russell From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Nov 23 14:13:32 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:13:32 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Genome: A great wave of knowledge is soon to crash our shores Message-ID: <470a3c52041123061359897983@mail.gmail.com> National Review: The human genome has about three billion "base pairs" of these fundamental chemicals. (An example of a base pair would be GT. The G lives on one side of the "double helix" you have heard about, the T on the other, connected by one of the bonds that hold the helix together.) Even a humble bacterium has about four million or so base pairs. That is a lot of data. To get any sense out of it, in fact, you need to engage in a newish discipline called "data mining." This wave of knowledge, this great wave, is building up in laboratories and research institutes all around the world. Sooner or later the wave will come roaring in to crash on our beach. When that happens, a lot of stuff will get swept away - a lot of social dogma, a lot of wishful thinking, a lot of ignorant punditry and self-righteous posturing, and probably some law and tradition and religion and social cohesion as well. There is, however, no stopping the wave. Or rather, we might stop it here in the USA, but then it would just go crashing ashore somewhere else - in China, or Japan, or India - somewhere with a different set of attitudes, a quite different kind of wishful thinking. Dragged forward by cold science, which doesn't care what we think or wish for, we are headed into some interesting times. http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire200411220823.asp From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 23 16:41:30 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:41:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041123164130.79197.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > scerir wrote: > > Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a > simulation > > 'deterministic enough'? No. Details refer to what can be detected in the present, but says little about future states - save that they comply with whatever rules of physics have been set up. It allows for completely random events to trigger different specific future paths. > > Because, in this case, the > simulation > > would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' > (whatever > > it means) would be allowed. > > This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until > you can give me an > experimental test for the presence or absence of > free will, you're not > allowed to talk about it. :) You're allowed to talk about it. One has to have a way to find out that the test is lacking. Just don't continue to obssess over it once you discover the impossibility of testing. From max at maxmore.com Tue Nov 23 16:56:28 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:56:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize genetically modified crops Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041123105502.03897c98@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Some GOOD news: Soya on rice to go Nov 18th 2004 From The Economist print edition http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3404985&subjectID=526354&emailauth=%2527%2525%253EL%2529X%255CYFS%2520%255D%2523%250A _______________________________________________________ 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 23 16:57:57 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 08:57:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A2DC26.6030504@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041123165757.80879.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > I'm not talking about a problem where some silly > human is trying to come up > with hypotheses and then protect them from > falsification. I am talking > about a case where you are *genuinely unsure* which > universe you live in, > and Occam's Razor won't always save you. Suppose > that you're in the > eighteenth century, weighing Newton's gravitation > and Einstein's relativity > as mutually exclusive alternatives. Occam's Razor, > historically, would > have given you the wrong answer because they > couldn't perform measurements > precise enough to see the superiority of Einstein's > predictions. That you > could test the theories *eventually* would not > change the fact that, right > *now*, the now of this hypothetical eighteenth > century, you would either be > uncertain which universe you lived in, or wrong > about it. For this reason > do we need to entertain alternatives. Also, note my > use of a hypothetical, > alternative eighteenth century in this explanation. This is one of the reasons why untestable stuff is acknowledged as untestable. Testing capability advances all the time, especially these days... > Nick Bostrom would probably say, "What if we have > the experimentally > testable prediction that building a > superintelligence wastes so much > sim-computing-power that the sim gets shut down > shortly thereafter?" Now > you have an alarming prediction, and you need an > advance expectation on it. One can make an analogy to other predictions that the universe will suddenly behave radically different, on a grand scale, because of some simple action. These have always turned out false (or almost always, if one stretches the terms and looks hard enough). For example, people have predicted that planetary alignments would signal the end of the Earth (say, it was the Y2K signal for our sim or something). Yet the Earth has survived previous planetary alignments just fine. Likewise, building a superintelligence is something one ramps up to, and there would seem likely to be signs we could detect before the sim shuts down, if we are in a sim, that we could react to. (Normal computer administrators have an array of tools to use short of rebooting the machine if a single rogue process starts eating up a lot of computing power.) Plus, the computing power is ultimately expressed in terms of atoms, which the sim would already simulate - so would even a superintelligence necessarily use more computing power in the sim? > Wei Dai would probably say that all the different > contexts simulating > Adrian Tymes exist in superposition from the > perspective of the agglomerate > "Adrian" while he has not yet performed any test > that distinguishes them, > and then diverges as soon as the test is performed, > so that here, now, you > should anticipate all those futures; that is, the > superposition of possible > substrates is analogous to the superposition of > quantum states in > many-worlds theory. Why anticipate all futures? I can act now without yet knowing exactly what I'll have for dinner tomorrow (or if I'll skip dinner tomorrow in favor of being hungry come Thanksgiving dinner). > I agree. Wisely restricting ourselves to this mode > of thinking, we still > find that we are unsure of exactly which universe we > live in. That is what > probability theory is for. This is correct. But an AI would not necessarily need to determine all aspects of the universe beyond its ability to test. > I see. Well, in that case, it is clearly no service > to humanity for me to > waste my time talking to someone who will make no > difference to the outcome > of the Singularity. Goodbye, discussion over. That only applies if you think yours is the only possible effort that can make a difference. Which leads you to ignore other efforts. Which ultimately impairs your own effort's effectiveness. (I've run into this exact problem with my Casimir work: there have been and still are a lot of failed efforts; only by studying them, and acknowledging that those that have not yet failed have, indeed, not yet failed, could I come up with something that might succeed. I also plan for what happens should I fail too, such that others might find my error and suceed at my ultimate aim.) (I know, you said "discussion over". But I suspect you'll still read this - and even if I don't contribute money, I can still contribute advice. Yours to follow or not, as you choose. But keep in mind that my thinking is also certain others' thinking, if you wonder why everyone on the ExI list is not funding your effort yet.) From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 23 17:25:58 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:25:58 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com><000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> Message-ID: <06db01c4d181$92d22b10$16bf1b97@administxl09yj> From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" > > Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation > > 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation > > would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever > > it means) would be allowed. > > This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until you can give me an > experimental test for the presence or absence of free will, you're not > allowed to talk about it. :) There is, perhaps, another remote possibility. Observed from without, the will is determined. Observed from within, it is free. (Something like Weyl's 'Block Universe', which is different when seen from within, or when seen from without.) If the above makes sense, hmmm, another question arises. That is to say, is the 'simulation' going on from within or from without? s. 'The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it.' -George Bernard Shaw 'The problem of `free will' assumes an acute but concrete form. Namely, in common-sense reasoning, a person often decides what to do by evaluating the results of the different actions he can do. An intelligent program must use this same process, but using an exact formal sense of can, must be able to show that it has these alternatives without denying that it is a deterministic machine.' -John McCarthy From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 23 17:41:57 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:41:57 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI References: <20041123164130.79197.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <06ea01c4d183$bad68b40$16bf1b97@administxl09yj> From: "Adrian Tymes" > No. Details refer to what can be detected in the > present, but says little about future states - save > that they comply with whatever rules of physics have > been set up. It allows for completely random events > to trigger different specific future paths. This is perhaps what philosophers (Pearl i.e.) call statistical-causality, as opposed to time-causality, and to Reichenbach-causality (common cause). Now I realize I forgot the difference between determinism and causality, and I also forgot wich was the book explaining all that! John Earman perhaps? Or Sklar? Bah. > > This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until > > you can give me an > > experimental test for the presence or absence of > > free will, you're not > > allowed to talk about it. :) > > You're allowed to talk about it. One has to have a > way to find out that the test is lacking. Just don't > continue to obssess over it once you discover the > impossibility of testing. In a parallel thread, in another list, somebody wrote "If people do not have free will, then can they be willfully ignorant?" :-) From scerir at libero.it Tue Nov 23 17:48:25 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:48:25 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com><000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <8d71341e041123055424b893c0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <06f301c4d184$a2b1b520$16bf1b97@administxl09yj> From: "Russell Wallace" > Is a 'detailed enough' simulation of all the molecules > in a glass of water the same as a simulation 'deterministic > enough'? Yes, I suppose. > Because, in this case, the simulation would be too strong, > that is to say no 'wetness' (whatever it means) would > be allowed. 'Wetness'? You mean those 'qualia'? From naddy at mips.inka.de Tue Nov 23 17:46:12 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:46:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: EU: What is going wrong? References: <20041120063431.31521.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <000501c4cecf$dabedc70$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: Spike wrote: > > EU officials implore new immigrants to learn 'European values'... > > I don't think the EU officials get it. The immigrants > are not interested in adopting European values. They > want to transform Europe to Muslim values. They come > as Muslim missionaries to convert the heathen. Nonsense. The immigrants come to make a better living for themselves. It shouldn't come as a surprise that many (I wish I had figures) are from poor, rural parts of their country--obviously, if you're well off at home why would you want to leave in the first place?--and with that background comes religious and social conservativeness. Now, a few of these immigrants actually refuse to abandon wholesale their native language and culture. I keep waiting for somebody to spin this the other way around and bemoan the fact of immigrants losing their native culture and blindly embracing that of their host country. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 23 18:02:21 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:02:21 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize genetically modifiedcrops References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041123105502.03897c98@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <033901c4d186$94a79510$e1964c44@kevin> This is good news. One thing I have been wondering lately is why we don't do the same thing with meat. It seems to me that if a human ear can be grown on the back of a mouse, and that if they are learning to grow human organs in a lab, it should be less complicated to grow a slab of beef in a manufacturing facility. You could have one assembly line that "makes" rib-eye and another that makes 100% lean ground beef. With this kind of manufactirung capability, the entire concern over mad cow disease, and many other health issues could be done away with completely. Meat could be genetically modified to get rid of fats and other harmful things, and even tweaked to get the maximum nutrients with the least amount of garbage. The entire factory that raises animals in horrible surroundings only to cut their meat from them before they are completely dead could be done away with. Pig farmers could become technicians and manufacturers of pig meat. What obstacles are there to being able to go to the stor and purchase a slab of lab-grown meat? Surely we aren;t too far from that ability. Are we? Kevin Freels From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 23 18:00:51 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:00:51 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <06f301c4d184$a2b1b520$16bf1b97@administxl09yj> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <8d71341e041123055424b893c0@mail.gmail.com> <06f301c4d184$a2b1b520$16bf1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041123115334.01a9abf8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:48 PM 11/23/2004 +0100, Serafino wrote: >From: "Russell Wallace" > > > Is a 'detailed enough' simulation of all the molecules > > in a glass of water the same as a simulation 'deterministic > > enough'? > >Yes, I suppose. > > > Because, in this case, the simulation would be too strong, > > that is to say no 'wetness' (whatever it means) would > > be allowed. > >'Wetness'? You mean those 'qualia'? This seems to me one of those classic errors due to incompetent reframing (in this case failure to reframe appropriately). The standard skeptical move is to say `If the computer simulates a tornado, nobody gets blown away or drenched'. Of course not, not out here. But in a sufficiently complex simulation, the people inhabiting the sim surely *would* suffer both experiences. It seems arbitrary to declare that if those inhabitants were simulated down the level of responsive nervous systems they would *not* experience `wetness'. They would observe surface tension, sense coolness or warmth, respond to the flow of the liquid on their hands, etc. They would report all this in the words we have provided for them, the same words we use to annotate just those experiences. In what sense would they fail to find `wetness' in their world? Damien Broderick From reason at longevitymeme.org Tue Nov 23 18:08:08 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason .) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:08:08 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] First Methuselah Mouse Rejuvenation Prize Awarded Message-ID: <200411231208.AA452067526@longevitymeme.org> The Methuselah Foundation is happy to report that they have awarded the first Rejuvenation Prize to Stephen Spindler, who led "the first experiment to achieve rejuvenation in middle-aged mice, making them biologically younger while extending their lifespans." The Methuselah Foundation prize fund is supported by public donations - by people like you and I who wish to make a tangible difference to the future of medicine, health and longevity. Donors include the "X PRIZE Foundation, Foresight Institute, the Life Extension Foundation, Dr. William Haseltine -- Founder of Human Genome Sciences and Dr. Raymond Kurzweil -- noted futurist and entrepreneur." I encourage you all to step up to the plate and make a donation that will help to invigorate serious anti-aging research! http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=76595 Scientist Wins the First Methuselah Foundation Rejuvenation "M Prize" for Reversing Aging in Middle-Aged Mice Using Techniques Applicable to Human Beings WASHINGTON, D.C. -- (MARKET WIRE) -- 11/23/2004 -- Dr. Aubrey de Grey, Chairman of The Methuselah Foundation (www.Mprize.org), awarded the first ever Methuselah Mouse Rejuvenation Prize to Dr. Stephen Spindler, who lead the first experiment to achieve rejuvenation in middle-aged mice, making them biologically younger while extending their lifespans. The award was presented on November 21st during the 2004 Gerontological Society of America Conference in Washington, D.C. Dr. Spindler's research was astounding because it began with mice that were in middle age. This research, first reported in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science achieved decisive increases of 15% average and maximum lifespan, AND was accompanied by significant early reductions of deaths from cancer. The fact that mice actually became younger was verified by genetic microarray analysis. Video showing that mice were more active and vibrant than their years can be found at http://www.biomarkerinc.com/html/video1-hi.htm Dr. de Grey of Cambridge University UK, Chairman and Chief Science Advisor to the Methuselah Foundation said, "We are very proud to honor Dr. Spindler and his main financial supporter, The Life Extension Foundation, for their historic and groundbreaking research. The "M Prize" is meant to inspire and encourage this kind of serious scientific progress and innovation in extending the healthy human lifespan." While many people and organizations have already begun to openly question the ethics of such research, Dr. de Grey said, "Increased life spans in humans will result in increased knowledge to solve many of the problems we face." He also states that by making people younger it would "make them more productive for longer lives," which would help "alleviate the funding crisis faced by the Social Security Administration" in the United States. The Methuselah Foundation's Rejuvenation Prize -- in the spirit of the recently successful Ansari X PRIZE for space tourism -- is designed to encourage investors and scientists to compete in a worthy endeavor. To accomplish a future of greatly reduced human suffering through widely available rejuvenation therapies, the Foundation is offering cash prizes for teams that exceed the bar set by Dr. Spindler's remarkable experiment. Already six world-class teams are competing. The Methuselah Foundation is supported by individuals who are no longer willing to stand by and do nothing while the diseases of aging disable and then take their irreplaceable loved ones away. They are taking matters into their own hands and inviting others to join with them to cure and reverse aging. Among the over 100 donors and sponsors, including the X PRIZE Foundation, Foresight Institute, the Life Extension Foundation, Dr. William Haseltine -- Founder of Human Genome Sciences and Dr. Raymond Kurzweil -- noted futurist and entrepreneur. The Methuselah Foundation prize fund currently stands at over half million dollars and is accepting tax-deductible donations and corporate sponsorships to increase the prize fund. For more information, please visit www.MPrize.org. From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 23 18:29:14 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:29:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize genetically modifiedcrops In-Reply-To: <033901c4d186$94a79510$e1964c44@kevin> Message-ID: <20041123182914.37426.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > This is good news. One thing I have been wondering > lately is why we don't do > the same thing with meat. It seems to me that if a > human ear can be grown on > the back of a mouse, and that if they are learning > to grow human organs in a > lab, it should be less complicated to grow a slab of > beef in a manufacturing > facility. You could have one assembly line that > "makes" rib-eye and another > that makes 100% lean ground beef. Mainly, it's expensive - not just in development costs, but also in probable per-unit manufacturing costs (versus the mostly naturally maintained - and therefore very cheap - cellular processes that are taken advantage of currently). Solve the money problem, and one could do this. From megao at sasktel.net Tue Nov 23 18:39:20 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:39:20 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize genetically modifiedcrops In-Reply-To: <033901c4d186$94a79510$e1964c44@kevin> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041123105502.03897c98@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <033901c4d186$94a79510$e1964c44@kevin> Message-ID: <41A383D8.40108@sasktel.net> Animal biotech commodities for simple macdonalds style use are not worth high teching as the cost of production differential is excessive as opposed to plant agbiotech. However mass production of animal biotech products via various forms of animal bioreactors with food as a by-product works. But try saying that in a crowd on a speakers podium without getting shouted down , beat up and expelled. Kevin Freels wrote: >This is good news. One thing I have been wondering lately is why we don't do >the same thing with meat. It seems to me that if a human ear can be grown on >the back of a mouse, and that if they are learning to grow human organs in a >lab, it should be less complicated to grow a slab of beef in a manufacturing >facility. You could have one assembly line that "makes" rib-eye and another >that makes 100% lean ground beef. With this kind of manufactirung >capability, the entire concern over mad cow disease, and many other health >issues could be done away with completely. Meat could be genetically >modified to get rid of fats and other harmful things, and even tweaked to >get the maximum nutrients with the least amount of garbage. The entire >factory that raises animals in horrible surroundings only to cut their meat >from them before they are completely dead could be done away with. Pig >farmers could become technicians and manufacturers of pig meat. What >obstacles are there to being able to go to the stor and purchase a slab of >lab-grown meat? Surely we aren;t too far from that ability. Are we? > >Kevin Freels > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 23 18:53:06 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:53:06 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize geneticallymodifiedcrops References: <20041123182914.37426.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003201c4d18d$ac11d420$8bb32643@kevin> I can see where the development of the processes would be expensive, but wouldn;t the product still use many of those same natural biological processes? I was thinking that it would actually be more efficient and less costly than regular farming in the long run since you aren't feeding the bones, brains, and energy to walk around and feed. I was also thinking that there would also be more usable "meat" in the same space since a cow needs more room ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 12:29 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize geneticallymodifiedcrops > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > This is good news. One thing I have been wondering > > lately is why we don't do > > the same thing with meat. It seems to me that if a > > human ear can be grown on > > the back of a mouse, and that if they are learning > > to grow human organs in a > > lab, it should be less complicated to grow a slab of > > beef in a manufacturing > > facility. You could have one assembly line that > > "makes" rib-eye and another > > that makes 100% lean ground beef. > > Mainly, it's expensive - not just in development > costs, but also in probable per-unit manufacturing > costs (versus the mostly naturally maintained - and > therefore very cheap - cellular processes that are > taken advantage of currently). Solve the money > problem, and one could do this. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From hal at finney.org Tue Nov 23 18:54:12 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:54:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] First Methuselah Mouse Rejuvenation Prize Awarded Message-ID: <20041123185412.8A70F57E2A@finney.org> Reason forwards: > The Methuselah Foundation is happy to report that they have awarded > the first Rejuvenation Prize to Stephen Spindler, who led "the first > experiment to achieve rejuvenation in middle-aged mice, making them > biologically younger while extending their lifespans." Oddly, the press release doesn't give any clue as to what the intervention actually was. Looking at the biomarkerinc.com web site, it appears to have been calorie reduction. Hal From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 23 19:07:49 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:07:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <20041123132718.45412.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <20041123132718.45412.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041123110603.0294a068@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> A generalization of the 'Time Police' SF idea.... >If we are in a simulation, this could explain the disappearance of >mystical phenomena over the ages as communications media/technology >developed: the revisionist software, instead of editing memory, has >gone to the root of the problem and removed or retired all/almost all >Agent Smiths and other programs capable of violating 'physics' and >disturbing the stability of reality. > >Mike Lorrey ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 23 19:20:42 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:20:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize geneticallymodifiedcrops In-Reply-To: <003201c4d18d$ac11d420$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041123192042.72592.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I can see where the development of the processes > would be expensive, but > wouldn;t the product still use many of those same > natural biological > processes? I was thinking that it would actually be > more efficient and less > costly than regular farming in the long run since > you aren't feeding the > bones, brains, and energy to walk around and feed. I > was also thinking that > there would also be more usable "meat" in the same > space since a cow needs > more room Eliminate the brain, and you need to regulate hormone balance yourself. Eliminate the stomach, intestines, and kidneys, and you need to provide carefully balanced nutrients, removing any toxins (including those generated by the cells you are keeping) yourself. And so forth. In theory, it can be made cheaper. In practice, it's going to take a lot of developmnt to make it so. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 19:53:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:53:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize geneticallymodifiedcrops In-Reply-To: <20041123192042.72592.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041123195307.12436.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > I can see where the development of the processes > > would be expensive, but > > wouldn;t the product still use many of those same > > natural biological > > processes? I was thinking that it would actually be > > more efficient and less > > costly than regular farming in the long run since > > you aren't feeding the > > bones, brains, and energy to walk around and feed. I > > was also thinking that > > there would also be more usable "meat" in the same > > space since a cow needs > > more room > > Eliminate the brain, and you need to regulate hormone > balance yourself. > > Eliminate the stomach, intestines, and kidneys, and > you need to provide carefully balanced nutrients, > removing any toxins (including those generated by the > cells you are keeping) yourself. > > And so forth. In theory, it can be made cheaper. In > practice, it's going to take a lot of developmnt to > make it so. This is a good example of how 'efficient' doesn't necessarily mean 'cheaper'. High efficiency generally costs more than low efficiency. Given the output of a vat grown steak is merely a one time impact on the human palate, I doubt spending $1 million growing a steak at 99% thermodynamic efficiency is a worthwhile investment. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Nov 23 20:21:36 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:21:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize geneticallymodifiedcrops In-Reply-To: <20041123195307.12436.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041123202136.62079.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > And so forth. In theory, it can be made cheaper. > In > > practice, it's going to take a lot of developmnt > to > > make it so. > > This is a good example of how 'efficient' doesn't > necessarily mean > 'cheaper'. High efficiency generally costs more than > low efficiency. > Given the output of a vat grown steak is merely a > one time impact on > the human palate, I doubt spending $1 million > growing a steak at 99% > thermodynamic efficiency is a worthwhile investment. Efficiency wouldn't be the sole reason to do this. Vegetarians might not object to vat meat, for instance, and space colonies might be able to support vats where they might not be able to support farm animals. That said, $1,000,000 - or even $1,000 - steaks (as price per steak, not the one-time R&D costs) would be too expensive for almost any food use. $100 per pound of steak *might* barely be viable, but it'd be borderline. From samantha at objectent.com Tue Nov 23 21:32:49 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:32:49 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> Message-ID: <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> On Nov 23, 2004, at 2:51 AM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: >> Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation >> 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation >> would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever it >> means) would be allowed. > > This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until you can give me an > experimental test for the presence or absence of free will, you're not > allowed to talk about it. :) > Now who's being silly? -s From reason at longevitymeme.org Tue Nov 23 21:49:35 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason .) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:49:35 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] First Methuselah Mouse Rejuvenation Prize Awarded Message-ID: <200411231549.AA604897474@longevitymeme.org> From: hal at finney.org ("Hal Finney") >Reason forwards: >> The Methuselah Foundation is happy to report that they have awarded >> the first Rejuvenation Prize to Stephen Spindler, who led "the first >> experiment to achieve rejuvenation in middle-aged mice, making them >> biologically younger while extending their lifespans." > >Oddly, the press release doesn't give any clue as to what the intervention >actually was. Looking at the biomarkerinc.com web site, it appears to >have been calorie reduction. The Betterhumans article answers some of the obvious questions - the press release was really aimed at folks outside the choir. Link below: http://www.betterhumans.com/News/news.aspx?articleID=2004-11-23-3 Reason Founder, Longevity Meme From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Nov 24 06:24:18 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:24:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] geek squad In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041123105502.03897c98@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Message-ID: <000201c4d1ee$3e0b3500$6501a8c0@SHELLY> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/11/23/geek.squads.ap/index.html Sure, but *I* was a geek *before* it was cool. {8-] Yanks, as you sit down to your Thanksgiving feast, thank evolution or your favorite deity for computers. spike From scerir at libero.it Wed Nov 24 07:51:23 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:51:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] dynamics of books References: <20041123164130.79197.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> <06ea01c4d183$bad68b40$16bf1b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <00f201c4d205$0502de40$64bc1b97@administxl09yj> dynamics of books http://www.aip.org/pnu/2004/split/709-1.html and ... authors http://www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0308073 From sentience at pobox.com Wed Nov 24 09:22:22 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:22:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: > > On Nov 23, 2004, at 2:51 AM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > >>> Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation >>> 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation >>> would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever it >>> means) would be allowed. >> >> This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until you can give me an >> experimental test for the presence or absence of free will, you're not >> allowed to talk about it. :) > > Now who's being silly? I'm quite serious. Adrian is right about the principle; his foolishness lies in lecturing a Bayesian Master on such a simple topic. If you live your life by the precept of testability you shall not go astray. If you cannot give a testable physical predicate for the presence or absence of free will, that does, indeed, indicate a deep and fundamental confusion; for if there is no physical predicate then whatever you are talking about must be orthogonal to physics, hence orthogonal to the universe, hence orthogonal to yourself and any thoughts you possess that have been sparked by observation of any real thing. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 24 12:24:16 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:24:16 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. Message-ID: Security people are increasingly concerned with computer security problems. Unfortunately they have lost the battle. The general public now has the technology, but has no time for security or privacy worries. Nine out of ten computers connected to the internet are infested with viruses and spyware. The general public STILL click on email attachments, give their data to phishing sites and respond to spam offers. They don't install software patches and forget to update their antivirus and spyware defences (if they have any installed at all, that is). Thousands upon thousands of zombie pcs are available to use for any purpose you want - and the owners don't even know. Open your laptop at any WiFi hotspot, or indeed, pretty much anywhere these days, and your helpful software will immediately tell you what networks are freely available around you. Most users leave their laptops with the default security settings, so you will also see a list of computers ready and willing to connect to you and let you browse through anything on their hard disk. In a hotel room, for example, your notebook will automatically connect you to the strongest wireless signal it finds ? which will often be owned by the guest in a room somewhere nearby, and you might well be able to wander unrestricted through their hard drive. At any security conference, a speaker on the platform can open his laptop, and using perfectly standard software start displaying data from unprotected laptops in the audience on the screen. Just open Network Neighbourhood in Windows and begin poking around wide-open notebooks. Most of the public risk their company's security by carrying an unsecured PDA like a Pocket PC or Palm PC. Remember, most of these devices automatically synchronize their contents with the desktop back at the office. That data frequently consists of confidential contacts, records of meetings, budget spreadsheets, and more. Although it's simple to lock these PDAs with a password, very few people bother. When someone reports a laptop, PDA or mobile phone has been lost or stolen, you can guarantee that nothing was password protected or encrypted. All the data is available to the new owner. What about mobile phone users, shouting confidential data across the airport departure lounge? See: Quote: Companies are spending a fortune on computer security whilst neglecting the biggest hole in the bucket - the fallibility and stupidity of their people. Individuals tend to be paranoid about their private lives and information but shout it out as loud as can be on a mobile call in a crowded place. One of my favourite and recurring tricks whilst travelling is to pick up people's banking details and give it to them written on the back of my business card. I can generally get the bank branch and sort code with ease. And for credit cards it is mostly the whole nine yards: name, number, expiry and start date, plus security number. Home address, phone numbers and email address are often thrown in for good luck too. All I have to do is sit and listen. People's reaction to this is always outrage, as if I was a thief, as if I had committed a crime. But, I respond, they shouted, I could not help hearing and at least I am giving them good warning to be more careful in future. I just wonder if they modify their behaviour as a result. End quote. Security, Privacy? Give up the struggle. The public has won. The battle is lost. The public is embracing the open society with open arms and delighting in their new toys. Unfortunately the bad guys are also taking advantage of the open doors. In future the mixture of good and bad usage will only get worse as the capabilities increase. The only feasible option is to try and protect yourself as best you can from all the chaos and disruption swirling around you. BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 13:14:17 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:14:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124131417.54129.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > Security people are increasingly concerned with computer security > problems. Unfortunately they have lost the battle. The general public > now has the technology, but has no time for security or privacy > worries. > > > Nine out of ten computers connected to the internet are infested with > viruses and spyware. The general public STILL click on email > attachments, give their data to phishing sites and respond to > spam offers. They don't install software patches and forget to > update their antivirus and spyware defences (if they have any > installed at all, that is). I highly doubt it is nine out of ten. In my years I've only seen one person who repeatedly did the things that result in virus infection without learning her lesson. Most people have anti-virus software installed, though many don't update it as frequently as they should. > Thousands upon thousands of zombie pcs are available to use for any > purpose you want - and the owners don't even know. Thousands out of tens of millions? Yeah, that sounds about right, but not millions. > > Open your laptop at any WiFi hotspot, or indeed, pretty much anywhere > these days, and your helpful software will immediately tell you what > networks are freely available around you. Most users leave > their laptops with the default security settings, so you will also > see > a list of computers ready and willing to connect to you and let you > browse through anything on their hard disk. In a hotel room, for > example, your notebook will automatically connect you to the > strongest wireless signal it finds ??? which will often be owned > by the guest in a room somewhere nearby, and you might well be > able to wander unrestricted through their hard drive. People leave the security of their wifi hotspots open because: a) manufacturers don't program their devices to be both secure and easy for a consumer to administer. b) almost nobody is war driving around infecting peoples home systems through their wifi connections intentionally. It is my opinion that most viruses are written by three groups: a) a few irresponsible CS students trying out newly found skills b) anti-virus company employees ensuring job security c) script kiddies who follow recipes to make viruses which are rather easily blocked by existing anti-virus libraries. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 24 13:48:00 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 07:48:00 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. References: <20041124131417.54129.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003301c4d22c$36c80a50$8bb32643@kevin> You forgot: d) Extremely intelligent programmers who have insecurity issues whose ability to crack security holes in Microsoft products increases their self-esteem. e) Communist and totalitarian governments that assign people to the very job of making the free market societies work harder. > > It is my opinion that most viruses are written by three groups: > > a) a few irresponsible CS students trying out newly found skills > b) anti-virus company employees ensuring job security > c) script kiddies who follow recipes to make viruses which are rather > easily blocked by existing anti-virus libraries. From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 24 13:54:46 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:54:46 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. In-Reply-To: <20041124131417.54129.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041124131417.54129.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:14:17 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- BillK wrote: > > > > Nine out of ten computers connected to the internet are infested with > > viruses and spyware. The general public STILL click on email > > attachments, give their data to phishing sites and respond to > > spam offers. They don't install software patches and forget to > > update their antivirus and spyware defences (if they have any > > installed at all, that is). > > I highly doubt it is nine out of ten. In my years I've only seen one > person who repeatedly did the things that result in virus infection > without learning her lesson. Most people have anti-virus software > installed, though many don't update it as frequently as they should. > Sorry, I should have quoted more of the sources, but the original email was getting rather long. Try, for starters, (but google much, much, more) 20% of Dell support calls are spyware-related Dell says spyware now affects about 90% of computers. The poll of 724 Internet users, taken Sept. 17 to 19, showed that only 24% of respondents regard themselves as knowledgeable about how to handle spyware threats. Spyware-related phone calls now make up as much as 20% of all help calls at Dell, compared with just 1-2% in August 2003. Oct 17, 04 US ISP EarthLink is starting to keep score in its fight against spyware. The internet service provider on Thursday said it found an average of nearly 28 spyware items on each PC it scanned during the first quarter. The company, in conjunction with Webroot Software, conducted a total of 1.06 million scans through its Spy Audit service. Apr 20, 04 According to FTC, nearly 4.5 million people each year fall for advance fee scam - a scam where poor-credit individuals are offered rock-bottom interest rates on credit cards with annual fee charged in advance by scammers. Phonebusters, a cooperative effort between US and Canadian law enforcement agencies, estimates phone fraud to be a $1 billion a year business now. The FBI estimates that US citizens send $100 million each year to Canadian con artists. Nov 16, 04 And so on, and on....... > > Thousands upon thousands of zombie pcs are available to use for any > > purpose you want - and the owners don't even know. > > Thousands out of tens of millions? Yeah, that sounds about right, but > not millions. > Zombie networks are only a tiny subset of the general mass of virus and spyware infected pcs. These zombie networks are used for DOS attacks to blackmail sites and to send out millions of spam or phishing or virus emails. Richard Clarke, former security advisor to the President of the United States, estimated the number of zombie computer networks at 30,000. This is a surge from 2,000 networks observed last year. The numbers are not exactly informative, as it doesn't tell about the total number of Internet-connected PCs infected with trojan horses and viruses, but former security advisor and current chairman of Good Harbor Consulting estimated each network to have a thousand of bots. Nov 05, 04 Computer security is the exception - not the rule. I would not expect a survey of your contacts to show the typical lack of interest in security, Mike. :) I'm sure that you warn them as often as I warn my friends. But it is a losing battle. Technology is being sold faster than the security industry can warn people. BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 14:42:23 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:42:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Europes smugness its own downfall Message-ID: <20041124144223.67045.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/11/07/do0704.xml from the Daily Telegraph: Believe it or not, it wasn't just rednecks who voted for Bush By Mark Steyn (Filed: 07/11/2004) The big question after Tuesday was: will it just be more of the same in George W Bush's second term, or will there be a change of tone? And apparently it's the latter. The great European thinkers have decided that instead of doing another four years of lame Bush-is-a-moron cracks they're going to do four years of lame Americans-are-morons cracks. Inaugurating the new second-term outreach was Brian Reade in the Daily Mirror, who attributed the President's victory to: "The self-righteous, gun-totin', military-lovin', sister-marryin', abortion-hatin', gay-loathin', foreigner-despisin', non-passport-ownin' rednecks, who believe God gave America the biggest dick in the world so it could urinate on the rest of us and make their land 'free and strong'." Well, that's certainly why I supported Bush, but I'm not sure it entirely accounts for the other 59,459,765. Forty five per cent of Hispanics voted for the President, as did 25 per cent of Jews, and 23 per cent of gays. And this coalition of common-or-garden rednecks, Hispanic rednecks, sinister Zionist rednecks, and lesbian rednecks who enjoy hitting on their gay-loathin' sisters expanded its share of the vote across the entire country - not just in the Bush states but in the Kerry states, too. In all but six states, the Republican vote went up: the urinating rednecks have increased their number not just in Texas and Mississippi but in Massachusetts and California, both of which have Republican governors. You can drive from coast to coast across the middle of the country and never pass through a single county that voted for John Kerry: it's one continuous cascade of self-righteous urine from sea to shining sea. States that were swing states in 2000 - West Virginia, Arkansas - are now solidly Republican, and once solidly Democrat states - Iowa, Wisconsin - are now swingers. The redneck states push hard up against the Canadian border, where if your neck's red it's frostbite. Bush's incontinent rednecks are everywhere: they're so numerous they're running out of sisters to bunk up with. Who exactly is being self-righteous here? In Britain and Europe, there seem to be two principal strains of Bush-loathing. First, the guys who say, if you disagree with me, you must be an idiot - as in the Mirror headline "How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB?" Second, the guys who say, if you disagree with me, you must be a Nazi - as in Oliver James, who told The Guardian: "I was too depressed to even speak this morning. I thought of my late mother, who read Mein Kampf when it came out in the 1930s [sic] and thought, 'Why doesn't anyone see where this is leading?' " Mr James is a clinical psychologist. If smug Europeans are going to coast on moron-Fascist sneers indefinitely, they'll be dooming themselves to ever more depressing mornings-after in the 2006 midterms, the 2008 presidential election, 2010, and beyond: America's resistance to the conventional wisdom of the rest of the developed world is likely to intensify in the years ahead. This widening gap is already a point of pride to the likes of B J Kelly of Killiney, who made the following observation on Friday's letters page in The Irish Times: "Here in the EU we objected recently to high office for a man who professed the belief that abortion and gay marriages are essentially evil. Over in the US such an outlook could have won him the presidency." I'm not sure who he means by "we". As with most decisions taken in the corridors of Europower, the views of Killiney and Knokke and Krakow didn't come into it one way or the other. B J Kelly is referring to Rocco Buttiglione, the mooted European commissioner whose views on homosexuality, single parenthood, etc would have been utterly unremarkable for an Italian Catholic 30 years ago. Now Europe's secular elite has decided they're beyond the pale and such a man should have no place in public life. And B J Kelly sees this as evidence of how much more enlightened Europe is than America. That's fine. But what happens if the European elite should decide a whole lot of other stuff is beyond the pale, too, some of it that B J Kelly is quite partial to? In affirming the traditional definition of marriage in 11 state referenda, from darkest Mississippi to progressive enlightened Kerry-supporting Oregon, the American people were not expressing their "gay-loathin' ", so much as declining to go the Kelly route and have their betters tell them what they can think. They're not going to have marriage redefined by four Massachusetts judges and a couple of activist mayors. That doesn't make them Bush theo-zombies marching in lockstep to the gay lynching, just freeborn citizens asserting their right to dissent from today's established church - the stifling coercive theology of political correctness enforced by a secular episcopate. As Americans were voting on marriage and marijuana and other matters, the Rotterdam police were destroying a mural by Chris Ripke that he'd created to express his disgust at the murder of Theo van Gogh by Islamist crazies. Ripke's painting showed an angel and the words "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Unfortunately, his workshop is next to a mosque, and the imam complained that the mural was "racist", so the cops arrived, destroyed it, arrested the television journalists filming it and wiped their tape. Maybe that would ring a bell with Oliver James's mum. The restrictions on expression that B J Kelly sees as evidence of European enlightenment are regarded as profoundly unhealthy by most Americans. When one examines Brian Reade's anatomy of redneck disfigurements - "gun-totin', military-lovin', abortion-hatin' " - most of them are about the will to survive, as individuals and as a society. Americans tote guns because they're assertive citizens, not docile subjects of a permanent governing class. They love their military because they think there's something contemptible about Europeans preening and posing as a great power when they can't even stop some nickel'n'dime Balkan genital-severers piling up hundreds of thousands of corpses on their borders. And, if Americans do "hate abortion", is Mr Reade saying he loves it? It's at least partially responsible for the collapsed birthrates of post-Christian Europe. However superior the EU is to the US, it will only last as long as Mr Reade's generation: the design flaw of the radical secular welfare state is that it depends on a traditionally religious society birthrate to sustain it. True, you can't be a redneck in Spain or Italy: when the birthrates are 1.1 and 1.2 children per couple, there are no sisters to shag. What was revealing about this election campaign was how little the condescending Europeans understand even about the side in American politics they purport to agree with - witness The Guardian's disastrous intervention in Clark County. Simon Schama last week week defined the Bush/Kerry divide as "Godly America" and "Worldly America", hailing the latter as "pragmatic, practical, rational and sceptical". That's exactly the wrong way round: it's Godly America that is rational and sceptical - especially of Euro-delusions. Uncowed by Islamists, undeferential to government, unshrivelled in its birthrates, Bush's redneck America is a more reliable long-term bet. Europe's media would do their readers a service if they stopped condescending to it. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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 Wed Nov 24 14:43:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:43:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Not Just Rednecks for Bush Message-ID: <20041124144339.96247.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Polls show that the President increased his support by... 5% among females 9% among Latinos 2% among African Americans 3% among Asians 7% among those over age 65 5% among Catholics 6% among Jewish voters 4% among married people ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 14:59:05 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:59:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124145905.72186.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:14:17 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > --- BillK wrote: > > > > > > Nine out of ten computers connected to the internet are infested > with > > > viruses and spyware. > > I highly doubt it is nine out of ten. In my years I've only seen > one > > person who repeatedly did the things that result in virus infection > > without learning her lesson. Most people have anti-virus software > > installed, though many don't update it as frequently as they > should. > > > > Sorry, I should have quoted more of the sources, but the original > email was getting rather long. > Try, for starters, (but google much, much, more) > > > > 20% of Dell support calls are spyware-related > Dell says spyware now affects about 90% of computers. Okay, spyware. Understood. That includes the HP software that came with my HP printer (used to make sure I don't print fake copies of fake dollar bills, among other big brotherish things), among software from other major companies. That doesn't mean that 90% of computers are infected with viruses. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Nov 24 15:18:58 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:18:58 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B014@tpeex05> No matter life is a simulation or not, it should be possible that human beings can find some *universal power button* to stop the world from running. It's also possible that other *universal adjustment buttons* can be found, such as: - One universal button to adjust the normal human life - One universal button to adjust the occurrence rate of misfortunes - One universal button to adjust the evolution rate of human beings ... Thanks. Walter. ---------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Wed Nov 24 15:44:29 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:44:29 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] the challenges of photojournalism Message-ID: There was a major story in the blog sphere recently when Kevin Sites filmed the killing of a man in a Falluja mosque who was injured and seemed to be no threat to the marines that entered and to the marine who killed him. It is a complicated story, that you should read on your own to get the full picture. As a journalist, often travelling with the soldiers, Kevin Sites walks a fine line to present facts in as objective a mode as possible, and I don't notice an underlying agenda in his blog stories. I think that is a great sign of professionalism in his work. Compared to his other blog stories, this incident is major, and other news sources think so, as well. The New York Times has apparently based an entire story around what Sites showed, the first time that that the paper has based a story completely on a blog entry. After some days, the author, Kevin Sites himself, wrote a detailed response on what he captured on tape. I think that it is worthwhile reading to understand the challenges that face anyone wishing to report 'truth' (as it were). Sites gives many views on this story, that help the reader to form his/her own opinion on what happened. ------------- http://www.kevinsites.net/2004_11_21_archive.html#110107420331292115 In the particular circumstance I was reporting, it bothered me that the Marine didn't seem to consider the other insurgents a threat -- the one very obviously moving under the blanket, or even the two next to me that were still breathing. I can't know what was in the mind of that Marine. He is the only one who does. But observing all of this as an experienced war reporter who always bore in mind the dark perils of this conflict, even knowing the possibilities of mitigating circumstances -- it appeared to me very plainly that something was not right. According to Lt. Col Bob Miller, the rules of engagement in Falluja required soldiers or Marines to determine hostile intent before using deadly force. I was not watching from a hundred feet away. I was in the same room. Aside from breathing, I did not observe any movement at all. Making sure you know the basis for my choices after the incident is as important to me as knowing how the incident went down. I did not in any way feel like I had captured some kind of "prize" video. In fact, I was heartsick. Immediately after the mosque incident, I told the unit's commanding officer what had happened. I shared the video with him, and its impact rippled all the way up the chain of command. Marine commanders immediately pledged their cooperation. We all knew it was a complicated story, and if not handled responsibly, could have the potential to further inflame the volatile region. I offered to hold the tape until they had time to look into incident and begin an investigation -- providing me with information that would fill in some of the blanks. For those who don't practice journalism as a profession, it may be difficult to understand why we must report stories like this at all -- especially if they seem to be aberrations, and not representative of the behavior or character of an organization as a whole. The answer is not an easy one. In war, as in life, there are plenty of opportunities to see the full spectrum of good and evil that people are capable of. As journalists, it is our job is to report both -- though neither may be fully representative of those people on whom we're reporting. For example, acts of selfless heroism are likely to be as unique to a group as the darker deeds. But our coverage of these unique events, combined with the larger perspective - will allow the truth of that situation, in all of its complexities, to begin to emerge. That doesn't make the decision to report events like this one any easier. It has, for me, led to an agonizing struggle -- the proverbial long, dark night of the soul. ------------- Last weekend I had another experience of filmmakers with a couple of BBC freelancers at Stromboli (the island and the volcano). I think that the good documentaries/films can be thought as humans' "repository of dreams". We usually notice the films that portray devastating events, which are often or sometimes a source of shame. However, remember the flip side, that films have the potential to remind us of how great humans have been, are now, and could be. The film that the BBC guys were making was the latter, so it was kind of fun (but stressful) to observe their craft and I am curious of what the result will look like at the end. After the BBC guys left, we had some extra time to climb to the top of Stromboli, and I saw the volcano for the first time from the highest point. The topography of the volcano provides an easy view too look down into the craters, to see the regular eruptions (on average once per hour), from which the volcano has earned the name from ancient Greek times: "lighthouse of the Mediterranean". The volcano this time wasn't exerting her usual full potential, but I think I captured something on film. The photos from my photographer friend will be ready in a day or two, so I'll post the links here when they are ready. The view from the top of Stromboli was spectacular though, the sky was unusually clear (it was raining solid for the two weeks before we arrived). The sunset was gorgeous, the Moon was three-quarters full, giving a soft light on the landscape. The temperature was cold cold cold cold, I thought I was an icicle at the end, and my knees complained strongly on the descent (The volcano is ~1000m high, 35% grade climb up and down), but it was worth it. Amara -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." --Anais Nin From scerir at libero.it Wed Nov 24 16:09:48 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:09:48 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B014@tpeex05> Message-ID: <004301c4d240$0674e300$bdb71b97@administxl09yj> > No matter life is a simulation or not, it should be possible that human > beings can find some *universal power button* to stop the world from running. > Walther Walther, It crashes automatically after enough applications are run upon it.. The question is whether or not the existing information (or which portion of the existing information) is preserved. Not sure this post, and your question, would be preserved, after next MS-Uniwows reboot. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 16:05:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 08:05:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B014@tpeex05> Message-ID: <20041124160510.87871.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > No matter life is a simulation or not, it should be possible that > human > beings > can find some *universal power button* to stop the world from > running. > It's also possible that other *universal adjustment buttons* can be > found, > such as: > - One universal button to adjust the normal human life > - One universal button to adjust the occurrence rate of misfortunes > - One universal button to adjust the evolution rate of human beings > ... I think that's a bit too much to expect, as such buttons would create the sort of instabilities I spoke of the other day. I suspect that most such 'buttons' typically wind up triggering the creation of black holes and other singularity functions which are essentially the result of dividing by zero. If you want to screw around with such things, they'd have to be more than just theories or papers, you'd have to build a physical mechanism that operated such a function. Then you'd have to deal with entities in the future light cone who would take unkindly to people screwing around with such toys that would impact their past timeline. Charlie Stross' unseen character The Eschaton in "Singularity Sky" is one such. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From fortean1 at mindspring.com Wed Nov 24 16:24:50 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:24:50 -0700 Subject: FWD [extropy-chat] Re: Merry Christmas SoCal: No Global Warming Message-ID: <41A4B5D2.31E44480@mindspring.com> Well, had they been around for the Easter 1999 surprise when it snowed here, in Tucson and the Phoenix Suburbs... Actually, I think they happen more than once a decade but I'd have to look up the climo. The storm was one of those that surprises but it was not in the class of the famous January 1949 storm which put snow in downtown LA-even along the beaches. That was the storm that brought the only snowflakes ever to San Diego (Trace) and one of two occurrences of snow in Yuma. January 1949 was also when Vegas had 17 inches of snow and when Canelo and the Apache Powder Plant near Benson bottomed out at -6?F (since 1995, however, there have been remote weather stations close to the San Pedro River due east of SV and a bit upstream and they have recorded winter temperatures that surprised the researchers initially-last December when Douglas hit +8?F, one of the sites recorded a -2?F). Willcox recorded a low of -10?F in 1962 following the system that brought 4 inches of snow to Fresno and 1-3 inches to San Jose CA. Steve [retired meteorologist] -- "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 hal at finney.org Wed Nov 24 18:24:34 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:24:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Not Just Rednecks for Bush Message-ID: <20041124182434.07ED257E2A@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > Polls show that the President increased his support by... > 5% among females > 9% among Latinos > 2% among African Americans > 3% among Asians > 7% among those over age 65 > 5% among Catholics > 6% among Jewish voters > 4% among married people I agree with Mike that this is an issue of concern to Extropians. The President's enthusiasm for faith-based initiatives, his opposition to personal self-determination and body-ownership (via his drug, abortion and homosexuality policies), his "Council on Bioethics" headed by Leon Kass whose primary purpose seems to be de facto opposition to Extropianism, all portend an ominous future given his increasing level of public support. It is equally significant than a substantial number of Bush voters listed "moral values" as their main reason for choosing him, in the exit polls. While this is a somewhat ambiguous phrase, it certainly does not signify widespread support for an Extropian world where individuals have maximum freedom of self-development and self-control. However it is far too early to despair. Change is always uncomfortable for people, and it is natural for their initial reaction to be a longing to go back to the old ways, which seem safe and comfortable. But in fact, much of that longing is simple nostalgia; the past was really not that great. And if America begins to turn back to that past, she will quickly remember once again why she left it. Extropians and other transhumans offer a package which, in truth, cannot fail to attract widespread support. Life extension, health extension, human advancement, all of these are trends which have brought tremendous benefits to people all over the world. Despite the discomfort from traditionalists, I remain confident that the attractions of these new opportunities will more than overcome social resistance. Right now we are seeing the early skirmishing, attempting to set the stage for the great battle which lies ahead. Once these changes become actual opportunities rather than merely potential futures, the memetic battleground will shift significantly. No amount of pontificating by Kass or lecturing from the pulpit will turn Americans away from life extension and make them embrace death. Hal From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 24 18:36:03 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:36:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] the challenges of photojournalism Message-ID: <20041124183603.3C11957E2A@finney.org> Amara Graps writes: > There was a major story in the blog sphere recently when Kevin Sites > filmed the killing of a man in a Falluja mosque who was injured and > seemed to be no threat to the marines that entered and to the marine > who killed him. The problem with this kind of story is that we don't have all of the information necessary to know how to put it into context. Imagine if we did have something like Brin's "transparent society". All skirmishes and military actions would be available for anyone to see. No doubt actions like the one Sites filmed, killing an unarmed man, happen more often than just that one time, where a cameraman happened to be filming. Likewise, no doubt there are many circumstances where failing to kill an (apparently) unarmed man causes death to the merciful soldiers because it is a trap. And of course there are undoubted incidents where the other side kills unarmed hostages and other innocents. With access to a full database of images of all these kinds of actions, we would have a better sense of how this fits into the whole enterprise (or horror, if you prefer) of war. Likewise we would ideally have access to similar information about other engagements, around the world, and in the past as well. World War II is often seen as a just war; but no doubt these kinds of actions happened there just as they do today. War is Hell, as the saying goes. Yet people choose to engage in war. This may be a rational choice; but is it fully informed? I can't help wondering how differently people would perceive the decision to go to war, and how they would react to news of events which occur during the war, if they had access to full information. Perhaps someday this will be possible. Hal From hal at finney.org Wed Nov 24 18:57:09 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:57:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. Message-ID: <20041124185709.A6CFC57E2A@finney.org> An article on slashdot this morning offers an interesting perspective: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/24/182221 points to http://www.benedelman.org/news/111804-1.html which describes how visiting a single website, xpire.info (slash) fa?d=get, using Internet Explorer on an unpatched Windows XP system led to multiple infections on his system. On the other hand, if he used the latest version of Windows XP, which is Service Pack 2 (SP2), he was immune. So we have two lessons here: first, that it is indeed easy to get infected by visiting the wrong sites. This .info site was a risk, and the article I point to below, a review of spyware removers, describes a number of other sites where "drive-by-infections" are rampant. But second, if you let your Windows XP system auto-update itself like it wants to, things are getting better. The latest security patches are closing the holes. It's also worth noting that a small but growing number of people are switching to Firefox, http://www.getfirefox.com , for their web browser in preference to Internet Explorer. FF is (so far) much more immune to these kinds of attacks. In many cases, spyware is getting installed by the user downloading popular software, like file sharing software. Many of these packages install spyware. It's not as bad as a virus but it may pop up some ads and slow down your machine. Here is a review of anti-spyware software from yesterday: http://spywarewarrior.com/asw-test-guide.htm . It notes that just installing Grokster, a P2P file sharing application, added 15 adware and spyware programs. I am more optimistic about security. My view is that we (the pro-security forces) have only begun to fight. SP2 shows that Windows can become genuinely more secure. Open source alternatives are agile and responsive to security threats. Security, like spam, has only become a major issue for individual users in the last couple of years. It takes a while for the net community to respond, just as it takes a while for the body's immune system to respond to an infection. But eventually I believe we will see an effective and indeed overwhelming response from security technology, and the result will be a far more secure networking infrastructure. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Nov 24 20:01:31 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:01:31 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] a future safe for us all to be Paris and Nicky Hilton Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041124140042.01b50ab0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> In an interesting interview with American sf writer Pamela Sargent, http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue394/interview.html I find an amusing or perhaps terrifying idea (but yes, I do notice that it forgets to factor in self-augmentation, Hard Raptures and the like): ============== Q: Your comic story "Originals" would seem to have a serious undertone, in that you undertake a critical examination of a world where society is based not on privation but rather on plenty. As on Star Trek, your characters here have matter replicators that fabricate their every need, converting any sort of mass into requested objects. Unlike Star Trek, however, the people who live in this utopia are just as shallow, vain and dumb as, well, people in any age. Seeing how society in "Originals" remains stratified according to manners and exclusivity, even in a world of unbelievable material wealth, strikes a true chord as well as a humorous one. Sargent: It always seemed to me that almost all human beings have an innate capacity to be total slackers, and I include myself in that group. I have a built-in talent for indolence. If it weren't for my writing and the spur of needing to make a living, I could easily slack off most of the time. But stories and novels, in my experience, impose themselves on you and compel you to write them, and a low bank balance provides its own inspiration to work harder. The fact is that a lot of people would not be doing what they do if they had plenty of money. How many lottery winners hang on to their old jobs? Years ago, I read in an article about John Grisham that he often had lawyers come up to him at book signings and congratulate him for being able to get out of that profession. Most writers would keep writing no matter how prosperous they are?Stephen King certainly isn't in it for the money at this point. I suspect that the same is true of most people who have devoted their lives to an occupation they love. But the rest of us? I want a world where everyone is rich enough and prosperous enough to be as vacuous as Paris and Nicky Hilton, or Jenna and Barbara Bush, for that matter. Now there's a slogan for social change! Q: I wonder if a society that offered universal wealth, whether in material terms, or by way of long life, or by making other things we want available in massive amounts, would end up being inhabited by dejected, depressed people. Already in our own society we see a people whose standard of living is incredibly high (by most historical and even contemporary standards) and yet as a society we are fearful, crabby, dissatisfied and self-absorbed?given to popping Prozac and Paxil as if they were Pez. Are we really suited to the level of wealth of which we dream? Sargent: I don't know if we can draw any hard and fast conclusions about the effects of universal wealth from American culture. Many people who might be or seem very well off by any standard are also stressed out as hell trying to hang on to what they've got. I know people who actually fear extended periods of leisure, some because they've basically adapted to being workaholics, others because they deeply fear solitude. We're kind of a messed-up culture in a lot of ways; we sure as hell don't leave ourselves with a lot of inner resources. From pharos at gmail.com Wed Nov 24 21:06:28 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:06:28 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Privacy, Security?? Don't make me laugh. In-Reply-To: <20041124185709.A6CFC57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041124185709.A6CFC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:57:09 -0800 (PST), "Hal Finney" wrote: > > I am more optimistic about security. My view is that we (the pro-security > forces) have only begun to fight. SP2 shows that Windows can become > genuinely more secure. Open source alternatives are agile and responsive > to security threats. > > Security, like spam, has only become a major issue for individual users > in the last couple of years. It takes a while for the net community to > respond, just as it takes a while for the body's immune system to respond > to an infection. But eventually I believe we will see an effective and > indeed overwhelming response from security technology, and the result > will be a far more secure networking infrastructure. > You are indeed more optimistic than me about security. But then as part of the computer security industry, that's what they pay you for. You are hardly going to talk yourself out of a job, are you? And, of course, every little helps - it is just insufficient to stop the tide. I have a fair bit of computer industry experience (note modest Brit understatement ;) ) and it sounds like whistling in the wind to me. The problem is not the few thousand knowledgeable people that work in the computer industry. It is the great unwashed millions out there. Yes, plugging the ten years' worth of bad design holes in Windows is a good thing. Yes, switching to FireBadger is a good thing. (I use it myself). But, read my original post again. The problem isn't mainly the loopholes in Windows or the techie tricks that take advantage of unwary people. The more technically secure you try to make the system then the more unusable it will become for the multitudes. They will lose patience and switch off or bypass the stringent security. Bruce Schneier wrote in his book Secrets and Lies: Digital Security in a Networked World (John Wiley, ISBN 0-471-25311-1): - "Security is not a product, it's a process." - Moreover, security is not a technology problem - it's a people and management problem. - "If you think technology can solve your security problems, then you don't understand the problems and you don't understand the technology." BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 23:55:33 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:55:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif School Wed Nov 24, 2004 04:12 PM ET By Dan Whitcomb LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California teacher has been barred by his school from giving students documents from American history that refer to God -- including the Declaration of Independence. Steven Williams, a fifth-grade teacher at Stevens Creek School in the San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino, sued for discrimination on Monday, claiming he had been singled out for censorship by principal Patricia Vidmar because he is a Christian. "It's a fact of American history that our founders were religious men, and to hide this fact from young fifth-graders in the name of political correctness is outrageous and shameful," said Williams' attorney, Terry Thompson. "Williams wants to teach his students the true history of our country," he said. "There is nothing in the Establishment Clause (of the U.S. Constitution) that prohibits a teacher from showing students the Declaration of Independence." Vidmar could not be reached for comment on the lawsuit, which was filed on Monday in U.S. District Court in San Jose and claims violations of Williams rights to free speech under the First Amendment. Phyllis Vogel, assistant superintendent for Cupertino Unified School District, said the lawsuit had been forwarded to a staff attorney. She declined to comment further. Williams asserts in the lawsuit that since May he has been required to submit all of his lesson plans and supplemental handouts to Vidmar for approval, and that the principal will not permit him to use any that contain references to God or Christianity. Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists" and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." "He hands out a lot of material and perhaps 5 to 10 percent refers to God and Christianity because that's what the founders wrote," said Thompson, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund, which advocates for religious freedom. "The principal seems to be systematically censoring material that refers to Christianity and it is pure discrimination." In June, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case of a California atheist who wanted the words "under God" struck from the Pledge of Allegiance as recited by school children. The appeals court in California had found that the phrase amounted to a violation of church and state separation. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From Walter_Chen at compal.com Thu Nov 25 00:37:37 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:37:37 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B019@tpeex05> We can't just think based on current tech. or logic. For example, quantum computing uses complex numbers as probability. So dividing by zero or system crash cause problems only on our computers. There is no way to say there are such problems on "the universe". If life is a simulation, it's just very reasonable for human beings to ask for such adjustment buttons to change our life once and for all. If life is not a simulation, such adjustment buttons still could exist somewhere in the universe (because nobody really knows why and how comes the universe). Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey I think that's a bit too much to expect, as such buttons would create the sort of instabilities I spoke of the other day. I suspect that most such 'buttons' typically wind up triggering the creation of black holes and other singularity functions which are essentially the result of dividing by zero. If you want to screw around with such things, they'd have to be more than just theories or papers, you'd have to build a physical mechanism that operated such a function. Then you'd have to deal with entities in the future light cone who would take unkindly to people screwing around with such toys that would impact their past timeline. Charlie Stross' unseen character The Eschaton in "Singularity Sky" is one such. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Walter, It crashes automatically after enough applications are run upon it.. The question is whether or not the existing information (or which portion of the existing information) is preserved. Not sure this post, and your question, would be preserved, after next MS-Uniwows reboot. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 03:16:43 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:16:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B019@tpeex05> Message-ID: <20041125031643.6027.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > We can't just think based on current tech. or logic. > For example, quantum computing uses complex numbers as probability. > So dividing by zero or system crash cause problems only on our > computers. That is right, which isn't what I was saying. Creating a mechanism which does such things with the matter or energy of the universe would only self-erase in the event that it creates a singularity function which can have an impact upon the time-line. Otherwise, the meta-sysop may simply allow universes to play themselves out to their ultimate end, however it may be. If the universe ends, it ends. If it does so because of the stupidity or greed or whatever of entities within it, the meta-sysop may simply not be interested in having such entities, and is instead searching for the universe of angels who are rational and right and responsible as a matter of course and not because of any hit or miss behavior that is at least as likely to screw up as not. > There is no way to say there are such problems on "the universe". > If life is a simulation, it's just very reasonable for human beings > to ask for such adjustment buttons to change our life once and for > all. > If life is not a simulation, such adjustment buttons still could > exist somewhere in the universe > (because nobody really knows why and how comes the universe). It is presumptuous to presume that the universe was made for our benefit. Even if such 'buttons' existed, they may not even be anywhere near our region of the universe or our future light cone. Parents do tend to keep breakable/dangerous things out of the reach of the toddlers... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 25 03:55:32 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:55:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Mike Lorrey > Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... > > Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif School > >...at Stevens Creek School in the > San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino... I wonder how they figure Cupertino is a suburb of San Francisco? It is closer to the more populated city of San Jose. San Jose gets no respect. > In June, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case of a > California atheist who wanted the words "under God" struck from the > Pledge of Allegiance as recited by school children. The appeals court > in California had found that the phrase amounted to a violation of > church and state separation... Mike Lorrey Im waiting for some ballsy high school student to end the customary invocation before the local football game with "...we pray in the name of Satan amen..." What do you suppose would happen? spike From dirk at neopax.com Thu Nov 25 04:08:41 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:08:41 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hello again... In-Reply-To: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> Well, I'm back. Seems I've been run out of WTA-town by Sheriff Hughes for talking back without permission. Despite the reason I originally left (low sig to noise here) the one redeeming feature is freedom of expression and freedom from arbitrary censorship. I did not know how much I missed it until it was gone. Assuming I don't get kicked out of here for not being a libertarian I'll probably actually stump up some cash and become a full member in due course. -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 05:34:27 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:34:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041125053427.22345.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > Im waiting for some ballsy high school student to end > the customary invocation before the local football game > with "...we pray in the name of Satan amen..." > > What do you suppose would happen? The christians would, of course, blame it on the lack of god in schools. Said student would either be lauded for courage of their convictions, declared an endangered species, or sued for bringing religion into schools, by various and sundry liberal special interest groups. The pagans would immediate issue a press release saying that paganism is not satanism. If the kid's team lost the game, he'd have to enter the witness protection program. You do make the assumption that they still do invocations before football games, at least in California (I have no doubt they still happen in Utah and Texas), anywhere outside of Oakland or South Central. I once joked to a sergeant of mine that the unit needed a satanist, not a chaplain.... that didn't go over very well. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From Walter_Chen at compal.com Thu Nov 25 05:44:35 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:44:35 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B026@tpeex05> Of course, these adjustment buttons won't be easily accessible. Need to work hard to find out. One reason for the existence of such adjustment buttons is to provide one way out of the life game. Life is like a game. The adjustment buttons let human beings go out of the human limits. The adjustment buttons are also physically possible because all microscopic particles and macroscopic objects of the universe came from the same origin (like a big bang). So all these microscopic particles and macroscopic objects share some kind of the shared information from the big bang (like the entanglement in QM). That's why the total status of the universe could be changed as a whole by some adjustment buttons. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 11:17 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > We can't just think based on current tech. or logic. > For example, quantum computing uses complex numbers as probability. > So dividing by zero or system crash cause problems only on our > computers. That is right, which isn't what I was saying. Creating a mechanism which does such things with the matter or energy of the universe would only self-erase in the event that it creates a singularity function which can have an impact upon the time-line. Otherwise, the meta-sysop may simply allow universes to play themselves out to their ultimate end, however it may be. If the universe ends, it ends. If it does so because of the stupidity or greed or whatever of entities within it, the meta-sysop may simply not be interested in having such entities, and is instead searching for the universe of angels who are rational and right and responsible as a matter of course and not because of any hit or miss behavior that is at least as likely to screw up as not. > There is no way to say there are such problems on "the universe". > If life is a simulation, it's just very reasonable for human beings > to ask for such adjustment buttons to change our life once and for > all. > If life is not a simulation, such adjustment buttons still could > exist somewhere in the universe > (because nobody really knows why and how comes the universe). It is presumptuous to presume that the universe was made for our benefit. Even if such 'buttons' existed, they may not even be anywhere near our region of the universe or our future light cone. Parents do tend to keep breakable/dangerous things out of the reach of the toddlers... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? All your favorites on one personal page - Try My Yahoo! http://my.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: From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 25 06:55:45 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:55:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B026@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F4260601B026@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041124225001.02906f98@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Um, ever heard of the 'butterfly effect'? I can wave my hand, and the change in gravitation will move, at the speed of light, throughout the entire visible universe. Changing the total status of the universe is that easy. But, as is well demonstrated in classical mechanics, let alone QM, is the leetle difficulty called 'chaos'. Even if the function were describable (which it is not, due to impossiblity of measurement) and all the initial conditions known, it will not be computable by anything less than the entire universe, and we just can't see all of those bits! IOW fuggetahabouditt.... >That's why the total status of the universe could be changed as a whole by >some adjustment buttons. > >Walter. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 25 06:58:27 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:58:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041124225646.02923e10@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> That case has a lot of hidden detail, starting with a child custody dispute and a preteen daughter (I suppose by now a teen), just for starters.... > > In June, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case of a > > California atheist who wanted the words "under God" struck from the > > Pledge of Allegiance as recited by school children. The appeals court > > in California had found that the phrase amounted to a violation of > > church and state separation... Mike Lorrey > > >What do you suppose would happen? > >spike > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From samantha at objectent.com Thu Nov 25 07:07:52 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:07:52 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> Message-ID: I do not agree with your reductionism. I don't agree that everything real is fully reducible to physics unless much of what is meaningful to critters like us is lost in the process. In particular I don't believe that lack of having come up with a test for "free will" means that the existence of free will is in doubt. I don't believe that all that is real or important can be reduced to "testable physical predicates". Furthermore, I don't believe that you fully and consistently believe this either. - samantha On Nov 24, 2004, at 1:22 AM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Samantha Atkins wrote: >> On Nov 23, 2004, at 2:51 AM, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: >>>> Is a simulation 'detailed enough' the same as a simulation >>>> 'deterministic enough'? Because, in this case, the simulation >>>> would be too strong, that is to say no 'free will' (whatever it >>>> means) would be allowed. >>> >>> This is where Adrian's rule comes in handy; until you can give me an >>> experimental test for the presence or absence of free will, you're >>> not allowed to talk about it. :) >> Now who's being silly? > > I'm quite serious. Adrian is right about the principle; his > foolishness lies in lecturing a Bayesian Master on such a simple > topic. If you live your life by the precept of testability you shall > not go astray. If you cannot give a testable physical predicate for > the presence or absence of free will, that does, indeed, indicate a > deep and fundamental confusion; for if there is no physical predicate > then whatever you are talking about must be orthogonal to physics, > hence orthogonal to the universe, hence orthogonal to yourself and any > thoughts you possess that have been sparked by observation of any real > thing. > > -- > 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 pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 07:15:42 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:15:42 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> Banning an important historic document from schools on (atheist) religious ground is very disturbing, as is banning scientific evidence on evolution from schools on (christian) religious ground. Rewriting history, and rewriting science, are always first steps toward a totalitarian Orwellian system. Let's hope both types of talibanism are only temporary reactions to the overheated political climate. Mike, I am puzzled by your more and more frequent defense of religious nuts. My analysis: you hate what you call "liberals" so much that you prefer to side with the christian talibans on the basis of a feeling that "the enemies of my enemy are my friends" (faulty logic to say the least). You are proud that the christian talibans have beaten the liberals in the US, and now regard them as precious allies. My friend: just wake up. These are the same people who used to actually BURN people for exercising their right to free thought and speech. These are the same people who burned Giordano Bruno, put Galileo in jail, and held most of Europe in a totalitarian terror regime for centuries. Just read history. You call yourself a libertarian, but are ready to defend the witch-hunters that history has proven to be the worst enemies if personal freedom. You call yourself an extropian, but side with those who want to ban all research on advanced medical technologies that can make us better than today's humans. You proudly call yourself an American, but please try to realize that your new taliban friends are more and more against all that Jefferson and Paine stood for. G. On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:55:33 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif School From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 07:27:03 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:27:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heart protein could be used to repair ... Message-ID: <20041125072704.11211.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com> Extropes, Sounds to me like a nutritional supplement with 'rejuvenating' qualities. The caprice of evolution--its focus on reproductive success and the ruthless expendability of individuals--explains why this protein doesn't 'naturally' Mathuzalize us all. Which leaves the species that forges its own destiny to jump right in there and help out mother nature. A transhumanist's reach should exceed her grasp, if only temporarily, or what's an Extropy Institute/WTA for? Best of the season to y'all, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/uots-hpc112304.php The protein, Thymosin beta-4, is expressed by embryos during the heart's development. It encourages the migration of heart cells and affects those cells' survivability. The new findings show that the protein prevents cell death after an experimentally-induced heart attack and limits the degree of scar tissue formation. ...Thymosin beta-4 is already used in clinical trials to promote wound healing on the skin.... ...Researchers now believe that Thymosin beta-4 changes cell metabolism to create stronger heart muscle cells... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 25 07:30:12 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:30:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041125073012.39678.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > >...at Stevens Creek School in the > > San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino... > > I wonder how they figure Cupertino is a suburb of > San Francisco? It is closer to the more populated > city of San Jose. San Jose gets no respect. There's SF, and then there's the SF Bay Area. The latter is far larger than the former, and happens to include the name of the more famous major city. Cupertino is indeed within the SF Bay Area, despite not being a suburb of SF itself. > Im waiting for some ballsy high school student to > end > the customary invocation before the local football > game > with "...we pray in the name of Satan amen..." > > What do you suppose would happen? He'd get kicked off, or at least given a stern talking to about not invoking religion. Despite the religious "tolerance", mostly that extends to tolerance of religions that don't have far more negative reputation than positive - and especially not for religious statements that are seen as singling out one religion for special treatment (e.g., endorsing Satan can be seen as rebuking Christians in particular); exceptions usually consisting of public policy or scientific issues (e.g., regulating animal slaughter is a public health issue, even if members of certain religions wish to practice it in ways that violate the regs). His parents could legitimately sue for discrimination, and might well win. But the discrimination would still happen, as the adults surrounding the kid try to choose the "safest" course of action (and fail). Of course, the safest course of action actually was to remove that invocation, partly for that reason. I believe that most schools in the area have long since done so, if they ever used it in the first place. (Besides, school sports programs pray at the altar of money anyway. There's been major concern about how professional things are getting, to the exclusion of kids who just wanted to play - the original reason for said programs - and how they often trump the academic studies that the schools are supposed to establish. More than one school has cancelled its sports programs outright in response, finding no other way to keep these effects from creeping in.) From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 07:35:59 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:35:59 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Quantum leap for computers Message-ID: <470a3c520411242335213af511@mail.gmail.com> THE amazing world of quantum computing has made a, well, quantum leap forwards, thanks to European scientists who have fashioned a practical "quantum memory" for the hypothetical devices. Without a working memory no computer can process data, whether it's the binary bits of today's machines or the quantum bits, "qubits", of tomorrow's quantum computers. But Danish, Dutch and Czech physicists report in the journal Nature that they successfully used a faint pulse of laser light to carry and trap "quantum information" into a gas of atoms - the quantum equivalent of an ordinary random-access memory. Although commercially or scientifically useful, quantum computers are at least 10-15 years off, Nobel laureate William Phillips says. Banks and governments are scrambling to build quantum-style encryption machines to protect their systems, and crack others. "There are rumours they're already being used by the military and intelligence communities," said Professor Phillips, from the atomic physics division of the US National Institute of Standards and Technology in Maryland. He said the work of Dr Polzik and his colleagues was "an important step" towards true quantum computers. http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11489358%5E15321,00.html From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 25 07:48:15 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:48:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041125074815.43590.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > I do not agree with your reductionism. I don't > agree that everything > real is fully reducible to physics unless much of > what is meaningful to > critters like us is lost in the process. Physics and information theory, also known in part as computer science. Physics alone does not describe the network effect of billions of neurons working together, yet out of that we get something a lot more than the effect of billions of isolated neurons. There may also be other relevant disciplines, that cover the rest of what is meaningful to us. > In > particular I don't > believe that lack of having come up with a test for > "free will" means > that the existence of free will is in doubt. I > don't believe that all > that is real or important can be reduced to > "testable physical > predicates". If you think Eliezer's saying that's what I was saying, then there has been a miscommunication somewhere along the line. The point is not that that which is not testable is doubted to exist, but rather, that which is not (yet) testable does not (yet) matter when trying to determine the reality we live in, so far as our ability to affect it is concerned. There might be free will; there might not be free will. From our perspective, whether we choose our next action or we just have the illusion of choosing matters not in terms of understanding the universe - at least, without some way for us to fully predict the universe in advance based on the determinism that exists. There are times when it can be entertaining to ponder such, but when it comes time to do anything that affects the real world, such ponderings can be identified and set aside to be re-examined later, to see if there has yet arisen a way to answer the question. To deeply care about the answer to an unanswerable question calls more for adjustment of the care than for answering the unanswerable. Although it may seem otherwise, one's life is no less significant if free will does not exist than if it does. From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 07:56:26 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:56:26 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hello again... In-Reply-To: <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> References: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204112423562ca6b1ba@mail.gmail.com> Welcome back Dirk. You will find that many posters on the WTA list, with some notable exceptions of course, also post here. You will not get kicked out of here for not being a libertarian: I am not one, and I am still welcome. I think what triggered angry reactions from a few people on the WTA list was that some of your statements could have been interpreted as supporting racism. Having read what you write on the Consensus website, I don't think you are really a racist (now, please correct me if I am wrong:-). I plan to wake from cryonic sleep as soon as some specific technical options will be available, for example backing up one's mind to disk. I am sure that in a world with that kind of technology, it will be easy to choose the color of one's skin. Myself, I think I will go for pale green. Why? No special reason, just that it is one of my favorite colors. I would also like to have wings and a suitable muscular structure to support them. Last but not least, I wish to have largely increased emphatic understanding of other's points of view. I find it difficult to understand why some of us attach so much importance to some small variations in the physical and cultural makeup of today's humans when we all (claim to) advocate a posthuman future with exponentially increased options for physical and cultural diversity. G. On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 04:08:41 +0000, Dirk Bruere wrote: > Well, I'm back. > Seems I've been run out of WTA-town by Sheriff Hughes for talking back > without permission. > Despite the reason I originally left (low sig to noise here) the one > redeeming feature is freedom of expression and freedom from arbitrary > censorship. > I did not know how much I missed it until it was gone. > > Assuming I don't get kicked out of here for not being a libertarian I'll > probably actually stump up some cash and become a full member in due course. > > -- > Dirk From samantha at objectent.com Thu Nov 25 07:58:23 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:58:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Not Just Rednecks for Bush In-Reply-To: <20041124182434.07ED257E2A@finney.org> References: <20041124182434.07ED257E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: When we get blue we may find solace in the realization that 73% of the *registered* voters did not vote for Bush. If we could reach enough of them we could stop major bush-wackiness in its tracks. IF. - samantha On Nov 24, 2004, at 10:24 AM, Hal Finney wrote: > Mike Lorrey writes: >> Polls show that the President increased his support by... >> 5% among females >> 9% among Latinos >> 2% among African Americans >> 3% among Asians >> 7% among those over age 65 >> 5% among Catholics >> 6% among Jewish voters >> 4% among married people > > I agree with Mike that this is an issue of concern to Extropians. > The President's enthusiasm for faith-based initiatives, his opposition > to > personal self-determination and body-ownership (via his drug, abortion > and > homosexuality policies), his "Council on Bioethics" headed by Leon Kass > whose primary purpose seems to be de facto opposition to Extropianism, > all > portend an ominous future given his increasing level of public support. > It is equally significant than a substantial number of Bush voters > listed > "moral values" as their main reason for choosing him, in the exit > polls. > While this is a somewhat ambiguous phrase, it certainly does not > signify > widespread support for an Extropian world where individuals have > maximum > freedom of self-development and self-control. > > However it is far too early to despair. Change is always uncomfortable > for people, and it is natural for their initial reaction to be a > longing > to go back to the old ways, which seem safe and comfortable. But in > fact, much of that longing is simple nostalgia; the past was really not > that great. And if America begins to turn back to that past, she will > quickly remember once again why she left it. > > Extropians and other transhumans offer a package which, in truth, > cannot fail to attract widespread support. Life extension, health > extension, human advancement, all of these are trends which have > brought tremendous benefits to people all over the world. Despite the > discomfort from traditionalists, I remain confident that the > attractions > of these new opportunities will more than overcome social resistance. > Right now we are seeing the early skirmishing, attempting to set the > stage for the great battle which lies ahead. Once these changes become > actual opportunities rather than merely potential futures, the memetic > battleground will shift significantly. No amount of pontificating by > Kass or lecturing from the pulpit will turn Americans away from life > extension and make them embrace death. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From samantha at objectent.com Thu Nov 25 08:07:53 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:07:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1B3D952F-3EB9-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> I really don't think so. I receive literature from the main US atheist groups and none report anywhere near such power (or ambitions) as this article claims. I think it smacks of hyperbole. On Nov 24, 2004, at 3:55 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Declaration of Independence Banned at Calif School > Wed Nov 24, 2004 04:12 PM ET > > > By Dan Whitcomb > LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California teacher has been barred by his > school from giving students documents from American history that refer > to God -- including the Declaration of Independence. > > Steven Williams, a fifth-grade teacher at Stevens Creek School in the > San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino, sued for discrimination on > Monday, claiming he had been singled out for censorship by principal > Patricia Vidmar because he is a Christian. > > "It's a fact of American history that our founders were religious men, > and to hide this fact from young fifth-graders in the name of political > correctness is outrageous and shameful," said Williams' attorney, Terry > Thompson. > That is actually not so true. Many were deists. Some were out and out agnostics or atheist in their leanings. > "Williams wants to teach his students the true history of our country," > he said. "There is nothing in the Establishment Clause (of the U.S. > Constitution) that prohibits a teacher from showing students the > Declaration of Independence." > If it is being taught as prove for some already assumed heavy religious basis for America then it is a twisted teaching. > Vidmar could not be reached for comment on the lawsuit, which was filed > on Monday in U.S. District Court in San Jose and claims violations of > Williams rights to free speech under the First Amendment. > > Phyllis Vogel, assistant superintendent for Cupertino Unified School > District, said the lawsuit had been forwarded to a staff attorney. She > declined to comment further. > > Williams asserts in the lawsuit that since May he has been required to > submit all of his lesson plans and supplemental handouts to Vidmar for > approval, and that the principal will not permit him to use any that > contain references to God or Christianity. > Now that seems a bit odd and if true heavy handed. But it hardly should be labeled and atheist inquisition. It looks like Williams got exactly what he careful crafted the precursors for. > Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are > excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's > journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists" > and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." > > "He hands out a lot of material and perhaps 5 to 10 percent refers to > God and Christianity because that's what the founders wrote," said > Thompson, a lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund, which advocates for > religious freedom. "The principal seems to be systematically censoring > material that refers to Christianity and it is pure discrimination." > > In June, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case of a > California atheist who wanted the words "under God" struck from the > Pledge of Allegiance as recited by school children. The appeals court > in California had found that the phrase amounted to a violation of > church and state separation. > There is ample reason for such a position. - samantha From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 08:10:02 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:10:02 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Not Just Rednecks for Bush In-Reply-To: <20041124182434.07ED257E2A@finney.org> References: <20041124182434.07ED257E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <470a3c520411250010f50d2a2@mail.gmail.com> Very true Hal, but the future is never 100% sure, so perhaps we should say "if" instead of "once". The declared intent of the fundamentalist christian wing of the US administration is to prevent these changes from becoming actual opportunities. The only thing that can help is the limited power of the federal government to overrule decisions of individual states, so Washington can not (or perhaps I should say not yet) revoke things like the Californian stem cell initiative. They are not stupid: they know that your statement quoted below is evidently true, and they will do their best to prevent these changes from becoming actual opportunities. G. On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:24:34 -0800 (PST), "Hal Finney" wrote: > Mike Lorrey writes: > Once these changes become > actual opportunities rather than merely potential futures, the memetic > battleground will shift significantly. No amount of pontificating by > Kass or lecturing from the pulpit will turn Americans away from life > extension and make them embrace death. > > Hal From scerir at libero.it Thu Nov 25 08:22:22 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:22:22 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Structure of AI References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com><000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj><41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com><39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> Message-ID: <007c01c4d2c7$e371fe00$03b11b97@administxl09yj> > In particular I don't believe that lack of having > come up with a test for "free will" means > that the existence of free will is in doubt. > - samantha Notice the difference between 'wants' and 'wills' Einstein was making more than 100 years ago. 'I do not believe in free will. Schopenhauer's words: 'Man can do what he wants, but he cannot will what he wills,' accompany me in all situations throughout my life and reconcile me with the actions of others, even if they are rather painful to me. This awareness of the lack of free will keeps me from taking myself and my fellow men too seriously as acting and deciding individuals, and from losing my temper.' - Einstein, 'My Credo', http://www.einstein-website.de/credo-e.htm He was also skeptical about QM, that people think is a good background for the culture of free will (not just because of that randomness, but because QM allows self-measurements which are pre-measurements and not irreversible measurements). A simulation algorithm reproducing these quantum behaviours would be 'detailed enough' and would allow 'free will'. UNIty in diVERSity. But it is also possible that 'free will' is emergent, as Asher Peres supposes, in 'Existence of "free will" as a problem of physics', Foundations of Physics, vol. 16, no. 6 (1986), pp. 573-584. s. 'Apparently separate parts of the world would be deeply and conspiratorially entangled, and our apparent free will would be entangled with them.' J.S. Bell, 'Bertlmann's socks and the nature of reality', Journal de physique, tome 42 (1981), n.3, supplement: Colloque C2, pp. C2/41-62. From samantha at objectent.com Thu Nov 25 08:16:45 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:16:45 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <584F52C8-3EBA-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> On Nov 24, 2004, at 11:15 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Banning an important historic document from schools on (atheist) > religious ground is very disturbing, as is banning scientific evidence > on evolution from schools on (christian) religious ground. Rewriting > history, and rewriting science, are always first steps toward a > totalitarian Orwellian system. Let's hope both types of talibanism are > only temporary reactions to the overheated political climate. > Mike, I am puzzled by your more and more frequent defense of religious > nuts. Hmm. Not very gentle today are we? Religious nuts? Are you talking only about the subset of religious/spiritual minded folks who really are nuts or is this a blanket assumption that all such are nuts? Sorry to have to ask. But I find it best to in these parts. > My analysis: you hate what you call "liberals" so much that you prefer > to side with the christian talibans on the basis of a feeling that > "the enemies of my enemy are my friends" (faulty logic to say the > least). This is again psychologizing - questioning the supposed internal workings of a conversational opponent instead of their argument directly. It also looks a bit like an attempt at shaming. > You are proud that the christian talibans have beaten the > liberals in the US, and now regard them as precious allies. Whoa, this is over the top. > My friend: just wake up. These are the same people who used to > actually BURN people for exercising their right to free thought and > speech. These are the same people who burned Giordano Bruno, put > Galileo in jail, and held most of Europe in a totalitarian terror > regime for centuries. Just read history. Wow. Religious people generally are the same everywhere? > You call yourself a libertarian, but are ready to defend the > witch-hunters that history has proven to be the worst enemies if > personal freedom. You call yourself an extropian, but side with those > who want to ban all research on advanced medical technologies that can > make us better than today's humans. You proudly call yourself an > American, but please try to realize that your new taliban friends are > more and more against all that Jefferson and Paine stood for. Please take a breath and try again. This is a slam. - samantha From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 10:12:11 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 11:12:11 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <584F52C8-3EBA-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> <584F52C8-3EBA-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520411250212415863c1@mail.gmail.com> Samantha, I am not talking of religious spiritually minded in general. I am talking of a very specific breed of fundamentalist "christians" who have been pushing intolerance and hate to unacceptable extremes for centuries. As for their burning Giordano Bruno, it is in history books. I am VERY worried of extropians taking their side. G. On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:16:45 -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > > On Nov 24, 2004, at 11:15 PM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > > Banning an important historic document from schools on (atheist) > > religious ground is very disturbing, as is banning scientific evidence > > on evolution from schools on (christian) religious ground. Rewriting > > history, and rewriting science, are always first steps toward a > > totalitarian Orwellian system. Let's hope both types of talibanism are > > only temporary reactions to the overheated political climate. > > Mike, I am puzzled by your more and more frequent defense of religious > > nuts. > > Hmm. Not very gentle today are we? Religious nuts? Are you talking > only about the subset of religious/spiritual minded folks who really > are nuts or is this a blanket assumption that all such are nuts? Sorry > to have to ask. But I find it best to in these parts. > > > > My analysis: you hate what you call "liberals" so much that you prefer > > to side with the christian talibans on the basis of a feeling that > > "the enemies of my enemy are my friends" (faulty logic to say the > > least). > > This is again psychologizing - questioning the supposed internal > workings of a conversational opponent instead of their argument > directly. It also looks a bit like an attempt at shaming. > > > You are proud that the christian talibans have beaten the > > liberals in the US, and now regard them as precious allies. > > Whoa, this is over the top. > > > My friend: just wake up. These are the same people who used to > > actually BURN people for exercising their right to free thought and > > speech. These are the same people who burned Giordano Bruno, put > > Galileo in jail, and held most of Europe in a totalitarian terror > > regime for centuries. Just read history. > > Wow. Religious people generally are the same everywhere? > > > You call yourself a libertarian, but are ready to defend the > > witch-hunters that history has proven to be the worst enemies if > > personal freedom. You call yourself an extropian, but side with those > > who want to ban all research on advanced medical technologies that can > > make us better than today's humans. You proudly call yourself an > > American, but please try to realize that your new taliban friends are > > more and more against all that Jefferson and Paine stood for. > > Please take a breath and try again. This is a slam. > > - samantha > From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 25 11:40:49 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:40:49 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Stromboli lighthouse Message-ID: I said yesterday: >After the BBC guys left, we had some extra time to climb to the top of >Stromboli, and I saw the volcano for the first time from the highest >point. The topography of the volcano provides an easy view to look >down into the craters, to see the regular eruptions (on average once >per hour), from which the volcano has earned the name from ancient >Greek times: "lighthouse of the Mediterranean". The volcano this time >wasn't exerting her usual full potential, but I think I captured >something on film. The photos from my photographer friend will be >ready in a day or two, so I'll post the links here when they are >ready. Here they are: Stromboli: 20-22 November 2004 http://www.educeth.ch/stromboli/photos/photo04-en.html continuing - >The view from the top of Stromboli was spectacular though, the >sky was unusually clear (it was raining solid for the two weeks before >we arrived). The sunset was gorgeous, the Moon was three-quarters >full, giving a soft light on the landscape. The temperature was cold >cold cold cold, I thought I was an icicle at the end, and my knees >complained strongly on the descent (The volcano is ~1000m high, 35% >grade climb up and down), but it was worth it. More on the climb- I was with two people who had been up to the top of Stromboli a couple dozen times, so I wasn't concerned for my safety or for getting lost. However, presently it is forbidden to go to the top without an authorized guide. The Guardia di Finanzia (the Italian tax and border people) control access to the mountain, and we would be put in jail (according to the locals or were they making drama?) if we were caught since the two people with me were not authorized guides. Therefore, we cut our lights on the way down to not attract attention to ourselves. We lost the trail for a little while and then missed the hydrofoil that evening because we were late, but I think that was only the Universe's way to tell me to stay another night on the island. In general, our timing was perfect: the GdF were off of the island for a few days, the weather was extraordinarily clear, and the moon was 3/4 full to help our climb down. Happy Thanksgiving everyone! 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/ ******************************************************************** "My life has a superb cast but I can't figure out the plot." --Ashleigh Brilliant From brentn at freeshell.org Thu Nov 25 12:54:12 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:54:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Not Just Rednecks for Bush In-Reply-To: <20041124182434.07ED257E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: (11/24/04 10:24) "Hal Finney" wrote: >No amount of pontificating by >Kass or lecturing from the pulpit will turn Americans away from life >extension and make them embrace death. Agreed. I think it will be difficult for Americans to afford the treatments though, since they will be likely priced in either euros or yen. Bush, on advice from Kass and the others, will enact policy making it difficult to do such research in the US. And if he continues with the economic policies of the past 4 years, we'll be looking at an extremely unfavorable exchange rate with the new First World's currencies. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 13:33:47 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:33:47 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? Message-ID: <470a3c5204112505331e99313a@mail.gmail.com> Has anyone seen this movie? Looks interesting - santatcruztoday.com: This sure-to-be cult favorite is a hybrid of documentary and melodrama, combining a story about an unhappy, divorced photographer (Marlee Matlin) wandering the streets of Portland, Ore., with highly abstract theoretical constructs about the nature of God and "the wacky, weird world of quantum physics." The movie has a website (http://www.whatthebleep.com/): WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW?! is a new type of film. It is part documentary, part story, and part elaborate and inspiring visual effects and animations. The protagonist, Amanda, played by Marlee Matlin, finds herself in a fantastic Alice in Wonderland experience when her daily, uninspired life literally begins to unravel, revealing the uncertain world of the quantum field hidden behind what we consider to be our normal, waking reality... The fourteen top scientists and mystics interviewed in documentary style serve as a modern day Greek Chorus. In an artful filmic dance, their ideas are woven together as a tapestry of truth. The thoughts and words of one member of the chorus blend into those of the next, adding further emphasis to the film's underlying concept of the interconnectedness of all things. http://www.whatthebleep.com/ From dirk at neopax.com Thu Nov 25 13:39:34 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:39:34 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hello again... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112423562ca6b1ba@mail.gmail.com> References: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> <470a3c5204112423562ca6b1ba@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <41A5E096.10701@neopax.com> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >Welcome back Dirk. You will find that many posters on the WTA list, >with some notable exceptions of course, also post here. >You will not get kicked out of here for not being a libertarian: I am >not one, and I am still welcome. > > Well, I should clarify. I am not an *economic* libertarian, but I am one when it comes pretty much all else. >I think what triggered angry reactions from a few people on the WTA >list was that some of your statements could have been interpreted as >supporting racism. Having read what you write on the Consensus >website, I don't think you are really a racist (now, please correct me >if I am wrong:-). > > You are correct. However, it has only been Hughes that has been persistently 'on my case' despite the complete transparency of my position, to the point of malicious fabrication (on record). I have a tendency to jump to the defence of those who I see as having their freedom of expression curtailed, even racists. The last straw for Hughes was when I casually mentioned that I thought the Nazis could be called proto-Transhumanists, despite their lamentable and ineffective methods. Arguing the point sealed my fate. Anyway, it was merely an off-the-cuff remark and I don't particularly want to continue the debate here. Suffice to say that here we can perhaps agree to differ and leave it at that. >I plan to wake from cryonic sleep as soon as some specific technical >options will be available, for example backing up one's mind to disk. >I am sure that in a world with that kind of technology, it will be >easy to choose the color of one's skin. Myself, I think I will go for >pale green. Why? No special reason, just that it is one of my favorite >colors. I would also like to have wings and a suitable muscular >structure to support them. Last but not least, I wish to have largely >increased emphatic understanding of other's points of view. >I find it difficult to understand why some of us attach so much >importance to some small variations in the physical and cultural >makeup of today's humans when we all (claim to) advocate a posthuman >future with exponentially increased options for physical and cultural >diversity. >G. > > Well, that's easy to answer. Only a very specific cultural mix is going to make the transition, and we are borderline IMO as it is. I had a look at the Transtopia site and one comment struck me. It was that a really superior AI might have no intererst in uplifting us any more than we would uplift ant and mice if we had the capability. IMO that's a definite possibility and merely emphasises the work that should be done on our genetics *before* we create such an AI (or it comes into existence as an emergent property of (say) the Net). -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From dirk at neopax.com Thu Nov 25 13:41:17 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:41:17 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Not Just Rednecks for Bush In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41A5E0FD.9050306@neopax.com> Brent Neal wrote: > (11/24/04 10:24) "Hal Finney" wrote: > > > >>No amount of pontificating by >>Kass or lecturing from the pulpit will turn Americans away from life >>extension and make them embrace death. >> >> > > >Agreed. I think it will be difficult for Americans to afford the treatments though, since they will be likely priced in either euros or yen. Bush, on advice from Kass and the others, will enact policy making it difficult to do such research in the US. And if he continues with the economic policies of the past 4 years, we'll be looking at an extremely unfavorable exchange rate with the new First World's currencies. > > > IMO the first major and radical engineering technologies (esp germ line) will be priced in Renminbi -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From amara at amara.com Thu Nov 25 13:43:40 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:43:40 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: the challenges of photojournalism Message-ID: me: >> There was a major story in the blog sphere recently when Kevin Sites >> filmed the killing of a man in a Falluja mosque who was injured and >> seemed to be no threat to the marines that entered and to the marine >> who killed him. Hal Finney: >The problem with this kind of story is that we don't have all of the >information necessary to know how to put it into context. Like any information source, one must decide whether the source is trustworthy or not. Ideally, yes, we would like to have had more cameras on that particular scene to give us all of the perspectives. Lacking that, we have the source that we have. It's up to each of us to decide what to trust. If you read Kevin Sites' full letter to the Marines, http://www.kevinsites.net/2004_11_21_archive.html#110107420331292115 he was trying very hard to see the situation from different perspectives, including from the Marine's view. At the end, he had to say what his conscience was telling him. I think that it took alot of courage to speak out his mind. I respect what he did, alot. In order to report data ('truths'), it's important to be aware of our own filters and be open to whatever new evidence comes to light. Many years ago another photojournalist named Saira Shah found herself breaking her very old stereotypes of people dear to her, the mujahadin, in order to report particular events for her work at a British television station. Her family background was an exiled Afghan growing up in England, so she didn't know an Afghanistan beyond the stories of her father until she went there as a young adult (early 20s). Her early view of the mujahadin was wrapped in a romantic envelope. The event that shattered her romantic wrapping paper was evidence that a group of mujahadin had sold US-supplied Stinger missles to Iran. It was a huge story and she knew it, and because her data was solid, she had to write the story. From that moment, her life in Peshawar was orders of magnitude more difficult and she eventually left, but it was a turning point for her to see Afghanistan in a more realistic light. These are the kind of courageous people that I would trust to be my eyes to see particular events in the absence of more cameras. My point in my previous note was a bit different- it was how film can show the extremes of our human lives- at one end something that shames us, and at the other end, a reminder of our dreams and heroic efforts. Sites says: "In war, as in life, there are plenty of opportunities to see the full spectrum of good and evil that people are capable of. As journalists, it is our job is to report both -- though neither may be fully representative of those people on whom we're reporting. For example, acts of selfless heroism are likely to be as unique to a group as the darker deeds. But our coverage of these unique events, combined with the larger perspective - will allow the truth of that situation, in all of its complexities, to begin to emerge. That doesn't make the decision to report events like this one any easier. It has, for me, led to an agonizing struggle -- the proverbial long, dark night of the soul." Both ends of the spectrum are important to know the full range. My preference, though, is the heroic end of the spectrum because it highlights what humans are capable of, and spurs us forward into better/greater activities. 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 dirk at neopax.com Thu Nov 25 13:57:22 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:57:22 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt.extropians In-Reply-To: <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> References: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> Message-ID: <41A5E4C2.3090802@neopax.com> Why is not more use made of this NG? -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 15:01:55 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:01:55 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hello again... In-Reply-To: <41A5E096.10701@neopax.com> References: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> <470a3c5204112423562ca6b1ba@mail.gmail.com> <41A5E096.10701@neopax.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204112507012ae3f44e@mail.gmail.com> I would love uplifting my doggy if I could. Not because she is very valuable to me in practical terms (I am a bit smarter than her and don't really need her advice or support), but just because she is cute and I love her. Perhaps a really superior AI could feel the same for you and me. I often think that perhaps true AI will not be developed/grown from scratch but rather co-evolve with us. Sort of, first people get memory implants, then implants get processing capabilities, then we start co-thinking with our implants, in such a way as to make sure that posthumans and AIs are really one and the same. This scenario would eliminate conflict between posts and AIs and the need for them to uplift us. G. On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:39:34 +0000, Dirk Bruere wrote: > Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Only a very specific cultural mix is going to make the transition, and > we are borderline IMO as it is. > I had a look at the Transtopia site and one comment struck me. It was > that a really superior AI might have no intererst in uplifting us any > more than we would uplift ant and mice if we had the capability. IMO > that's a definite possibility and merely emphasises the work that should > be done on our genetics *before* we create such an AI (or it comes into > existence as an emergent property of (say) the Net). > -- > Dirk From dirk at neopax.com Thu Nov 25 15:16:55 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:16:55 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hello again... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112507012ae3f44e@mail.gmail.com> References: <005601c4d2a2$9c884e10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41A55AC9.4010705@neopax.com> <470a3c5204112423562ca6b1ba@mail.gmail.com> <41A5E096.10701@neopax.com> <470a3c5204112507012ae3f44e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <41A5F767.7060003@neopax.com> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >I often think that perhaps true AI will not be developed/grown from >scratch but rather co-evolve with us. Sort of, first people get memory >implants, then implants get processing capabilities, then we start >co-thinking with our implants, in such a way as to make sure that >posthumans and AIs are really one and the same. This scenario would >eliminate conflict between posts and AIs and the need for them to >uplift us. >G. > > One of the most likely routes for Human style AI might be slicing a real brain (flash frozen if possible) in micron slices and doing a neural reconstruction and simulation in s/w. -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 15:25:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:25:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041125152559.96835.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Banning an important historic document from schools on (atheist) > religious ground is very disturbing, as is banning scientific > evidence > on evolution from schools on (christian) religious ground. Rewriting > history, and rewriting science, are always first steps toward a > totalitarian Orwellian system. Let's hope both types of talibanism > are only temporary reactions to the overheated political climate. > Mike, I am puzzled by your more and more frequent defense of > religious nuts. > My analysis: you hate what you call "liberals" so much that you > prefer to side with the christian talibans on the basis of a > feeling that "the enemies of my enemy are my friends" (faulty > logic to say the least). You are proud that the christian talibans > have beaten the > liberals in the US, and now regard them as precious allies. As Europeans have been so frequently demonstrating in recent months and years: you are quite wrong. My posts have been an attempt to illuminate to the atheists here that their faith is as much a religion as the Christianity they so vehemently hate, the Judaism of those they are so willing to love or hate depending on whether they are in the US or in Israel, and the Islam they are so willing to coddle. Atheists are JUST as capable of persecution and tyranny in perpetrating and evangelizing their faith as anybody else > My friend: just wake up. These are the same people who used to > actually BURN people for exercising their right to free thought and > speech. These are the same people who burned Giordano Bruno, put > Galileo in jail, and held most of Europe in a totalitarian terror > regime for centuries. Just read history. I have, and I am putting up warning signs to you to say: you are just as capable of these acts as anybody, see, it is already beginning. > You call yourself a libertarian, but are ready to defend the > witch-hunters that history has proven to be the worst enemies if > personal freedom. You call yourself an extropian, but side with those > who want to ban all research on advanced medical technologies that > can make us better than today's humans. You proudly call yourself an > American, but please try to realize that your new taliban friends are > more and more against all that Jefferson and Paine stood for. Please try to realize that your hyperbole and histrionics of collective guilt against people due to their faith is the same road that led to Sobibor and the other death camps, and it is YOU Europeans who have the real guilt and experience in persecuting people because of their faith. I would have thought you'd have learned your lesson by now. As a libertarian I stand behind anybody who peacefully practices their faith (including atheism). As an extropian, I oppose any luddite, including the majority of them, who are atheists/gaiaists of the left who hate extropians at least as much as they hate christians. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 15:35:12 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:35:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] alt.extropians In-Reply-To: <41A5E4C2.3090802@neopax.com> Message-ID: <20041125153512.96207.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Usenet is dead. Few people use it, few ISPs provide access to it (or inform their users that they do), and there are few or no free websites that provide access to it. --- Dirk Bruere wrote: > Why is not more use made of this NG? > > -- > Dirk > > The Consensus:- > The political party for the new millenium > http://www.theconsensus.org > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From dirk at neopax.com Thu Nov 25 15:40:05 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:40:05 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt.extropians In-Reply-To: <20041125153512.96207.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041125153512.96207.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A5FCD5.8020004@neopax.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >Usenet is dead. Few people use it, few ISPs provide access to it (or >inform their users that they do), and there are few or no free websites >that provide access to it. > > > Then effectively (interactive) free speech on the net is dead. We all go to our moderated and closely controlled ghettoes... -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Nov 25 15:47:18 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:47:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041125152559.96835.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000f01c4d306$0bb4cf80$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > Atheists are JUST as capable of persecution and tyranny in perpetrating > and evangelizing their faith as anybody else Atheism is just a term meaning "without god." I've met atheists who believed in astrology (and other irrational things). "Without god" does not necessarily mean that a person is compassionate, rational, pluralistic or keenly perspicacious. IMO it is just a *good start.* While some atheists are simply atheists (and they run the gamut of human characteristics), some of them are secular humanists, as well. Secular humanism is a term that implies more of a philosophical bent regarding putting together some type of written the-Golden-Rule driven musings regarding how we live with what we objectively know about the universe and our place in it. Olga From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Nov 25 16:05:00 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:05:00 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041125073012.39678.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001a01c4d308$87be95f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Adrian Tymes ... > > There's SF, and then there's the SF Bay Area. The > latter is far larger than the former, and happens to > include the name of the more famous major city... You are right. I think we should rename it the San Jose Bay Area. > ... There's been major concern about how > professional things are getting... Ja, its a wonderful trend to professionalize games. We need to teach our children well, that money drives everything. Make young capitalists out of them, instruct them at every opportunity the joys of crass materialism. > ...to the exclusion of kids who just wanted to play... Play is for the retired elderly. {8^D > - the original reason for > said programs - and how they often trump the academic > studies that the schools are supposed to establish... Ja I see your point. Perhaps they should work out ways to make the sports merge with academic studies, such as by having students organize the concessions and such. spike From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Nov 25 18:01:33 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 18:01:33 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041125152559.96835.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041125152559.96835.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A61DFD.2050904@gmail.com> Well Mike, strange as you may find it, we are in perfect agreement here. In passing: I may have reached the top 8 messages per day, I promise to shut up for the rest of the day. I know that "atheistic talibans" can be, and have been, just as intolerant and dangerous as "*any religion here* talibans". Under past communist rule in Eastern European countries, people could go to jail for admitting religious beliefs. I am against this as I am against any form of intolerance against others' ideas. Please note also that I am one of those who frequently react to atheist intolerance of others' religious beliefs. I also stand behind anybody who peacefully practices their faith (including atheism). My main point, which perhaps I have not expressed clearly enough, is this: politics created strange bedfellows, and I have the impression that you are now seeing christian *fundamentalists* as allies of libertarians in US politics (a couple of weeks ago a guy posted a very interesting explanation of how christian *fundamentalists* and libertarians manage to peacefully coexist in the Republican party). And I wish to warn you that, in my opinion, some of them, including some very close to the political powers that be, do not limit themselves to peacefully practicing their faith, but actively try to force their faith upon everyone else. The fact that they are in power makes them dangerous. Especially dangerous for Extropians when they try to shut down all medical research which could lead to human enhancement. G. Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > >>Banning an important historic document from schools on (atheist) >>religious ground is very disturbing, as is banning scientific >>evidence >>on evolution from schools on (christian) religious ground. Rewriting >>history, and rewriting science, are always first steps toward a >>totalitarian Orwellian system. Let's hope both types of talibanism >>are only temporary reactions to the overheated political climate. >>Mike, I am puzzled by your more and more frequent defense of >>religious nuts. >>My analysis: you hate what you call "liberals" so much that you >>prefer to side with the christian talibans on the basis of a >>feeling that "the enemies of my enemy are my friends" (faulty >>logic to say the least). You are proud that the christian talibans >>have beaten the >>liberals in the US, and now regard them as precious allies. > > > As Europeans have been so frequently demonstrating in recent months and > years: you are quite wrong. > > My posts have been an attempt to illuminate to the atheists here that > their faith is as much a religion as the Christianity they so > vehemently hate, the Judaism of those they are so willing to love or > hate depending on whether they are in the US or in Israel, and the > Islam they are so willing to coddle. > > Atheists are JUST as capable of persecution and tyranny in perpetrating > and evangelizing their faith as anybody else > > >>My friend: just wake up. These are the same people who used to >>actually BURN people for exercising their right to free thought and >>speech. These are the same people who burned Giordano Bruno, put >>Galileo in jail, and held most of Europe in a totalitarian terror >>regime for centuries. Just read history. > > > I have, and I am putting up warning signs to you to say: you are just > as capable of these acts as anybody, see, it is already beginning. > > >>You call yourself a libertarian, but are ready to defend the >>witch-hunters that history has proven to be the worst enemies if >>personal freedom. You call yourself an extropian, but side with those >>who want to ban all research on advanced medical technologies that >>can make us better than today's humans. You proudly call yourself an >>American, but please try to realize that your new taliban friends are >>more and more against all that Jefferson and Paine stood for. > > > Please try to realize that your hyperbole and histrionics of collective > guilt against people due to their faith is the same road that led to > Sobibor and the other death camps, and it is YOU Europeans who have the > real guilt and experience in persecuting people because of their faith. > I would have thought you'd have learned your lesson by now. > > As a libertarian I stand behind anybody who peacefully practices their > faith (including atheism). As an extropian, I oppose any luddite, > including the majority of them, who are atheists/gaiaists of the left > who hate extropians at least as much as they hate christians. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." > -William Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism From reason at longevitymeme.org Thu Nov 25 17:21:18 2004 From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:21:18 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112505331e99313a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Giu1i0 > Pri5c0 > Has anyone seen this movie? Looks interesting - santatcruztoday.com: > This sure-to-be cult favorite is a hybrid of documentary and > melodrama, combining a story about an unhappy, divorced photographer > (Marlee Matlin) wandering the streets of Portland, Ore., with highly > abstract theoretical constructs about the nature of God and "the > wacky, weird world of quantum physics." > The movie has a website (http://www.whatthebleep.com/): WHAT THE BLEEP > DO WE KNOW?! is a new type of film. It is part documentary, part > story, and part elaborate and inspiring visual effects and animations. > The protagonist, Amanda, played by Marlee Matlin, finds herself in a > fantastic Alice in Wonderland experience when her daily, uninspired > life literally begins to unravel, revealing the uncertain world of the > quantum field hidden behind what we consider to be our normal, waking > reality... The fourteen top scientists and mystics interviewed in > documentary style serve as a modern day Greek Chorus. In an artful > filmic dance, their ideas are woven together as a tapestry of truth. > The thoughts and words of one member of the chorus blend into those of > the next, adding further emphasis to the film's underlying concept of > the interconnectedness of all things. > http://www.whatthebleep.com/ You're not going to find any truth in this film; the "scientists" are just babbling and the mystics are promoting their particular delusional worldview. The result is the sort of dangerous nonsense that can exist in a society that is largely illiterate with it comes to science. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=111&t=4350&hl=what+the+bleep &s= Reason Founder, Longevity Meme From hal at finney.org Thu Nov 25 17:54:46 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:54:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041125175446.94DE357E2D@finney.org> Keep in mind that we're only getting one side of the story here. The main source for the article is the lawyer of the teacher who is suing. The school administration is not talking, which is a common bureaucratic response when threatened with a lawsuit. Reading between the lines, I get the impression that this teacher has been pushing his Christianity on the students, and probably some have complained, otherwise it would never have come to the attention of the administration. He may be providing selective quotes from historic documents which over-emphasize the religious and Christian influence on early American history. As Samantha pointed out, a number of our Founding Fathers were deists rather than Christians. Deism was a philosophy which acknowledged God as the creator of the universe and founder of natural law, but which rejected miraculous and superstitious explanations of physical events in favor of reason and science. Jefferson in particular created a re-written version of the Bible which removed Jesus' miraculous doings but preserved his moral and ethical instructions, which were seen as wise and well-founded. If the teacher is allowing his religious beliefs to sway his presentation of American history in a biased and unbalanced manner, then it is proper for the administration to step in and try to rectify the situation. Making the teacher run his instructional materials by the principle for approval is a drastic step, but it is better than giving the students a false impression of historical facts. Hal From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Thu Nov 25 18:16:30 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:16:30 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Research policy, EU versus US In-Reply-To: <41A61DFD.2050904@gmail.com> References: <20041125152559.96835.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <41A61DFD.2050904@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2163B026-3F0E-11D9-9125-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Nov 25, 2004, at 10:01 AM, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > The fact that they are in power makes them dangerous. Especially > dangerous for Extropians when they try to shut down all medical > research which could lead to human enhancement. There are many more ways to effectively shut down research than mere direct government regulation. Many governments make seemingly unrelated policy that have the same or worse consequences for research whether intended or not. Both the US and Japan spend vastly more money on R&D than the entire EU, in any relative term you care to use (per capita, percentage of GDP, etc), and the gap in absolute terms enormous as well. The EU gives a great deal of lip service to the importance of all this research, but has shown no real interest in actually making it happen. Social policy and statements of support does not constitute "research". The US regulation of research is only dangerous to the EU because the EU doesn't do their own. And as the EU reports themselves state, the primary reason for this is that research driven enterprise has been regulated into non-competitiveness in the EU and no one dares make any radical changes to economic policy to make it competitive. Rather than worrying about the US regulating research, perhaps you should worry about the fact that the EU has *already* effectively regulated research into oblivion. No matter what happens in the US, it certainly cannot hurt to have the EU in the research game. Why is the US obligated to carry the EU's water? This is the same bizarre myopia that I see a lot when the EU makes commentary on all manner of policy in the US and how terrible it is. They complain about how fiscal irresponsibility in the US is tragic, while refusing to make any real reforms to their own economies which are in far worse shape. They complain about perceived loss of freedoms in the US, apparently ignoring the fact that the US still has far greater basic freedom e.g. freedom of speech, than the EU has ever had, yet there is no push to liberalize their own laws. They complain about research regulation in the US, but only give lip service to doing their own research. They talk about the "atrocity" that is US foreign policy, while actively supporting tyrants for personal gain and turning a blind eye toward egregious human rights violations in their own back yards. And so on. Can you see how this might look monstrously hypocritical to many Americans? It is as though the EU is living vicariously through the US and has no life of its own, or at the very least acting as an annoying backseat driver. Everyone is concerned that the US does not listen to the opining of the EU, but there are two questions that should be asked far more than they actually are: Does the EU actually heed the policy advice of the US, even on matters where the US has a far better track record? And is it wise for the US to take policy advice from organizations with a policy track record that is very arguably worse than the US? I think Americans would be far more likely to be genuinely open to listening to the EU if the EU appeared to be serious about fixing their own problems instead of just giving them political lip service and then playing armchair president of the US. cheers, j. andrew rogers From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 25 18:23:04 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:23:04 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] META - AVOIDING DUPLICATE POSTS, HELP PLEASE Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041125101657.0294a968@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Below is a message I sent, and TWO copies of this ended up on the list. I had pressed Reply. I would expect only ONE copy here. What is wrong? >Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:58:27 -0800 >To: ExI chat list >From: Hara Ra >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... > >That case has a lot of hidden detail, starting with a child custody >dispute and a preteen daughter (I suppose by now a teen), just for starters.... > >> > In June, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case of a >> > California atheist who wanted the words "under God" struck from the >> > Pledge of Allegiance as recited by school children. The appeals court >> > in California had found that the phrase amounted to a violation of >> > church and state separation... Mike Lorrey >> >> >>What do you suppose would happen? >> >>spike >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>extropy-chat mailing list >>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 25 22:19:08 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:19:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041125221908.58570.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Reason wrote: > You're not going to find any truth in this film; the > "scientists" are just > babbling and the mystics are promoting their > particular delusional > worldview. The result is the sort of dangerous > nonsense that can exist in a > society that is largely illiterate with it comes to > science. Agreed. I went to see the film having been told it was an illustration of the limits of what we know from quantum mechanics, and of the scientific exploration of said field for more knowledge. There is nothing scientific about the questions and methods they discuss. One particularly egregious example is speculating that anyone can change the world just by willing it, and if they don't then they're just not trying hard enough/hindered by their subconscious (despite the fact that all attempts to change things - at least, outside one's own body - by willpower alone, with no corresponding physical actions, have failed under laboratory conditions, even when conducted by the most sincere of believers). This is the second movie in my life I've walked out in the middle of. I was strongly tempted to yell out in the theater about the pseudoscientific bullshit while I exited, but decided that would not likely convince any of the other patrons either way, and only make our side look like the irrational (and unpleasant, for those deluded into thinking it more important) one. From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 25 22:30:33 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:30:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <001a01c4d308$87be95f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041125223033.31867.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > Adrian Tymes > ... > > > > There's SF, and then there's the SF Bay Area. The > > latter is far larger than the former, and happens > to > > include the name of the more famous major city... > > You are right. I think we should rename it > the San Jose Bay Area. That would require renaming the SF Bay. Easier, and possibly better, just to promote the name the region already has - Silicon Valley - as adjacent to but distinct from the SF Bay Area. > > ... There's been major concern about how > > professional things are getting... > > Ja, its a wonderful trend to professionalize games. > We need to teach our children well, that money > drives > everything. Make young capitalists out of them, > instruct > them at every opportunity the joys of crass > materialism. And not only that, but to teach them that physical exertion with a minimum of intelligence is the optimal way for most people to make a lot of money, as opposed to uncool professions like engineering (even if far more people who try to become engineers than try to become pro athletes actually get decent pay). > > ...to the exclusion of kids who just wanted to > play... > > Play is for the retired elderly. {8^D Kids can play too. ;P > > - the original reason for > > said programs - and how they often trump the > academic > > studies that the schools are supposed to > establish... > > Ja I see your point. Perhaps they should work out > ways to make the sports merge with academic studies, > such as by having students organize the concessions > and such. But the inexperienced students wouldn't rake in as much profit as expensive promoters (who might not actually rake in any profit, not that they'll let you see their performance records, but they'll promise a good kickback under the table - verbally, so it's worth the paper it's written on, unless they hope to get your future business). From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 25 22:34:48 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:34:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] alt.extropians In-Reply-To: <20041125153512.96207.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041125223448.32273.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- Dirk Bruere wrote: > Why is not more use made of this NG? Perhaps because it's in the alt.* hierarchy? Or because email and Web based forums are far more popular? --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > Usenet is dead. Few people use it, few ISPs provide > access to it (or > inform their users that they do), and there are few > or no free websites > that provide access to it. Few, but definitely not zero. And Usenet's still popular enough that I know several people who regularly use specific groups in it just like we use this mailing list. It might not have grown as vigorously as the Web over the past several years, but so long as it (in aggregate) still has millions of active posters I wouldn't quite call it "dead". From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 25 22:41:23 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:41:23 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <20041125221908.58570.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041125221908.58570.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125162906.01be2040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:19 PM 11/25/2004 -0800, Adrian wrote: >all attempts to >change things - at least, outside one's own body - by >willpower alone, with no corresponding physical >actions, have failed under laboratory conditions, even >when conducted by the most sincere of believers This is simply incorrect, as stated. You might wish to assert that it *must* be so, and that those who publish claims of lab PK or other psi (believers and uncommited alike) are mistaken or lying--but you can't say that the claims don't exist. Read the cumulative and on-going results from the Princeton PEAR lab. Read the results of my friend Professor Suitbert Ertel, Home: Tobias-Mayer-Weg 3 D 37077 G?ttingen Office: Georg-Elias-M?ller-Institut f?r Psychologie Gossler Strasse 14 D 37073 G?ttingen Email: sertel at uni-goettingen.de Phone (home): 0551-3794494 (from abroad: 0049 551 3794494) Fax (office): 0551-393662 (from abroad: 0049 551 393662) Homepage: www.SuitbertErtel.net Here's an example of a perceptual psi claim rather than PK, but it is of the same order of effectivity shown in the best PK human/machine protocols: < [Subjects] draw pingpong balls from bags with written numbers 1 to 5 on them while they have to avoid one of the five numbers. My psi-gifted participants were successful at that. They were not only successful when they tried to hit certain numbers, they were also successful when they tried to avoid certain numbers. Here are summarized results of seven participants from tests with avoidance intention: Total trials 4800, 681 hits = 14.2%, expected 20%. Z = -10.05. P-value astronomical. With hit intention these seven participants obtained the following hit percentages (not summarized here): 24.2%, 25.5%, 32.7%, 32,7%,32.8%, 33.8%, 45.8%. Trial numbers were near 1,000 for each participant, expectancy again 20%. Since hit intention was generally more psi-effective than avoidance intention, psi seems to be more activated for achieving something [desired] than for escaping from something bad. Suitbert > Before anyone rushes to point out possible design flaws--maybe the Ss *saw* the balls, maybe the numbers *feel* different, etc--give a moment's consideration to the possibility that the experimenters have thought of these child-obvious problems and dealt with them in advance. Preferably, find and assess more complete accounts of the trials on Suitbert's site. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Nov 25 23:15:19 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:15:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125162906.01be2040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041125231519.32899.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 02:19 PM 11/25/2004 -0800, Adrian wrote: > >all attempts to > >change things - at least, outside one's own body - > by > >willpower alone, with no corresponding physical > >actions, have failed under laboratory conditions, > even > >when conducted by the most sincere of believers > > This is simply incorrect, as stated. You might wish > to assert that it > *must* be so, and that those who publish claims of > lab PK or other psi > (believers and uncommited alike) are mistaken or > lying--but you can't say > that the claims don't exist. Okay, okay, I'll give the long (and less convenient, but more technically accurate) version, since you requested it: The vast majority of attempts to recreate these phenomena under conditions of scientific testing have failed. While there have been a few successes, most of these have been shown to be flawed, given enough time (and people who care about the research) enough for the specific study's flaws to be revealed. Furthermore, given the many many experiments that have been conducted, it is expected that a few would show anomalous results, even just among the legit ones. This is why repeatability is one of the hallmarks of scientific investigations - and most attempts to independently repeat the study, under the exact conditions the study details, have failed. (So if there is something there, the successful studies have so far universally failed to give accurate descriptions of how to recreate it - which means they might not truly understand how they got the results they got, even if the results are legit.) So, although the claim can not be entirely ruled out at this time, it is far from an established scientific fact at this time, so far as any theory can ever become an "established scientific fact" (like evolution, or Newtonian mechanics for non-quantum-scale events). To claim that these claims of conscious manipulation have that level of scientific justification already is factually incorrect, and the level of that incorrect statement that the movie presented was a level that I, as a scientist, found to be offensive. Note that there is an exception for changing things within one's body. However, even here, it has been shown that the effects seem to be entirely related to the brain's control over the body's autonomic systems - which do, perhaps, have potential to do things that human beings can not ordinarily do, but not on the level of fundamentally editing reality (which would allow one to, say, make gold appear out of thin air, or alter the path of a basketball after it leaves your hands without causing anything else to act upon the ball) as the movie suggested was possible. > Before anyone rushes to point out possible design > flaws--maybe the Ss *saw* > the balls, maybe the numbers *feel* different, > etc--give a moment's > consideration to the possibility that the > experimenters have thought of > these child-obvious problems and dealt with them in > advance. The problem is, there have been so many experiments that didn't, that the time and energy to refute each and every single study is overwhelming - especially if each person must refute them all independently of others' efforts. > Preferably, > find and assess more complete accounts of the trials > on Suitbert's site. Or better yet, on some independent sites whose maintainers not only have practice in reviewing claims of this nature, but who also dedicate their time to reviewing them so the rest of us can spend our time the way we wish to. (E.g. in my case, spending a few hours to refute this claim is not more important than sitting down with my family for Thanksgiving dinner - and similar if lesser problems arise if I postpone the claim to review at a later date.) The claim might merit review by people such as myself after it has been reviewed by said independent sites, but so long as the only documentation is on Suitbert's site, the probability of it being yet another flawed claim is so high as to not be worth bothering with. (I am well aware of the paradox, BTW, in case Suitbert actually has found something and wishes to promote it. In that case, getting independent others to review his work and publish their opinions is the best - possibly only - way to get the word out. This is not quite what you're doing, BTW: you're presenting his claim, but for example you do not state that you yourself have actually critically analyzed it for possible flaws. I, myself, am working on something that might be as fantastic if it were true - my Casimir device work - so I have spent some time thinking how I would get people like myself to accept the claim if it is true.) From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Nov 25 23:51:18 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:51:18 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <20041125231519.32899.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125162906.01be2040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041125231519.32899.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125173747.01a93278@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:15 PM 11/25/2004 -0800, Adrian wrote: >The vast majority of attempts to recreate these >phenomena under conditions of scientific testing have >failed. What comprises a `vast majority'? More than half, clearly. More than 90%? But again, if the latter, this is simply inconsistent with the results found by a number of meta-analyses conducted by competent statisticians during the last decade or so. In general, the effect sizes remain stable, if small; the number of experiments that fail to repudiate the null is about in accordance with the number one must expect (due to noise, etc) in any ensemble of tests of a small-effect phenomenon. Read Prof Jessica Utts on this: http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/ E.g.: http://anson.ucdavis.edu/%7Eutts/JSE1999.pdf >Furthermore, given the many many experiments that >have been conducted, it is expected that a few would >show anomalous results, even just among the legit >ones. The well-known file-drawer hypothesis. This is an ongoing discussion in the scientific-paranormal community, but the consensus remains, I gather, that the number of competent experiments unpublished due to null results required to offset the data summarized in various meta-analyses is so absurdly large that the hypothesis is itself found to be extremely improbable. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 26 00:05:06 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 18:05:06 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <20041125231519.32899.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125162906.01be2040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041125231519.32899.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125175511.01c3cec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:15 PM 11/25/2004 -0800, Adrian wrote: > > Preferably, > > find and assess more complete accounts of the trials > > on Suitbert's site. > >Or better yet, on some independent sites whose >maintainers not only have practice in reviewing >claims of this nature, but who also dedicate their >time to reviewing them so the rest of us can spend our >time the way we wish to. This is very nearly impossible to achieve, I think. `Independent' in such a vexed topic means `as yet unpersuaded'. The moment an independent observer becomes convinced that the psi data really do show something weird as shit happening, s/he loses standing as an independent and is seen, willynilly, as either a convert or a dupe. I'm extremely relieved, sometimes, that unlike Michael Crichton I've never seen a bunch of people bending cutlery by stroking it gently and then gone on to do it repeatedly myself. If this did happen, and was filmed, and I affirmed upon my life that it was not fraudulent, would you, Adrian, take this testimony as evidence of anything other than my credulity or bogosity? What *would* it take? A theory that explains it, perhaps. I don't know, it's very unsettling. If I ever do see people I trust bending metal by pure force of personality (rather than just being told about it), and if I learn how to do it myself, I'll be very tempted to shut up about it. The file-drawer in the other cabinet... Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 00:07:05 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:07:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041125175446.94DE357E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041126000705.47900.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > > If the teacher is allowing his religious beliefs to sway his > presentation > of American history in a biased and unbalanced manner, then it is > proper > for the administration to step in and try to rectify the situation. > Making the teacher run his instructional materials by the principle > for > approval is a drastic step, but it is better than giving the students > a false impression of historical facts. If the administration was telling the teacher what can be taught about the documents, that is one thing. She is instead specifically being prevented from teaching *THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE*. That is an attack on the Constitution itself, and a demonstration of the irrationality of the atheist inquisitors: they are attacking that which gives them the right to practice their atheist religion. It is an inherently paradoxical and absurd thing to do, which I would have assumed would be obvious to those on this board who pretend to be rational intelligent people. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? All your favorites on one personal page ? Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 00:25:34 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:25:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41A61DFD.2050904@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041126002534.49372.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > I also stand behind anybody who peacefully practices their faith > (including atheism). > My main point, which perhaps I have not expressed clearly enough, is > this: politics created strange bedfellows, and I have the impression > that you are now seeing christian *fundamentalists* as allies of > libertarians in US politics (a couple of weeks ago a guy posted a > very interesting explanation of how christian *fundamentalists* and > libertarians manage to peacefully coexist in the Republican party). > And I wish to warn you that, in my opinion, some of them, including > some very close to the political powers that be, do not limit > themselves to peacefully practicing their faith, but actively try > to force their faith > upon everyone else. The fact that they are in power makes them > dangerous. Especially dangerous for Extropians when they try to shut > down all medical research which could lead to human enhancement. I know several devoutly religious christian families who also are libertarians. In their opinion, a true christian SHOULD be a libertarian, and in their opinion is why one can believe that the US was founded by christians, based on christian precepts, while at the same time embracing tolerance and respect for other faiths. They find that christianity is: a) an inherently personal faith of a personal relationship with christ, which cannot be imposed by government, but at the same time cannot be suppressed by government restrictions on people testifying to their faith. b) a faith that requires that individuals be free to choose to sin or not, provided only that they do not harm others (an incredibly important caveat). Victimless "crimes" therefore, should not be regulated or prosecuted by the state, morality should not be legislated. If you are prevented by the state from choosing to sin or not, then you cannot attain grace through virtue. Just as it is wrong for the state to impose morality, it is even more wrong for the state to impose sin upon persons of faith. Forcing a person to pay money in taxes, which are spent on what that persons faith tells them is murder, is inherently wrong. For that reason, state subsidies for abortion or stem cell research that aborts fetuses, is also inherently wrong, no matter how beneficial you or I believe that research is. If you believe it is beneficial, you should pay for it. At the same time, until science can prove that a fetus is a person, it would be wrong for government to impose the morality of banning abortion. Because of the prevalence of premee births, third trimester abortion is rightly regulated and/or banned. Because of the proven lack of neural development in first trimester fetuses, abortion is rightly unregulated during that period. The rest is grey area left to science to prove or disprove. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From neptune at superlink.net Fri Nov 26 01:23:39 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:23:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041126002534.49372.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004301c4d356$8fb57aa0$b3893cd1@pavilion> I'm forced to make some comments on this thread. Atheism per se is not a religion. It's merely the lack of a belief in God/gods. That's it. Ditto for theism. Theism is not a religion either. It's merely a presence of a belief in God/gods. Nor is either necessarily based on faith. When Mike Lorrey states either one is, he's conflating belief with epistemology -- ignoring the distinction between what's believed and why it's believed. Yes, just about any particular belief may be held on faith -- in the sense that it goes against logic and evidence as Tertullian put it, "I believe it because it's impossible." (Note: this answers the issue of agnosticism. Agnosticism is not an alternative to atheism or theism. It, too, conflates the What with the Why of belief. An agnostic either has a belief or lacks it. She or he may claim that there's no valid epistemological method to choose between belief and its lack, but this doesn't mean she or he is in some middle realm between belief and its lack. As Georges H. Smith pointed out, each agnostic is either an atheist or a theist. In my own experience, agnostics have really been atheists who use the label to avoid a heated debate. This is not the same with "secular humanist" as that implies more than just atheism, though I suspect many people using the term don't know the difference so it probably doesn't matter.) Now, Christianity is a religion and it's theistic -- and it has a faith component. At least, this is true of extent forms of Christianity of which I'm aware. (In fact, a Christian who claims not to believe on faith would not be considered by most Christians today or historically to be a Christian.) Deism, since others have brought it up, is not necessarily based on faith, but it's based on faulty reasoning -- generally an argument from design or something along those lines. Morality per se doesn't have a direct link with atheism/theism. Nor per se does character. Now, of course, Christianity and most religions hold certain moral beliefs and that's part of their practice and, generally, people see the bond between religion and morality as so strong that most are unable to believe in morality without religion, but it's not only possible but actually exists. Examples include neo-Aristoteleans, Objectivists, some Existentialists, and Marxists (insofar as they have a morality; in general Marxist moral precepts are close to Christianity; no offense, Mike). Now, one might disagree with the particulars of any of these philosophies or their moral components, but that doesn't mean they don't combine morality with atheism. As for the specific case that brought this up, I don't know the details of it, but the strict libertarian position is: get rid of public schooling and the issue of what's taught will no longer be political. As long as there are public schools, there will always be a chance for political antagonism if not downright strife over what's taught in them. Privatizing the schools and abolishing mandatory school laws will do more to solve this problem than feuding over what should or shouldn't be taught. Regards, Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/FamilySOG.html From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:55:27 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:55:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <004301c4d356$8fb57aa0$b3893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20041126015527.59750.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Technotranscendence wrote: > I'm forced to make some comments on this thread. Atheism per se is > not a religion. It's merely the lack of a belief in God/gods. That's > it. Ditto for theism. Theism is not a religion either. It's merely a > presence of a belief in God/gods. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Atheism is as much a matter of faith as theism. Particularly, since the advent of the Simulation Argument, the issue demands that scientists intending on total scientific objectivity must be agnostic or at most Deist, until the Simulation Argument is proven or disproven. The Simulation Argument essentially dictates that the inhabitants of most universes must be deists to be objective. The hubris of religion is not to presume something which is not in evidence, but to presume something in spite of evidence or odds to the contrary (i.e. evolution, jupiters moons, etc). Atheism falls in this same trap of hubris in presuming that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, but especially in going beyond that presumption in insisting, despite the Simulation Argument's demonstration of odds to the contrary, that we exist in the one rare universe that was not created by anybody. Eliezer's bayesian games of the past months (of colored balls in bags) should be conclusive in proving that presumptions of atheists are at least as specious of those of theists. I am an agnostic because I don't know which sort of universe I live in, yet, but I lean to the Deist view because the odds tell me to. > > Nor is either necessarily based on faith. When Mike Lorrey states > either one is, he's conflating belief with epistemology -- ignoring > the > distinction between what's believed and why it's believed. Yes, just > about any particular belief may be held on faith -- in the sense that > it > goes against logic and evidence as Tertullian put it, "I believe it > because it's impossible." (Note: this answers the issue of > agnosticism. Faith is only required in the absence of knowledge of evidence one way or the other. To have faith and admit that your beliefs are based on faith is to acknowledge that the objective stance is agnosticism and that one chooses irrational behavior. > Agnosticism is not an alternative to atheism or theism. It, too, > conflates the What with the Why of belief. An agnostic either has a > belief or lacks it. She or he may claim that there's no valid > epistemological method to choose between belief and its lack, but > this doesn't mean she or he is in some middle realm between belief > and its lack. As Georges H. Smith pointed out, each agnostic is > either an atheist or a theist. In my own experience, agnostics have > really been atheists who use the label to avoid a heated debate. In my own experience, atheists are merely born again theists with a chip on their shoulder. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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 alex at ramonsky.com Fri Nov 26 04:33:39 2004 From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:33:39 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Living in Ireland -the reality Message-ID: <41A6B223.9050708@ramonsky.com> I know this is a response to a rather old post and I apologize for my tardiness... I lived in various counties in Ireland (Not the same thing as Northern Ireland, BTW -there is no conflict in the South) from 1986 until 1999, when I moved to the UK. The bad news: We had no electricity, no toilets, no running water. We were not unusual. Most of our neighbors didn't either. Since we are not catholic, there was little chance of getting employed or a decent place to rent. We were treated as second class citizens, known as 'blow-ins'. We were refused service in all catholic pubs and some shops and restaurants. We were stopped on the street by the cops regularly and searched for no apparent reason. We were ripped off by the locals at every opportunity. There are drunks everywhere, and real mental cases wandering around on the streets accosting people for money/booze. Car insurance is prohibitively high. Irish roads (about the same standards as much of Africa) meant we needed a new gearbox/clutch/suspension every year or so. It rains almost every day, and the winds are icy and blasting for much of the year. The attitude to science? There were 5 religious education lessons per week in our local high school and 2 science. Catholic prayers had to be done before and after every lesson, and in the mornings. The good news: You won't have to send your kids to school. (That's why we did it). You are very unlikely to get burgled, mugged, raped, beaten up or murdered. Or indeed, acknowledged at all. Enjoy. : ) AR From hal at finney.org Fri Nov 26 04:36:48 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:36:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041126043648.B531357E2D@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > If the administration was telling the teacher what can be taught about > the documents, that is one thing. She is instead specifically being > prevented from teaching *THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE*. Actually the article says: : Among the materials she [the principal] has rejected, according to : Williams, are excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George : Washington's journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the : Colonists" and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." This sounds like the teacher is specifically selecting excerpts from the DOI and other documents. If these are selected in such a way as to emphasize religiosity rather than to teach the document as a whole, the principle is doing the right thing. And again, keep in mind that we are receiving a biased and one-sided presentation of the issues. Hal From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 26 01:56:06 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 20:56:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126015527.59750.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126015527.59750.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1101434165.20563.7071.camel@localhost> On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 20:55, Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Technotranscendence wrote: > > > I'm forced to make some comments on this thread. Atheism per se is > > not a religion. It's merely the lack of a belief in God/gods. > That's > > it. Ditto for theism. Theism is not a religion either. It's merely > a > > presence of a belief in God/gods. > > "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Atheism is as much a > matter of faith as theism. Part of the problem in this discussion is that the word faith has multiple uses. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary may not be the world's best but since the online OED requires a subscription I will take the definition found at: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=faith&x=0&y=0 Dropping the derivation info we have left: 1. 1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions 2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust 3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs synonym see BELIEF - in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY So lets examine these: Definition number 1 refers to "allegiance" and "fidelity to one's promises" and "sincerity of intentions". I do not see how being an Atheist necessarily implies any of the aspects of definition 1. Definition 2 seems to be dealing with religious matters but here again there is nothing which logically links Atheism with faith. For example you can be an Atheist without having a "firm belief in something for which there is no proof". Definition 3 also fails because Atheism is not something that is believed such as a system of religious beliefs. As has already been mentioned the works of George H. Smith on Atheism provide clear and very readable discussions of these matters. Also see the book The Retreat to Commitment by W. W. Bartley. Familiarity with the work of Smith and Bartley should clear up the confusion. Thus it seems to me that anyone who wants to make the statement that "Atheism is as much a matter of faith as theism" needs to provide some further argument than to merely repeat what I think I and several others have demonstrated is an incorrect statement. Fred Disclaimer: George H. Smith is a friend of mine. So, yes I am recommending books by a friend however he is one of the top authors on this subject. From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 26 02:37:31 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:37:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1101436651.18348.7112.camel@localhost> Before everyone goes too far on this I suggest that everyone remember what the article said: >Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are >excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's >journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the Colonists" >and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." News articles sometimes get the story wrong but according to this part of the news article what was rejected were "excerpts" not the entire document. Unless someone can provide more info lets remember that the story is about "excerpts". If the excerpts were selected and presented in such a manner as to provide a false impression in the minds of the students as to the nature of the documents and the document authors then that is an issue of concern. Another news article at: http://www.theargusonline.com/Stories/0,1413,83~1968~2557673,00.html is similar to the article originally sited but does provide some additional info. Also for those in other parts of the world, Cupertino is a part of the greater Silicon Valley and is generally considered to have high quality schools. People report that they moved to Cupertino to get a good education for their children. Housing prices show the premium that is paid. The population is very diverse compared to the rest of the USA. It does not surprise me that this issue is happening in Cupertino. Fred From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 26 07:53:24 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 02:53:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism (was: Structure of AI) In-Reply-To: References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> Message-ID: <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: > I do not agree with your reductionism. I don't agree that everything > real is fully reducible to physics unless much of what is meaningful to > critters like us is lost in the process. In particular I don't believe > that lack of having come up with a test for "free will" means that the > existence of free will is in doubt. I don't believe that all that is > real or important can be reduced to "testable physical predicates". John Keats: "Do not all charms fly At the touch of cold philosophy? Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings, Conquer all mysteries by rule and line, Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine? Unweave a rainbow...? I think that most of the emotional problems with reductionism arise from failure to *see* why the reduction works, and instead being only *told* that it works. Someone may have told Keats that Newton explained the rainbow, but I doubt Keats ever studied the math. Suppose that instead of reading that entire, careful mathematical explanation of Bayes' Theorem and how it relates to rationality, you knew only that the marvelous miracle of Reason was reducible to a mere couple of equations, seemingly meaningless on the page. How sad; and it seemed so wonderful up until then. To know and understand and see how Bayesian reasoning explains rationality is to explain rationality; to be merely *told* that Bayesian reasoning explains rationality is to *explain away* rationality. There is a difference between explaining, and explaining away. To be *told* that a rainbow is mere water droplets, when you've grown up believing that it's a sign of God's compact with Noah, may seem sad and disappointing - if "physics" is something foreign and external about which little is known save that it is the epitome of the mundane. I confess I don't know the specific equations of the rainbow, but I know what it feels like to understand a truth of physics. What you want is not to be told that the rainbow is mere water droplets, but to work the relevant equations, until your breath catches and you see that the water droplets are the rainbow! People don't give physics enough credit. When I say that something is reducible to physics, the correct response is not "How sad" but "Wow, really?" The most unrealistic part of Star Wars isn't the Force, it's that people notice the Force as unusual. If the Force really existed, no one would care. You could lift mountains and they'd say, "Oh, that's just the Force." If dragons existed it would be no more fun to believe in dragons than to believe in zebras. We live in a normal universe. If we cannot learn to be excited by the mundane, the physical, the merely true, our lives will be empty indeed; for since the beginning of time, not one unusual thing has ever happened. > Furthermore, I don't believe that you fully and consistently believe > this either. Them's fighting words, Samantha. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 26 08:24:28 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:24:28 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126002534.49372.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <41A61DFD.2050904@gmail.com> <20041126002534.49372.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041126002430727dca@mail.gmail.com> Thanks for the clarification Mike, now I think I understand where you stand. I also know some of these devoutly religious christian families who also are libertarians. Let's call them libertarian christians for short. But I also know, as I am sure do you, many christians of a very different sort, who launch jihads against everyone who does not think exactly like them, and want to subject everyone else to their rule. Let's call them totalitarian christians (for those who don't like my using the term taliban). Actually, I know many more totalitarian christians than libertarian christians. That may depend on the fact that I live in Southern Europe, where they had a majority for centuries. Now, I am sure you will remind me that this is perhaps not the case in Northern Europe, and definitely not the case in the US. I don't know enough American history to answer that but, on the basis of what I read in the press of both sides of the Atlantic, I fear that totalitarian christians have much more influences than libertarian christians on the policies of the current US administration. When you say "no taxes for abortion and stem cell research", as a libertarian you only object to forcing people to pay taxes to support things they don't like, not to abortion and stem cell research as such. But I have the unpleasant feeling that those who currently shape policies in the US are only against abortion and stem cell research, and not at all against forcing people to pay taxes to support things they don't like. Just give them power and time, and they will force citizens to pay MORE taxes to support developing creationist curricula for high schools, monitoring who goes to church and who does not, and launching holy wars against infidels. Think of it. G. On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:25:34 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > I also stand behind anybody who peacefully practices their faith > > (including atheism). > > My main point, which perhaps I have not expressed clearly enough, is > > this: politics created strange bedfellows, and I have the impression > > that you are now seeing christian *fundamentalists* as allies of > > libertarians in US politics (a couple of weeks ago a guy posted a > > very interesting explanation of how christian *fundamentalists* and > > libertarians manage to peacefully coexist in the Republican party). > > And I wish to warn you that, in my opinion, some of them, including > > some very close to the political powers that be, do not limit > > themselves to peacefully practicing their faith, but actively try > > to force their faith > > upon everyone else. The fact that they are in power makes them > > dangerous. Especially dangerous for Extropians when they try to shut > > down all medical research which could lead to human enhancement. > > I know several devoutly religious christian families who also are > libertarians. In their opinion, a true christian SHOULD be a > libertarian, and in their opinion is why one can believe that the US > was founded by christians, based on christian precepts, while at the > same time embracing tolerance and respect for other faiths. They find > that christianity is: > a) an inherently personal faith of a personal relationship with christ, > which cannot be imposed by government, but at the same time cannot be > suppressed by government restrictions on people testifying to their > faith. > b) a faith that requires that individuals be free to choose to sin or > not, provided only that they do not harm others (an incredibly > important caveat). Victimless "crimes" therefore, should not be > regulated or prosecuted by the state, morality should not be > legislated. If you are prevented by the state from choosing to sin or > not, then you cannot attain grace through virtue. > > Just as it is wrong for the state to impose morality, it is even more > wrong for the state to impose sin upon persons of faith. Forcing a > person to pay money in taxes, which are spent on what that persons > faith tells them is murder, is inherently wrong. For that reason, state > subsidies for abortion or stem cell research that aborts fetuses, is > also inherently wrong, no matter how beneficial you or I believe that > research is. If you believe it is beneficial, you should pay for it. > > At the same time, until science can prove that a fetus is a person, it > would be wrong for government to impose the morality of banning > abortion. Because of the prevalence of premee births, third trimester > abortion is rightly regulated and/or banned. Because of the proven lack > of neural development in first trimester fetuses, abortion is rightly > unregulated during that period. The rest is grey area left to science > to prove or disprove. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." > -William Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 26 08:05:50 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:05:50 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: Mike Lorrey, quoting the news article: >>...at Stevens Creek School in the >> San Francisco Bay area suburb of Cupertino... Spike: >I wonder how they figure Cupertino is a suburb of >San Francisco? It is closer to the more populated >city of San Jose. San Jose gets no respect. San Jose is more populated, but unless you are from California, or the from western US, the probability is low that you know where it is. I lived in Cupertino for ten years and in other parts of the Silicon Valley for four years, but if I say to people here, that I used to live near San Jose, California, then I get a blank stare. If I say that I used to live in the Silicon Valley, then I get a glimmer of recognition. And if I say that I used to live in the San Francisco Bay area, they smile and nod and tell me what a wonderful city that is (if they visited, or if it on their future vacation plans). Therefore, for me communicating with foreigners, the San Francisco area is a much simpler location for me to give to them. I'm not surprised the newspapers use it too (it would be more accurate for them to say it is in the Silicon Valley than the 'suburb' used above, though) -- Amara Graps, PhD Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI) Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica (INAF), Adjunct Assistant Professor Astronomy, AUR, Roma, ITALIA Amara.Graps at ifsi.rm.cnr.it From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 26 08:55:31 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:55:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Research policy, EU versus US Message-ID: J. Andrew Rogers andrew at ceruleansystems.com : >Both the US and Japan spend vastly more money on R&D than the entire >EU, in any relative term you care to use (per capita, percentage of >GDP, etc), and the gap in absolute terms enormous as well. True >The US regulation of research is only dangerous to the EU because the >EU doesn't do their own. The EU astrophysics and space science community would strongly disagree with you (about doing their own research, that is). The reason that some of you have not heard too much of ESA (DLR, CNES, ASI ...) research is that their public relations department is a fraction of NASA's size. >They [EU] complain about research regulation in the US, I think that you have never worked with NASA funding and their attached regulations and policies. I would take ESA funding over NASA funding any day for the ease of headaches for dealing with NASA's research restrictions. I suggest you sit in some NASA mission instrument team meetings and listen to the complaints from the scientists when they describe instrument building with their colleagues, software and hardware exchanges, on-site visits, unreliable future planning, document control, database use, for example. Amara From dirk at neopax.com Fri Nov 26 14:05:39 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:05:39 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Living in Ireland -the reality In-Reply-To: <41A6B223.9050708@ramonsky.com> References: <41A6B223.9050708@ramonsky.com> Message-ID: <41A73833.9030703@neopax.com> Alex Ramonsky wrote: > I know this is a response to a rather old post and I apologize for my > tardiness... > I lived in various counties in Ireland (Not the same thing as Northern > Ireland, BTW -there is no conflict in the South) from 1986 until 1999, > when I moved to the UK. > The bad news: > We had no electricity, no toilets, no running water. We were not > unusual. Most of our neighbors didn't either. > Since we are not catholic, there was little chance of getting employed > or a decent place to rent. We were treated as second class citizens, > known as 'blow-ins'. We were refused service in all catholic pubs and > some shops and restaurants. > We were stopped on the street by the cops regularly and searched for > no apparent reason. We were ripped off by the locals at every > opportunity. > There are drunks everywhere, and real mental cases wandering around on > the streets accosting people for money/booze. > Car insurance is prohibitively high. Irish roads (about the same > standards as much of Africa) meant we needed a new > gearbox/clutch/suspension every year or so. > It rains almost every day, and the winds are icy and blasting for much > of the year. > The attitude to science? There were 5 religious education lessons per > week in our local high school and 2 science. Catholic prayers had to > be done before and after every lesson, and in the mornings. > The good news: > You won't have to send your kids to school. (That's why we did it). > You are very unlikely to get burgled, mugged, raped, beaten up or > murdered. > Or indeed, acknowledged at all. > Enjoy. : ) > AR > Now you know why the Protestants of the North have fought tooth and nail not to be part of a united Ireland under the Xian Taliban. Of course, things are much better now than they were a few decades ago. The Eire govt no longer seeks prior approval from the Catholic Church hierarchy when making policy decisions etc -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From dirk at neopax.com Fri Nov 26 14:09:34 2004 From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:09:34 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125173747.01a93278@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125162906.01be2040@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041125231519.32899.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041125173747.01a93278@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <41A7391E.6010503@neopax.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 03:15 PM 11/25/2004 -0800, Adrian wrote: > >> The vast majority of attempts to recreate these >> phenomena under conditions of scientific testing have >> failed. > > > What comprises a `vast majority'? More than half, clearly. More than > 90%? But again, if the latter, this is simply inconsistent with the > results found by a number of meta-analyses conducted by competent > statisticians during the last decade or so. In general, the effect > sizes remain stable, if small; the number of experiments that fail to > repudiate the null is about in accordance with the number one must > expect (due to noise, etc) in any ensemble of tests of a small-effect > phenomenon. Read Prof Jessica Utts on this: > http://anson.ucdavis.edu/~utts/ > E.g.: http://anson.ucdavis.edu/%7Eutts/JSE1999.pdf > >> Furthermore, given the many many experiments that >> have been conducted, it is expected that a few would >> show anomalous results, even just among the legit >> ones. > > > The well-known file-drawer hypothesis. This is an ongoing discussion > in the scientific-paranormal community, but the consensus remains, I > gather, that the number of competent experiments unpublished due to > null results required to offset the data summarized in various > meta-analyses is so absurdly large that the hypothesis is itself found > to be extremely improbable. > The problem is that there has been no major progess in the field for decades. There is no plausible and testable theory to explain the results, and no method of amplifying the effects to a real macro level. Although, having said that I suggest you read an essay of mine concerning some work done in Toronto 30yrs ago (and as far as I can discover, not repeated or attempted again in recent years) http://www.neopax.com/asatru/pk/index.html -- Dirk The Consensus:- The political party for the new millenium http://www.theconsensus.org From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 14:42:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 06:42:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <1101434165.20563.7071.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote:> > Definition 2 seems to be dealing with religious matters but here > again there is nothing which logically links Atheism with faith. For > example you can be an Atheist without having a "firm belief in > something for which there is no proof". On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim that there is no God, or other universe-creator-being, humanity-creator-being, etc... is a claim to a proof which is not in evidence, and, given the Simulation Argument, is contrary to evidence currently available. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From neptune at superlink.net Fri Nov 26 14:47:00 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:47:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041126015527.59750.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <1101434165.20563.7071.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <003801c4d3c6$c9a90860$74893cd1@pavilion> On Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:56 PM Fred C. Moulton moulton at moulton.com wrote: > Part of the problem in this discussion is that > the word faith has multiple uses. I agree, but of the ones you list below, only 2b (1) is relevant. Generally, there are three ways I've noticed people use "faith." One is as a synonym for "confidence" -- as in "I have faith that Joe can do the job." This type of faith has nothing to do with this issue and, in fact, does not have any major epistemological ramifications. It's purely a stand in for "confidence." Of course, the usual dyad with this type of faith is faith/skepticism -- "I have faith Joe can do the job" and "You are skeptical that he can." But people typically use both terms in this context to refer to stuff that can rely on arguments and evidence. E.g., "I have faith Joe can do the job because I've seen him in action before and know his qualities." It's not blind faith. E.g., "You are skeptical that Joe can because it's a tough job -- tougher than anything he's ever done before and more experienced people than he have failed." (I.e., it's not radical skepticism or blind faith in either case.) Another one is belief without justification -- "firm belief in something for which there is no proof." This could even meaning holding a believe that seems logically or evidentially consistent with the rest of one's beliefs, but for which there's no particular decesive proof or evidence for it one way or the other. (An example could be belief that there's intelligent life on other worlds. Notice that this isn't really all that radical a claim.) A third and much more radical one is Tertullian's type of faith -- believing something because it goes against proof and evidence -- believing things because they are impossible or illogical, actually contradition logic and the evidence. To put it bluntly: holding an irrational belief. (Tertullian and many of the early Church fathers were quite specific about this too. It wasn't some Ancient atheists who pointed this out to them, but they who brought it up themselves.) Most Christian theologians and philosophers have adamantly argued for faith of the third kind above -- Tertullian's "I believe it because it's impossible." I'm not sure any major Christian thinker or church holds otherwise. Leaving aside the first type of faith, as it has nothing to do with this issue, were there no evidence and no valid arguments for or against God/gods, then both the atheist and the theist would be left with faith of the second kind above. They'd either have to believe or not believe without proof or evidence. However, there are arguments that tip the balance in favor of the atheist, starting with the Stratoconian Presumption -- there must be sufficient reason to postulate God/gods* -- to showing that the concept of God/gods is contradictory (detailed in Smith _Atheism: The Case Against God_ and many other books on atheism) to [I hate to bring him up] Leonard Peikoff's "primacy of existence" argument (detailed in his _Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand_). This answers Mike Lorrey's view that "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Granted, but this doesn't apply in this case. The arguments listed above weigh against God/gods. The Simulation Argument also is not relevant either, since those creating a simulation would not really be God/gods -- no more than someone making a film or writing a book is God. Yes, one could logically believe that this universe was made by intelligent beings, but that would make those intelligent beings gods -- except metaphorically. There's also a difference between the ontology and the cognition here. Any given theist might believe in God/gods out of ignorance of these arguments and without sufficient familiarity with the evidence. That wouldn't mean she or he believed on either type of faith. In her or his context, there would be some validation -- though faulty and based on ignorance -- for the belief. However, this is the cognitive side -- looking at why someone believes what they do NOT whether the particular belief is true. I'm only bringing this up because one shouldn't presume that because a person holds a wrong belief, she or he is holding it on the kind of radical, Tertullian faith. However, a person holding a wrong belief is still holding a wrong believe. A young child might believe the Earth is flat because it looks flat, when, in fact, it's not. Her or his belief is not irrational, but it is wrong. > The Merriam-Webster online dictionary > may not be the world's best but since > the online OED requires a subscription > I will take the definition found at: > http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=faith&x=0&y=0 > Dropping the derivation info we have left: > 1. 1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY > b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of > intentions > 2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : > belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion > b (1) : firm belief in something for which there > is no proof (2) : complete trust > 3 : something that is believed especially with > strong conviction; especially : a system of > religious beliefs synonym see BELIEF > - in faith : without doubt or question : VERILY > > So lets examine these: > > Definition number 1 refers to "allegiance" > and "fidelity to one's promises" and "sincerity > of intentions". I do not see how being an > Atheist necessarily implies any of the aspects > of definition 1. Granted, but see above. This type of faith really is not germane to the issue. It's merely a synonym for loyalty. > Definition 2 seems to be dealing with religious > matters but here again there is nothing which > logically links Atheism with faith. For example > you can be an Atheist without having a "firm > belief in something for which there is no proof". Right, and this fits with both the second and third kinds of atheism list by me above -- belief without proof or belief against proof. > Definition 3 also fails because Atheism is > not something that is believed such as a > system of religious beliefs. Well, to use "faith" as a stand in for "strong conviction" is also outside the scope of atheism/theism. One could have strong or weak convictions in either. It's not epistemologically decisive. But you're right in that atheism is not a system of beliefs. It's merely the lack of one belief. This explains, e.g., many strands of secular humanism and even Marxism on some level. They tend to hold many beliefs that're similar to Christianity, specifically the moral precepts. This is not an attack on Christianity or any of these belief systems. I'm only illustrating that the belief in God component doesn't seem essential for all the doctrines of any given religion. (I bring this up because a typical refrain from religious types is that if you don't believe in God, you don't believe in anything and they often package-deal atheism with skepticism, nihilism, cynicism, etc.) > As has already been mentioned the works > of George H. Smith on Atheism provide > clear and very readable discussions of > these matters. Also see the book The > Retreat to Commitment by W. W. Bartley. > Familiarity with the work of Smith and > Bartley should clear up the confusion. While Bartley does show how Protestanism evolve to immunize itself from any proof, the same holds for Christianity in general and his Pancritical Rationalism has its problems. See my "Comments on Pancritical Rationalism" at: http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/PCR.html > Thus it seems to me that anyone who > wants to make the statement that "Atheism > is as much a matter of faith as theism" needs > to provide some further argument than to > merely repeat what I think I and several others > have demonstrated is an incorrect statement. I agree, though with the qualification of my comments in this and my earlier post. Any particular person may believe just about anything on the kind of epistemic faith discussed above. However, if one proceeds to actually looking for arguments and evidence for this question, one will find that theists will have to yield the field -- either changing their belief or adopting/admitting faith as the ground of their belief in God/gods. > Disclaimer: George H. Smith is a friend of > mine. So, yes I am recommending books > by a friend however he is one of the top > authors on this subject. Irrelevant.:) Regards, Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/FamilySOG.html * This is usually stated that the burden of proof is on those proposing new/unknown entities like God/gods. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 14:57:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 06:57:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <1101436651.18348.7112.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <20041126145713.75279.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote: > > Before everyone goes too far on this I suggest that everyone remember > what the article said: > > >Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are > >excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's > >journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the > Colonists" > >and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." > > News articles sometimes get the story wrong but according to this > part > of the news article what was rejected were "excerpts" not the entire > document. Unless someone can provide more info lets remember that > the story is about "excerpts". If the excerpts were selected and > presented > in such a manner as to provide a false impression in the minds of the > students as to the nature of the documents and the document authors > then that is an issue of concern. On the contrary, I don't think it is germaine. Even if the teacher were specifically teaching these exerpts as part of a module regarding the religious basis for the colonizing of the US, it was entirely within her responsibility to teach that REAL history. I saw another article yesterday in which Maryland public schools are banning teachers from teaching students that the "Thanksgiving" the pilgrims were giving were to god. Instead, they are presenting it solely as a giving of thanks to the local native Americans who they invited to their feast. This absurd and revisionist view of history is exactly what is wrong and what I am talking about. Whatever you think about religion of any kind, it is entirely wrong to rewrite history in order to write religion out of it. It is classic atheist agit-prop to write out of history all the good things done in the name of religion, while emphasizing all the bad things. This illustrates the inherent irrationality of many/most atheists. Another revision is the claim on this list yesterday that many of the founding fathers were atheist. This is bogus. Jefferson was a religious man who wrote his own version of the bible to eliminate what he saw as a cult of personality regarding christ. The least religious people were unitarians or universalists, which were not the same thing then as they are now. They were still quite christian in character then. I challenge Samantha and others to actually name any of the signers of the D of I or the Constitution who were avowed atheists. At the time, all colonies had proscriptions against atheists taking office. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 26 14:57:13 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:57:13 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism next week on Radio Netherlands Message-ID: <470a3c520411260657492e7687@mail.gmail.com> Each week the English language service of Radio Netherlands presents Amsterdam Forum - a current affairs discussion programme hosted by Andy Clark. Listeners from over 60 countries have taken part, sending in questions and comments for the show. Next week: World's most dangerous idea? Human enhancement the key to eternal life. Want to live forever? Well, who knows, maybe you can. At least if the boldest claims of a movement known as transhumanism prove to be true. Transhumanists want to liberate the human race from its biological constraints and they say this will be possible by using advances being made in biotechnology. Human enhancement is key to the philosophy with radical life extensions, hundreds of years, thousands even, being made possible by employing the latest techniques. Proponents of transhumanism say nanotechnology will allow humans to radically rebuild and extend their bodies - this will be done with the help of 'nanobots' - tiny robots smaller than human blood cells that will travel around the body fixing DNA errors, fighting poisons and expanding intelligence. Science fiction? Not necessarily so, even the critics admit that much of the research being done in biotechnology can be as readily turned to human enhancement as it can to human repair. Transhumanist also say in the future protection against fatal accidents could be offered by 'mind uploading' - making a back up copy of the content of your brain to be re-used in a new brain in case of the worst. And if the technology is developing a little more slowly than planned there's always 'cryonics' - freezing your body after death to be thawed out a few decades later when science has the 'nanobots' ready to go. Leading US author and political thinker Francis Fukuyama, who's also a member of the US President's Council on Bioethics, has described transhumanism as the world's most dangerous idea - fearing it will undermine humanity's underlying equality of rights. But what do you think? Is transhumanism to be feared or should the goal of transcending our current physical limitations be one that we embrace? Have your say: Our panellists: Dr. James Hughes Ph.D. teaches Health Policy at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, and serves as Trinity's Associate Director of Institutional Research and Planning. Dr. Hughes also serves as the Executive Director of the World Transhumanist Association. He's also the author of Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future. The other speaker is yet to be confirmed. http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/features/amsterdamforum/041129af From neptune at superlink.net Fri Nov 26 15:01:54 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:01:54 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005401c4d3c8$de89a8a0$74893cd1@pavilion> On Friday, November 26, 2004 9:42 AM Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com wrote: >> Definition 2 seems to be dealing with >> religious matters but here again there >> is nothing which logically links Atheism >> with faith. For example you can be an >> Atheist without having a "firm belief in >> something for which there is no proof". > > On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim > that there is no God, or other universe- > creator-being, humanity-creator-being, > etc... is a claim to a proof which is not in > evidence, and, given the Simulation > Argument, is contrary to evidence > currently available. Au contrare! Mike conflates "God" with creator-being, especially for such mundane things as creating humanity. The God meant by theism is a God that literally is transcendent -- beyond reality. It may be a creator, but if so, then can create everything else -- the simulation and whatever is outside it. Either way, it is beyond everything else -- beyond the simulation and what's outside it. Now, just from a common sense viewpoint, when someone writes a computer game (or a novel), daydreams, or builds a house, one does not call that person God and wouldn't confuse her with the God as meant by theism. When one does -- assuming one isn't mad:) -- one is only being metaphorical and not implying that the writer, daydreamer, builder, whatever is really a god, a transcendent being. Further the Simulation Argument per se does not really speak to this matter -- it can not ground belief in a supernatural God of the kind theism posits -- but even if it did it would require some kind of validation. I think a lot of people buy into it and earlier versions of it -- like Descartes _malin genie_ and Berkeley's view that everything is in the mind of God -- without really considering that. Regards, Dan See "Family, Social Order, and Government" at: http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/FamilySOG.html "It is appropriate here to recall that the so-called Dark Ages began with the flight of the individuals into the protection of lords or chapters and came to an end when the individual again found it to his advantage to set forth on his own. We live at a time when everything conspires to push the individual into the fold." -- Bertrand de Jouvenel From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 15:03:54 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:03:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <003801c4d3c6$c9a90860$74893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20041126150354.67824.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Technotranscendence wrote:> > Another one is belief without justification -- "firm belief in > something for which there is no proof." This could even meaning > holding a believe that seems logically or evidentially consistent > with the rest of one's beliefs, but for which there's no > particular decesive proof or evidence for it one way or the other. > (An example could be belief that there's intelligent life on other > worlds. Notice that this isn't really all that radical a claim.) > > A third and much more radical one is Tertullian's type of faith -- > believing something because it goes against proof and evidence -- > believing things because they are impossible or illogical, actually > contradition logic and the evidence. To put it bluntly: holding an > irrational belief. Well, in that case I can clearly state that atheism is a tertullian form of faith, particularly because it is inherently impossible to prove a negative, i.e. it is impossible to prove the non-existence of God. Ergo, atheists believe the impossible. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 26 15:05:15 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:05:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Researchers and students in America Message-ID: Some of this is old and already discussed (here in the past), but I think it is useful to see it presented in one place by a foreign (nonUS) newspaper, and for another perspective. http://www.corriere.it/english/editoriali/Gaggi/23_11_04.shtml Researchers and students in America "Non-domestic companies are no longer sourcing supplies in the United States, or taking part in trade fairs and other events, because their executives cannot obtain an entry visa. American manufacturers are accusing the government of preventing them from recruiting overseas specialists - engineers and researchers in particular - who are hard to find in the US. The number of foreign students enrolling at American universities has fallen for the first time in 30 years because of visa procedures that resemble a frustrating, months-long obstacle course, often ending in a refusal. This could well be the most burdensome legacy of 9/11. America is spending billions on antiterrorism technology, from bomb-sniffing robots to X-rays that reveal the contents of a truck. But the real price of shielding America, which started with the Patriot Act passed just after the World Trade Center attack, is being paid elsewhere, in the visa clampdown-induced loss of economic activity, already in excess of 30 billion dollars. There is another, unquantifiable but potentially enormous, loss in the reduced inflow of non-domestic brainpower, which for decades has been the engine driving the country's main scientific and industrial successes." [full article follows, see the link above] 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 fault, dear Brutus, lies not in the stars, but in ourselves." -- Shakespeare From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Nov 26 15:31:03 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 07:31:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041126150354.67824.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000701c4d3cc$f1f941d0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > --- Technotranscendence wrote:> > > A third and much more radical one is Tertullian's type of faith -- > > believing something because it goes against proof and evidence -- > > believing things because they are impossible or illogical, actually > > contradition logic and the evidence. To put it bluntly: holding an > > irrational belief. > > Well, in that case I can clearly state that atheism is a tertullian > form of faith, particularly because it is inherently impossible to > prove a negative, i.e. it is impossible to prove the non-existence of > God. Ergo, atheists believe the impossible. And one can just as clearly state that amermaidism, asantaclausism, aleprechaunism, amoonmaidenism, apurplepeopleism, afirebirism, atoothfairism (and any other such "faith" driven convictions) are Tertullian. By the way, Mike, which god are you talking about here ...? Olga From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 16:34:11 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 08:34:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <005401c4d3c8$de89a8a0$74893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20041126163411.89081.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Technotranscendence wrote: > On Friday, November 26, 2004 9:42 AM Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com > wrote: > >> Definition 2 seems to be dealing with > >> religious matters but here again there > >> is nothing which logically links Atheism > >> with faith. For example you can be an > >> Atheist without having a "firm belief in > >> something for which there is no proof". > > > > On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim > > that there is no God, or other universe- > > creator-being, humanity-creator-being, > > etc... is a claim to a proof which is not in > > evidence, and, given the Simulation > > Argument, is contrary to evidence > > currently available. > > Au contrare! Mike conflates "God" with creator-being, especially for > such mundane things as creating humanity. The God meant by theism is > a God that literally is transcendent -- beyond reality. It may be a > creator, but if so, then can create everything else -- the simulation > and whatever is outside it. Either way, it is beyond everything else > -- beyond the simulation and what's outside it. Quite wrong. Firstly, pre-christian and early christian theists had no concept of multi-verse theory, at least not in that region of the world, so this universe/simulation is the extent of the boundary between natural and supernatural. Secondly, you are confusing late judaic monotheism/monodeisms with other theisms and/or deisms. Particularly, christianity is monotheistic/polydeistic in that its is focused at least equally upon Christ, the son, as on Yahweh, the father, as well as upon Mary the mother in many instances (and then you have that holy spirit/ghost thing to worry about), and beyond them, the whole panoply of the archangels, angels, seraphim, etc. as well as demons, devils, succubi and Satan/Lucifer. This polydeism is not unique, as it was also characteristic of the early jewish faith, with its worship of both Yahweh (El or Enki), Asherah (Eve), Marduk, Baal, etc. Early judaism did not say there were not other gods, only that worshiping any of them but Yahweh was a sin. Furthermore, many other theisms recognise deities created by a creator god, who themselves were responsible for creation of mankind. > > Now, just from a common sense viewpoint, when someone writes a > computer game (or a novel), daydreams, or builds a house, one does > not call that > person God and wouldn't confuse her with the God as meant by theism. > When one does -- assuming one isn't mad:) -- one is only being > metaphorical and not implying that the writer, daydreamer, builder, > whatever is really a god, a transcendent being. To any sentient inhabitant of a simulation universe, its creator is a transcendant being, as is any agent of that creator capable of jockeying the rules beyond the capacity of naturally evolved sentients within that simulation universe. > > Further the Simulation Argument per se does not really speak to this > matter -- it can not ground belief in a supernatural God of the kind > theism posits -- but even if it did it would require some kind of > validation. I think a lot of people buy into it and earlier versions > of it -- like Descartes _malin genie_ and Berkeley's view that > everything > is in the mind of God -- without really considering that. On the contrary, you apparently have not read the Simulation Argument in any detail. I suggest you do so. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 16:41:15 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 08:41:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <000701c4d3cc$f1f941d0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041126164115.73984.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Mike Lorrey" > > Well, in that case I can clearly state that atheism is a tertullian > > form of faith, particularly because it is inherently impossible to > > prove a negative, i.e. it is impossible to prove the non-existence > of > > God. Ergo, atheists believe the impossible. > > And one can just as clearly state that amermaidism, asantaclausism, > aleprechaunism, amoonmaidenism, apurplepeopleism, afirebirism, > atoothfairism > (and any other such "faith" driven convictions) are Tertullian. > > By the way, Mike, which god are you talking about here ...? Doesn't matter. Your reducto ad absurdum is irrelevant, because they are all subunits of the broad atheism/theism faith duality set. The only POV outside that set is agnosticism, which essentially tells both sides that none of them know enough to justify a claim one way or the other. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 16:42:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 08:42:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Researchers and students in America In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041126164259.87070.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> If there is such a visa clamp down, why is it that the pre-existing H1-B quota was exhausted on the first day of the fiscal year? --- Amara Graps wrote: > > Some of this is old and already discussed (here in the past), but I > think it is useful to see it presented in one place by a foreign > (nonUS) newspaper, and for another perspective. > > > http://www.corriere.it/english/editoriali/Gaggi/23_11_04.shtml > > Researchers and students in America > > "Non-domestic companies are no longer sourcing supplies in the United > States, or taking part in trade fairs and other events, because their > executives cannot obtain an entry visa. American manufacturers are > accusing the government of preventing them from recruiting overseas > specialists - engineers and researchers in particular - who are hard > to find in the US. The number of foreign students enrolling at > American universities has fallen for the first time in 30 years > because of visa procedures that resemble a frustrating, months-long > obstacle course, often ending in a refusal. This could well be the > most burdensome legacy of 9/11. America is spending billions on > antiterrorism technology, from bomb-sniffing robots to X-rays that > reveal the contents of a truck. But the real price of shielding > America, which started with the Patriot Act passed just after the > World Trade Center attack, is being paid elsewhere, in the visa > clampdown-induced loss of economic activity, already in excess of 30 > billion dollars. There is another, unquantifiable but potentially > enormous, loss in the reduced inflow of non-domestic brainpower, > which > for decades has been the engine driving the country's main scientific > and industrial successes." > > [full article follows, see the link above] > > 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 fault, dear Brutus, lies not in the stars, but in ourselves." > -- Shakespeare > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 26 16:54:42 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:54:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041126145713.75279.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000e01c4d3d8$a0716840$8bb32643@kevin> I've been following this thread and I felt it necessary to put my two cents in. I am an atheist and I am raising my children atheists. Most of my parents, sister, aunts, uncles, and friends, are Christians. They are all aware of my atheism as I am quite open and honest about it. As they try to "convert" me, I try to convert them. I feel it is my mission in life to convert as many of these Christians to rational thinking as possible. That being said, I have to agree with Mike here. History is full of religious figures. Some are bad, some are good. Being religious doesn;t make someone bad. Lots of christians do great things. If person X believe that God motivated them, or that God helped them accomplish something, then when writing about X's actions in a historical perspective, it must be written that X believed that God helped or motivated them. If we are then to teach the history of X's actions, it must be taught that X believed that God helped them. It is important to note the difference between teaching children that X believed that God helped him, and teaching that God helped X. The latter suggests that God is real and that the help he received was in fact from God. The former only teaches that X had these beliefs. Mike's brief paragraph on the Founding Fathers' religions is consistent with what I have read in the past as well. I have stumbled upon a lot of material online that claimed that many of them were Deist, atheist, or agnostic and have found these claims to be inconsistent with the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. As much as I would like to think that Jefferson was an atheist, I am afraid it is simply not true. These people were motivated at the time by their religious beliefs. Jefferson comitted sins (according to his religious beliefs) but this does not mean that he did not believe. It only means that he was a human being capable of sinning and asking God for forgiveness. (or whatever his particular denomination did when dealing with such things) Their religious motivation is a historical fact. I truly wish that it were otherwise, but it is not. Until Darwin, most scientists were religious and the job of a naturalist was to describe God's work. Many prominent "scientists" of the day went out of their way to keep God in the picture, but even Darwin had trouble accepting his own findings. This is one of the reasons he did not publish his findings until someone ealse was about to publish the same thing. The period we are talking about however is 100 years before Darwin. The people were social leaders, not scientists. I doubt that any of them were atheists. If even one of them was, they would have went out of their way to make sure that this was not known. History does suggest that a few of them at times had questioned their faith, but this is a common trait of people of any religion. In Christianity, the questioning of faith is accepted as the work of the devil. History is History. It is always written by the winners, and is somewhat subject to perspective, but changing facts to suit fads is totally different. I think the atheist movement needs to grow on it's own through truth, logic, rationality, and understanding. Attempting to change history to suit atheist objectives will only harm atheism in the long run. I have always seen atheism as the end result in the search for truth. If atheism itself is considered a religion of truth, these tactics are those of hypocrites. The thinking behind this does not seem to fit with what I see as true atheist objectives. If it were not for the support of some on this list, I would have thought this entire thing was a scam conducted by covert religious operatives determined to make atheists look like evil morons. Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 8:57 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... > > --- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote: > > > > > Before everyone goes too far on this I suggest that everyone remember > > what the article said: > > > > >Among the materials she has rejected, according to Williams, are > > >excerpts from the Declaration of Independence, George Washington's > > >journal, John Adams' diary, Samuel Adams' "The Rights of the > > Colonists" > > >and William Penn's "The Frame of Government of Pennsylvania." > > > > News articles sometimes get the story wrong but according to this > > part > > of the news article what was rejected were "excerpts" not the entire > > document. Unless someone can provide more info lets remember that > > the story is about "excerpts". If the excerpts were selected and > > presented > > in such a manner as to provide a false impression in the minds of the > > students as to the nature of the documents and the document authors > > then that is an issue of concern. > > On the contrary, I don't think it is germaine. Even if the teacher were > specifically teaching these exerpts as part of a module regarding the > religious basis for the colonizing of the US, it was entirely within > her responsibility to teach that REAL history. I saw another article > yesterday in which Maryland public schools are banning teachers from > teaching students that the "Thanksgiving" the pilgrims were giving were > to god. Instead, they are presenting it solely as a giving of thanks to > the local native Americans who they invited to their feast. > > This absurd and revisionist view of history is exactly what is wrong > and what I am talking about. Whatever you think about religion of any > kind, it is entirely wrong to rewrite history in order to write > religion out of it. > > It is classic atheist agit-prop to write out of history all the good > things done in the name of religion, while emphasizing all the bad > things. This illustrates the inherent irrationality of many/most > atheists. > > Another revision is the claim on this list yesterday that many of the > founding fathers were atheist. This is bogus. Jefferson was a religious > man who wrote his own version of the bible to eliminate what he saw as > a cult of personality regarding christ. The least religious people were > unitarians or universalists, which were not the same thing then as they > are now. They were still quite christian in character then. I challenge > Samantha and others to actually name any of the signers of the D of I > or the Constitution who were avowed atheists. At the time, all colonies > had proscriptions against atheists taking office. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH > "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!? > Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! > http://my.yahoo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From amara at amara.com Fri Nov 26 17:02:32 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:02:32 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Researchers and students in America Message-ID: Mike Lorrey: >If there is such a visa clamp down, why is it that the pre-existing >H1-B quota was exhausted on the first day of the fiscal year? Backlog from waiting for one or two years? I don't know if you are questioning the basic premise of the article, but for me it is old news, the visa restrictions have been written about in the last years in all of the periodicals to which I subscribe. For example, Physics today was printing a new report on the visa restrictions every few months. Nature and Science and The Economist have printed articles once in a while on this topic too. You should be able to find more information on the web. Have a good weekend. Amara From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 17:16:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:16:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Researchers and students in America In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041126171653.94426.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > Mike Lorrey: > >If there is such a visa clamp down, why is it that the pre-existing > >H1-B quota was exhausted on the first day of the fiscal year? > > Backlog from waiting for one or two years? > > I don't know if you are questioning the basic premise of the article, > but for me it is old news, the visa restrictions have been written > about in the last years in all of the periodicals to which I > subscribe. I find the claims of corporations to be specious when there are many thousands of highly trained Americans out of work because their jobs have been offshored, downsized, reengineered, etc. I have my own experience with the H1-B program and know that many companies abuse the system. Many get bought by foreign interests that want to ship their own people into the country, while in other instances, professionals deliberately write job descriptions so narrowly that they exclude any local people who are completely capable of doing the work, so they can justify giving a person they are friends with the job and get them into the US on an H1-B, or get a job for the unmarried significant other of a person they are already bringing into the country. This especially occurs quite frequently in academia. I have seen it occuring frequently at Dartmouth, for instance. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 26 17:42:20 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:42:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism next week on Radio Netherlands In-Reply-To: <470a3c520411260657492e7687@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041126174220.51607.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> It might be interesting to hear the results of this... --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/features/amsterdamforum/041129af ...but the above page, which might be of use in finding the results after the show, is 404. From hal at finney.org Fri Nov 26 17:54:09 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:54:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041126175409.3711157E2B@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > To any sentient inhabitant of a simulation universe, its creator is a > transcendant being, as is any agent of that creator capable of > jockeying the rules beyond the capacity of naturally evolved sentients > within that simulation universe. If and when we become uploads, then everyone outside will be transcendent beings? Nonsense! People will be able to participate in simulations all they want without any such metaphysical alterations in the nature of other inhabitants of the larger world. And it doesn't make any difference if you know you're in a simulation or not. How could such knowledge make a difference about whether an external observer was God? That doesn't make any sense to me. I would also like to echo Olga's question to Mike, whether you think that non-belief in leprechauns is merely a matter of faith and whether all of your arguments would apply with equal force to that case. Hal From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Nov 26 19:07:26 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:07:26 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism next week on Radio Netherlands In-Reply-To: <20041126174220.51607.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126174220.51607.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A77EEE.7050803@gmail.com> Try this: http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/features/amsterdamforum/amfor I am sure thay must hace changed the url in the last hour, better use the top page http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/ and look for it. G. Adrian Tymes wrote: > It might be interesting to hear the results of this... > > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/features/amsterdamforum/041129af > > ...but the above page, which might be of use in > finding the results after the show, is 404. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From hal at finney.org Fri Nov 26 18:06:42 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:06:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041126180642.CFB2F57E2B@finney.org> Amara writes: > San Jose is more populated, but unless you are from California, or the > from western US, the probability is low that you know where it is. Of course this problem was immortalized in the song of the lost traveller: "Do you know the way to San Jose?" From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 26 15:26:59 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:26:59 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1101482818.18348.7363.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:42, Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote:> > > Definition 2 seems to be dealing with religious matters but here > > again there is nothing which logically links Atheism with faith. For > > example you can be an Atheist without having a "firm belief in > > something for which there is no proof". > > On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim that there is no God, or > other universe-creator-being, humanity-creator-being, etc... is a claim > to a proof which is not in evidence, and, given the Simulation > Argument, is contrary to evidence currently available. > Mike I think you may have made an editing error because what you sent does not address the point I was making. You may want to try again. Fred From moulton at moulton.com Fri Nov 26 15:49:49 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:49:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126145713.75279.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126145713.75279.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1101484189.18348.7390.camel@localhost> On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:57, Mike Lorrey wrote: > On the contrary, I don't think it is germaine. Even if the teacher were > specifically teaching these exerpts as part of a module regarding the > religious basis for the colonizing of the US, it was entirely within > her responsibility to teach that REAL history. But it is how the excerpts are used that is the the question. Using excerpts to provide an accurate and full view of history is one thing, to use excerpts to provide a distorted view of history is another. We do not have sufficient evidence before us to know which I suggest we avoid jumping to unfounded conclusions. > This absurd and revisionist view of history is exactly what is wrong > and what I am talking about. Whatever you think about religion of any > kind, it is entirely wrong to rewrite history in order to write > religion out of it. As I said above we do not know the details of the case so we can not come to a conclusion about the Cupertino situation. As for the participants in this discussion I do not recall anyone attempting to rewrite history. If you think someone has then please quote the specific passage from their message. > It is classic atheist agit-prop to write out of history all the good > things done in the name of religion, while emphasizing all the bad > things. This illustrates the inherent irrationality of many/most > atheists. Given the number of Atheists who post messages here I am curious how you divide them up. How many have inherent irrationality? A few, some, most, all? And what about some famous Atheists such as Richard Dawkins for example. Provide the names of the ones you think suffer from inherent irrationality. Further I know many Atheists and am a member of many Atheist groups and I do not know any major Atheist group that wants to "write out of history all the good things done in the name of religion". Since you refer to "classic atheist agit-prop" provide specific references to page numbers in books or journals to back up your claim. I would not be surprised if you can find one or two somewhere since there is always an uninformed individual or two in most historical movements but I doubt you find credible evidence of any major atheist campaign to rewrite history. You made a claim now provide some specific evidence, vague accusations do not cut it. Fred From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 26 19:02:50 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 11:02:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Movie: WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041125175511.01c3cec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041126190250.64642.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 03:15 PM 11/25/2004 -0800, Adrian wrote: > > > Preferably, > > > find and assess more complete accounts of the > trials > > > on Suitbert's site. > > > >Or better yet, on some independent sites whose > >maintainers not only have practice in reviewing > >claims of this nature, but who also dedicate their > >time to reviewing them so the rest of us can spend > our > >time the way we wish to. > > This is very nearly impossible to achieve, I think. > `Independent' in such a > vexed topic means `as yet unpersuaded'. No. I meant "independent" as in "trying to get to the truth regardless of which side the truth happens to be on". One can be persuaded of one side or the other at the moment, but still be willing to analyze new evidence that might support the side one is not currently on. (Note that I'm not claiming this for myself. Again, I'm leaving this role to those who do choose to use their time this way.) > If this > did happen, and was filmed, and I affirmed upon my > life that it was not > fraudulent, would you, Adrian, take this testimony > as evidence of anything > other than my credulity or bogosity? I'd take it as testimony. I'd also look for testimony of how - or if - you looked for ways you might have been intentionally or unintentionally tricked. If I saw no such efforts, I would want said efforts to be made before ascribing a non-low level of confidence that the testimony accurately described anything more than merely what appeared to happen (as opposed to what really happened). I recall a thread, not that many months ago, where people were abuzz about a "psi experiment" where you would mentally select one card out of six on a Web site, click a button (that had nothing to do with which card you selected), and the card you had selected disappeared. People wondered if this was "proof" of psi potential, until the trick was explained: all six cards were replaced with five others, so whichever specific one you chose would be missing as well (and you didn't pay as much attention to the other five, so you didn't notice the other five being replaced). Given the high number of such incidents, merely observing something that seems on first glance to be psi is far more likely to be a false positive than a true positive. > What *would* it > take? A theory that > explains it, perhaps. That too. A theory that leads to other, testable experiments that can be conducted without the original forumlator's knowledge. (The laws of physics are the laws of physics, and don't care who knows them. But someone perpetuating a hoax - including to oneself, unconsciously - usually has to be at least aware of all aspects of the hoax to prevent it from being unraveled quickly.) > I don't know, it's very > unsettling. If I ever do see > people I trust bending metal by pure force of > personality (rather than just > being told about it), and if I learn how to do it > myself, I'll be very > tempted to shut up about it. I wouldn't. If psi really did exist, the world could be radically improved, and some of that would come back to benefit me. Indeed, the amount of that benefit if the whole world knew how to do it would seemingly likely exceed the personal benefit I could get from keeping the knowledge restricted. So it'd be in my own interests to make sure many people knew how to do this. And then there's the separate issue of having good confidence that I actually had what I thought I had. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 26 19:18:44 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:18:44 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence Message-ID: <002101c4d3ec$bf705850$8bb32643@kevin> While we are discussing some issues regarding the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, I was wondering if anyone knew of a movement to change the words "person" and "people" to read "intelligent beings"of something similar. Currently all rights guaranteed in the Constitution are granted to "people" and nothing more. If you go deeper, you begin to realize that a "person" is not very well defined. When the constitution was written, blacks were considered to be less than human and therefore were not allowed equal rights as whites. It seems that now would be a good time to replace the word "person" with something else, or at least redefine "person" as any sentient being. Kevin Freels -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naddy at mips.inka.de Fri Nov 26 19:41:01 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:41:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Researchers and students in America References: <20041126164259.87070.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Mike Lorrey wrote: > If there is such a visa clamp down, why is it that the pre-existing > H1-B quota was exhausted on the first day of the fiscal year? The article Amara quoted talks about visas for researchers, students, and business visitors. H1B visas are for guest workers, that's a different beast. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 26 20:21:21 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:21:21 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism In-Reply-To: <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> Message-ID: <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> I do not agree with your reductionism. I don't agree that everything >> real is fully reducible to physics unless much of what is meaningful >> to critters like us is lost in the process. In particular I don't >> believe that lack of having come up with a test for "free will" means >> that the existence of free will is in doubt. I don't believe that >> all that is real or important can be reduced to "testable physical >> predicates". > > > John Keats: > > "Do not all charms fly > At the touch of cold philosophy? > Philosophy will clip an Angel's wings, > Conquer all mysteries by rule and line, > Empty the haunted air, and gnomed mine? > Unweave a rainbow...? > > I think that most of the emotional problems with reductionism arise > from failure to *see* why the reduction works, and instead being only > *told* that it works. Someone may have told Keats that Newton > explained the rainbow, but I doubt Keats ever studied the math. > Suppose that instead of reading that entire, careful mathematical > explanation of Bayes' Theorem and how it relates to rationality, you > knew only that the marvelous miracle of Reason was reducible to a mere > couple of equations, seemingly meaningless on the page. How sad; and > it seemed so wonderful up until then. > What makes you think I was giving evidence of an "emotional problem" with this sort of reductionism? Let me go at a subpart of this from a slightly different angle. If given that you do not have such a useful physical test for what is commonly referred to as "free will" and thus doubt its existence, what does this actually gain for you? If you actually started treating people and situations as if free will was nonexistent would this make you more capable in interactions with people or less so? More generally, the formal foundations of many types of assumptions and tools we use every day often lags the usefulness of those tools and assumptions and may in fact never be done. We would be foolish and somewhat boorish to take every opportunity to heap scorn on all such as we do not have good formalisms and proofs for them. It is true enough that we can and should leave rooms for doubt concerning them or their actual meaning, explanation and inter-relatedness as we obviously do not understand them fully. As has been brought out many times here reducing all things to physics does not make all things more understandable. Some things lose much of their menaing when such a reduction is applied. This doesn't mean they were meaningless. It means one is using the wrong tools or at the wrong level of focus for the task at hand. > To know and understand and see how Bayesian reasoning explains > rationality is to explain rationality; to be merely *told* that > Bayesian reasoning explains rationality is to *explain away* > rationality. There is a difference between explaining, and explaining > away. > I have no problem with this instance of explanation or most real versus forced explanations. > > > Furthermore, I don't believe that you fully and consistently believe > > this either. > > Them's fighting words, Samantha. > By this I mean that you too make and must make use of various tools and assumptions that you cannot fully reduce in order to function at all in the world. There is no need to fight over an obvious truth. :-) - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 26 20:29:01 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:29:01 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A7920D.60002@mac.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >--- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote:> > > >>Definition 2 seems to be dealing with religious matters but here >>again there is nothing which logically links Atheism with faith. For >>example you can be an Atheist without having a "firm belief in >>something for which there is no proof". >> >> > >On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim that there is no God, or >other universe-creator-being, humanity-creator-being, etc... is a claim >to a proof which is not in evidence, and, given the Simulation >Argument, is contrary to evidence currently available. > > > How so? The Simulation Argument says such may be possible. But "may be or is possible" is not a sufficient ground for believing "it is so". It does not take an act of belief to disbelieve a great number of things that "may be possible" without further support than simply "may be or is possible". - s From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Nov 26 20:37:02 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:37:02 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126164115.73984.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126164115.73984.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A793EE.8040106@mac.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >--- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > > >>From: "Mike Lorrey" >> >> >>>Well, in that case I can clearly state that atheism is a tertullian >>>form of faith, particularly because it is inherently impossible to >>>prove a negative, i.e. it is impossible to prove the non-existence >>> >>> >>of >> >> >>>God. Ergo, atheists believe the impossible. >>> >>> >>And one can just as clearly state that amermaidism, asantaclausism, >>aleprechaunism, amoonmaidenism, apurplepeopleism, afirebirism, >>atoothfairism >>(and any other such "faith" driven convictions) are Tertullian. >> >>By the way, Mike, which god are you talking about here ...? >> >> > >Doesn't matter. Your reducto ad absurdum is irrelevant, because they >are all subunits of the broad atheism/theism faith duality set. The >only POV outside that set is agnosticism, which essentially tells both >sides that none of them know enough to justify a claim one way or the other. > > > Do I properly understand you to be saying that to be objective one must be agnostic regarding the existence of leprechauns, moon maidens, tooth fairies and so on as well as regarding the existence of God? Is this really what you believe or how you conduct yourself intellectually? - samantha From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 26 20:55:17 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:55:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence In-Reply-To: <002101c4d3ec$bf705850$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041126205517.44996.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > While we are discussing some issues regarding the > Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, I > was wondering if anyone knew of a movement to change > the words "person" and "people" to read "intelligent > beings"of something similar. Currently all rights > guaranteed in the Constitution are granted to > "people" and nothing more. If you go deeper, you > begin to realize that a "person" is not very well > defined. When the constitution was written, blacks > were considered to be less than human and therefore > were not allowed equal rights as whites. It seems > that now would be a good time to replace the word > "person" with something else, or at least redefine > "person" as any sentient being. In theory, that may be a fine idea. In practice, setting up these definitions long in advance of the reality causes all kind of problems. There are no "sentient beings" other than humans at this time, unless one counts apes and dolphins, who are unable to function as humans in human society (even aside from their different bodies). Any such movement would have to address those who - as a species (or equivalent), rather than just individually - are likewise unable to function. What if, say, someone were to genetically engineer a breed of humans who would, upon receipt of a chemical signal "signed" in some difficult-to-forge (but time-dependant, so not simply clonable) manner, become receptive and extremely susceptible to suggestions broadcast on a certain radio frequency (that being the "message" of the chemical signal)? They would be sentient most of the time, and might even voice a desire to have their susceptibility removed. But when the chemical hits - which might not be easy to detect - they would become like programmed robots. Should they be accountable for their actions - or able to vote - under such conditions? If not, then what happens if one of them commits a crime or regrets their vote and claims to have been under the influence, again if the chemical is difficult to detect? (Without witnesses or evidence from a week ago, how do you know someone was drunk a week ago?) Yes, there can be answers to the above, but that's just scratching the surface. There are a lot of such special cases that would have to be thought out - so many, that it is not worthwhile to do so this far in advance of when they might actually matter. From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 26 21:10:36 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:10:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism In-Reply-To: <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> Message-ID: <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> >> > Furthermore, I don't believe that you fully and consistently believe >> > this either. >> >> Them's fighting words, Samantha. > > By this I mean that you too make and must make use of various tools and > assumptions that you cannot fully reduce in order to function at all in > the world. There is no need to fight over an obvious truth. :-) Name me a single concept I must use, for which I cannot give an experimentally testable consequence of its presence or absence. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 26 21:19:22 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:19:22 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence References: <20041126205517.44996.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000b01c4d3fd$99979010$8bb32643@kevin> I hardly see "functioning in society" as a basis for rights. Stephen Hawking would not have done very well in society 200 years ago. A baby cannot survive and cannot function in society at all. If your concern is over crime and punishment of other "sentients", then that is a separate issue. Likewise, your voting scenario is a problem with voter fraud and the vote tabulating systems, not a problem of basic "human" or "person" rights. Whether or not a person can responsibly function or vote has little to so with their basic rights as a sentient being. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 2:55 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > While we are discussing some issues regarding the > > Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, I > > was wondering if anyone knew of a movement to change > > the words "person" and "people" to read "intelligent > > beings"of something similar. Currently all rights > > guaranteed in the Constitution are granted to > > "people" and nothing more. If you go deeper, you > > begin to realize that a "person" is not very well > > defined. When the constitution was written, blacks > > were considered to be less than human and therefore > > were not allowed equal rights as whites. It seems > > that now would be a good time to replace the word > > "person" with something else, or at least redefine > > "person" as any sentient being. > > In theory, that may be a fine idea. In practice, > setting up these definitions long in advance of the > reality causes all kind of problems. There are no > "sentient beings" other than humans at this time, > unless one counts apes and dolphins, who are unable to > function as humans in human society (even aside from > their different bodies). Any such movement would have > to address those who - as a species (or equivalent), > rather than just individually - are likewise unable to > function. > > What if, say, someone were to genetically engineer a > breed of humans who would, upon receipt of a chemical > signal "signed" in some difficult-to-forge (but > time-dependant, so not simply clonable) manner, become > receptive and extremely susceptible to suggestions > broadcast on a certain radio frequency (that being the > "message" of the chemical signal)? They would be > sentient most of the time, and might even voice a > desire to have their susceptibility removed. But when > the chemical hits - which might not be easy to detect > - they would become like programmed robots. Should > they be accountable for their actions - or able to > vote - under such conditions? If not, then what > happens if one of them commits a crime or regrets > their vote and claims to have been under the > influence, again if the chemical is difficult to > detect? (Without witnesses or evidence from a week > ago, how do you know someone was drunk a week ago?) > > Yes, there can be answers to the above, but that's > just scratching the surface. There are a lot of such > special cases that would have to be thought out - so > many, that it is not worthwhile to do so this far in > advance of when they might actually matter. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Nov 26 21:34:02 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:34:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126163411.89081.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <005401c4d3c8$de89a8a0$74893cd1@pavilion> <20041126163411.89081.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153034.01b7a210@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:34 AM 11/26/2004 -0800, Mike wrote: >To any sentient inhabitant of a simulation universe, its creator is a >transcendant being, as is any agent of that creator capable of >jockeying the rules beyond the capacity of naturally evolved sentients >within that simulation universe. Mike, buy yourself a miniature silver test tube you can wear on a silver chain around your neck when you feel these fits coming on, and keep a flask of distilled water handy. Possession by Silly Memes can be a frightful affliction. A mind is a terrible thing to lose. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 26 21:37:59 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:37:59 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism In-Reply-To: <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153648.01b9daa0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 04:10 PM 11/26/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote: >Name me a single concept I must use, for which I cannot give an >experimentally testable consequence of its presence or absence. Friendliness. (And watch out for those Type I and Type II errors.) Damien Broderick From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 26 21:49:02 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:49:02 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com><000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj><41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com><39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com><41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com><41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com><41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153648.01b9daa0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000701c4d401$bea4be60$8bb32643@kevin> I will go as far as to suggest sentience. I am aware of the Turing test and many of the other debates that have been made here regarding that topic and I don;t think thae it has been sufficiently demonstrated by anyone that it can be tested for. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 3:37 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Reductionism > At 04:10 PM 11/26/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote: > > >Name me a single concept I must use, for which I cannot give an > >experimentally testable consequence of its presence or absence. > > Friendliness. > > (And watch out for those Type I and Type II errors.) > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Nov 26 22:22:03 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:22:03 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Reductionism In-Reply-To: <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> Message-ID: <41A7AC8B.6040400@jefallbright.net> Samantha Atkins wrote: > > By this I mean that you too make and must make use of various tools > and assumptions that you cannot fully reduce in order to function at > all in the world. There is no need to fight over an obvious truth. > :-) > > We always operate within a context beyond our own comprehension. Having raised three children and managed teams of very bright technical staff for two decades, I've faced this issue repeatedly at home, work and online, however, I have not discovered any good way to effectively communicate the case-relevant knowledge except through experience. It seems to be essentially incompressible, although in a sense, it is encoded into the environment in which we've evolved. Interestingly (to me, at least), if I reflect on the topics over the last few years that motivate me to post, it's clear they're all linked by the theme of "pragmatic action under intrinsically limited but expanding knowledge." They're all about expanding spheres of awareness. Since I'm a predominately visual thinker, I imagine illustrating the concepts in animated 3D. Maybe someday I'll get the time. * The problem of concept-mapping across noncongruent knowledge bases, AKA "you can't know what you don't know" * The question of rational trust in a system complex beyond one's own understanding. * The bounds of rationality. * The importance of context. * The arrow of morality. * The subjective / objective trap. * The "mystery" of qualia. * The "hard problem" of consciousness. * The illusion of an independent self. Come to think of it, "pragmatic action under intrinsically limited but expanding knowledge" comes close to what we call intelligent behavior or wisdom. So why should this matter to anyone? It appears there can be no shortcut to wisdom, but we can and should work to improve the growth of wisdom. Optimum growth appears to require (1) a fertile environment for interaction (competition) among diverse systems of thought, and (2) a framework (cooperation) for selection and promotion of successful systems to the next level. With the web and its capability to connect communities of thought, we are well on our way with #1 above at global scope. However, we are lacking the global cooperative framework to accomplish #2 at global scope. We are still mostly separate and competitive, lacking the overlying cooperative framework necessary for a successful global metasystem of thought. <-- insert action plan here --> I'm hoping that our ideas and discussions nurture the seeds of the growth we need. - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net P.S. Apologies in advance for this considered cross-posting. From sentience at pobox.com Fri Nov 26 22:22:36 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:22:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153648.01b9daa0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153648.01b9daa0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <41A7ACAC.4040407@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 04:10 PM 11/26/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote: > >> Name me a single concept I must use, for which I cannot give an >> experimentally testable consequence of its presence or absence. > > Friendliness. > > (And watch out for those Type I and Type II errors.) Presence: you live Absence: you die I didn't say it would be a perfect test that caught every case and only those cases. I just said there would be an experimentally testable consequence. > I will go as far as to suggest sentience. I am aware of the Turing test and > many of the other debates that have been made here regarding that topic and > I don't think thae it has been sufficiently demonstrated by anyone that it > can be tested for. Presence: beings spontaneously begin talking about conscious experiences without having been deliberately prompted to imitate human discourse Absence: they don't This is a poor test, but a critical one, because it demonstrates that zombies are logically impossible. Consciousness produces at least one effect on the universe: it makes human philosophers talk about consciousness. If you subtract something and human philosophers still talk about consciousness, the word "consciousness" must not refer to whatever it is you subtracted, because it is not the cause producing those thoughts that make philosophers put down physical words on paper about consciousness. It's got to be woven into the chain of cause and effect somewhere - the reason and explanation and pattern that make the syllables "consciousness" fall from your physical lips. So I reasoned when I was sixteen. Today I have other perspectives that are harder to explain. But I lived by the law of experimental testability, then and now; and though it did not cure *all* my silliness, it made me less silly than the likes of Searle. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Nov 26 22:30:33 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:30:33 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism In-Reply-To: <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> Message-ID: <41A7AE89.4080808@jefallbright.net> Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> >>> >>> > Furthermore, I don't believe that you fully and consistently believe >>> > this either. >>> >>> Them's fighting words, Samantha. >> >> >> By this I mean that you too make and must make use of various tools >> and assumptions that you cannot fully reduce in order to function at >> all in the world. There is no need to fight over an obvious >> truth. :-) > > > Name me a single concept I must use, for which I cannot give an > experimentally testable consequence of its presence or absence. > Small child to parent: "Why *can't* I cross the big road if I'm careful?" Teenage daughter to parent: "Why *can't* I spend the night at my boyfriend's house" Aspiring young genius to the worldwide community: "Why don't you understand that *my* ideas are humanity's best hope for survival" Superhuman AI to dependent humans: "Because I said so." - Jef From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Nov 26 22:36:23 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:36:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence In-Reply-To: <000b01c4d3fd$99979010$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041126223623.59832.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > I hardly see "functioning in society" as a basis for > rights. Stephen Hawking > would not have done very well in society 200 years > ago. Stephen Hawking likely would not have survived past childhood 200 years ago, so this would have been a moot point. > A baby cannot > survive and cannot function in society at all. Yet babies are rarely given rights of any sort, until they become not-babies. > If > your concern is over crime > and punishment of other "sentients", then that is a > separate issue. > Likewise, your voting scenario is a problem with > voter fraud and the vote > tabulating systems, not a problem of basic "human" > or "person" rights. > Whether or not a person can responsibly function or > vote has little to so > with their basic rights as a sentient being. Then it depends on what you define as basic rights. Many of the rights listed in the DoI, such as the right to trial by jury, were ones subject to ability to function within society. (One can not meaningfully hold a trial at which the defendant can not understand anyone else in the courtroom, and where the defendant does not even understand the concepts of "court" or "courtroom", except as a mockery of an in absentia trial. Where human beings fit that role as defendants, they are remanded to mental institutions as unfit for trial.) BTW, there is a second objection: the DoI is a historical document, and as such reflects word usage at the time it was written. It is not subject to amendment - unlike, say, the Constitution of the United States, which was explicitly intended to be updated over time, to correct and flaws that were found after its writing. (E.g., society came to view the provision for slaves as a flaw in need of correction, even though it was a very intentional part of the original document on which much debate had been spent.) From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Nov 26 23:01:41 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:01:41 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] anthropogenic-climate-change skeptics in Oz Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126165823.01b19140@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html?oneclick=true Most scientists say that global warming is not only real, but is already contributing to extreme droughts, floods and the melting of the polar ice caps. But a few scientists still insist the idea is bunk. With the Kyoto Protocol about to come into force, Melissa Fyfe investigates the doubters, their financial backers and whether they are worth listening to. At 401 Collins Street on Monday night, 50 men gathered in a room of plush green carpet, pottery and antique lights to launch a book about the science of climate change. Some of them were scientists. But many were engineers and retired captains of industry. Presiding was Hugh Morgan, president of the Business Council of Australia and former Western Mining boss. The master of ceremonies was retired Labor politician Peter Walsh. Climate change is about science, but not just about science. It's about business and politics and wielding influence. The men - there was just one woman present - were all climate change sceptics, members of an organisation called the Lavoisier Group that argues global warming is nothing to worry about. The book they launched - the latest weapon in the tussle for hearts and minds over global warming - was by Melbourne climate change sceptic William Kininmonth, former head of the National Climate Centre, part of the Bureau of Meteorology. He argues that global warming is natural and not caused by humans burning fossil fuels. The book, Climate Change: A Natural Hazard, blasts the models used by climate scientists to predict and simulate what is happening. They are flawed, he says. "Climate change is naturally variable and it poses serious hazards for human kind," he writes. Focusing on man-made global warming is "self-delusion on a grand scale". The only problem for the sceptics is that the vast majority of scientists think they are the ones that are deluded. "There's a better scientific consensus on this than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics", Dr James Baker, of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the US, has said. [etc] From jbloch at humanenhancement.com Fri Nov 26 23:56:41 2004 From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:56:41 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence In-Reply-To: <002101c4d3ec$bf705850$8bb32643@kevin> References: <002101c4d3ec$bf705850$8bb32643@kevin> Message-ID: <41A7C2B9.9090201@humanenhancement.com> Kevin, That's actually not true. Blacks (and women) were not "not allowed equal rights as whites". Article I, Section 2, dealing with the number of Representatives each State is entitled to, merely set the value of a _slave_ as 3/5 of a non-slave (non-taxpaying Indians not being included at all). Free blacks were counted fully equally to free whites. The 3/5ths rule, often quoted, had nothing to do with rights per se. It had only to do with calculating population when apportioning Representatives in Congress. As with all such things, it was the result of a long process of political compromise. But the key was the status of the individual as slave or free, which did not necessarily map to racial origin. There were plenty of free blacks in the United States at the time (even in many of the slaveholding states). That being said, to answer your question, no; I've never heard of any such thing. Perhaps it's due to the fact that it is a moot point (there being no "intelligent beings" in the United States who aren't human. Yet.). Generally, such changes don't come to the fore beforehand; they are done in reaction to a problem that has arisen. When the first truely self-aware AI, or Uplifted chimpanzee, emerges, one might very well see such a movement emerge, although one might well see a movement to specifically declare "personhood" as being restricted _solely_ to humans; I predict both movements emerging in response to the same triggering event. Joseph Kevin Freels wrote: > While we are discussing some issues regarding the Declaration of > Independence and US Constitution, I was wondering if anyone knew of a > movement to change the words "person" and "people" to read > "intelligent beings"of something similar. Currently all rights > guaranteed in the Constitution are granted to "people" and nothing > more. If you go deeper, you begin to realize that a "person" is not > very well defined. When the constitution was written, blacks were > considered to be less than human and therefore were not allowed equal > rights as whites. It seems that now would be a good time to replace > the word "person" with something else, or at least redefine "person" > as any sentient being. > > Kevin Freels From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 00:05:43 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:05:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41A7920D.60002@mac.com> Message-ID: <20041127000543.46221.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > How so? The Simulation Argument says such may be possible. But "may > be or is possible" is not a sufficient ground for believing "it is > so". On the contrary, the SA says that the odds of us living in a simulation universe are very much greater than that we live in a non-simulation universe. A non-simulation universe would be one without a creator-god-metasysop-uberhacker. Ergo, an atheist believes what he/she believes in spite of odds to the contrary, thus believes in the practically impossible. Secondly, that the atheist believes in an impossible proof (a proof that claims that no god exists, when it is impossible to prove a negative), demonstrates that atheists have an unfounded faith in two degrees of impossibility. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 00:07:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:07:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41A793EE.8040106@mac.com> Message-ID: <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > Do I properly understand you to be saying that to be objective one > must > be agnostic regarding the existence of leprechauns, moon maidens, > tooth > fairies and so on as well as regarding the existence of God? Is > this > really what you believe or how you conduct yourself intellectually? Given the simulation argument, and what Stephen Hawking says about the sorts of things which are capable of coming out of black holes, I remain agnostic. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 00:15:48 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:15:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] anthropogenic-climate-change skeptics in Oz In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126165823.01b19140@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041127001548.30469.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > > http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html?oneclick=true > > Most scientists say that global warming is not only real, but is > already contributing to extreme droughts, floods and the melting > of the polar ice caps. Only if you count social scientists, pottery scientists, acting scientists, violin scientists, political scientists, and any other scientist that knows absolutely nothing about climatology. Even among those who do, such, such as those below attending this meeting, say that it is at least mostly natural, if not entirely so. > But a few scientists still insist the idea is bunk. With the Kyoto > Protocol about to come into force, Melissa Fyfe investigates the > doubters, their financial backers and whether they are worth > listening to. Ah, the technique of character assasination. The men who gathered at this meeting do not insist that it is bunk, they insist that the idea that it is caused by mankind to be bunk. Two entirely different conclusions. But I am not surprised that a journalist would bait and switch like that... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 27 00:49:04 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:49:04 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Reductionism In-Reply-To: <41A7ACAC.4040407@pobox.com> References: <20041123054325.12994.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> <000c01c4d140$c515d130$f1b31b97@administxl09yj> <41A3163B.4090702@pobox.com> <39771EF1-3D97-11D9-AD36-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> <41A452CE.8060001@pobox.com> <41A6E0F4.4080900@pobox.com> <41A79041.2030408@mac.com> <41A79BCC.7020503@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153648.01b9daa0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <41A7ACAC.4040407@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126184158.01a5f500@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:22 PM 11/26/2004 -0500, Eliezer wrote: >>>Name me a single concept I must use, for which I cannot give an >>>experimentally testable consequence of its presence or absence. >>Friendliness. >>(And watch out for those Type I and Type II errors.) > >Presence: you live >Absence: you die > >I didn't say it would be a perfect test that caught every case and only >those cases. I just said there would be an experimentally testable >consequence. Well, you can *impute* or *infer* unfriendliness on the part of someone who might have preserved your life but failed to do so, although the motivation might have been quite otherwise. I'd have preferred a less extreme instance; say, if the suspected unfriendly fails to share her slice of cake with you, or hold the door open for you. But even in this extreme case of death, there are so many situations where people die in the absence of malign or indifferent intention that it fails utterly as an *experimental test*. Damien Broderick From bjk at imminst.org Sat Nov 27 00:57:55 2004 From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:57:55 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update - Futurism in the Past and Present Message-ID: <41A7D113.5010903@imminst.org> IMMINST UPDATE ImmInst Chat - Nov 28, 2004 Mitch Howe: "Futurism in the Past and Present" http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=4395 ImmInst Film Project - $5,000 Donation: Alcor Life Extension Foundation http://www.imminst.org/film.php#Funding Bruce Klein has thus far interviewed 35 individuals. Bruce will travel to Hartford, CT for the ImmInst Social in a start to film 30+ more people for the ImmInst Film Project. ImmInst Social - Near Hartford, CT - Dec 4, 2004 http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4220 ImmInst Conference - Nov 5, 2005, Atlanta, GA Speakers (thus far) ? Anti-aging - A. de Grey ? Artificial Intelligence - E. Yudkowsky ? Brain-computer Interfacing - P. Passaro ? Cryonics - R. Merkle ? Diachronous Self - M. More ? Primo & Metabrains - N. Vita-More ? Technology Studies - S. Arrison POLL: Will you attend the ImmInst Conference ($250 tentative)? http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=159&t=4651 NEWS & ARTICLES Beyond Immortal - by Nate Barna http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=106&t=4239 Methuselah Mouse Prize Winner - Dr. Stephen R. Spindler http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=69&t=4645 ABOUT IMMINST Immortality Institute: "For Infinite Lifespans" 501c3 Mission: "Conquer the Blight of Involuntary Death" Members: 1830 - Full Members: 110 http://www.imminst.org/fullmembers From brentn at freeshell.org Sat Nov 27 01:23:02 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:23:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] anthropogenic-climate-change skeptics in Oz In-Reply-To: <20041127001548.30469.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (11/26/04 16:15) Mike Lorrey wrote: > >--- Damien Broderick wrote: > >> >> >> >http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html?oneclick=true >> >> Most scientists say that global warming is not only real, but is >> already contributing to extreme droughts, floods and the melting >> of the polar ice caps. > >Only if you count social scientists, pottery scientists, acting >scientists, violin scientists, political scientists, and any other >scientist that knows absolutely nothing about climatology. Even among >those who do, such, such as those below attending this meeting, say >that it is at least mostly natural, if not entirely so. Bullcrap. Go and actually read climatology journals. There are precious few climatologists who will deny global warming exists. The argument currently (for everyone except left- and right-wing political ideologues with no real education) is which effects and to what extent human influence is affecting the climate. And, just so that you make no mistake, there is no consensus on what that is. To say that most of them agree that global warming is mostly due to natural causes is either a gross misunderstanding or pure ideology. Most climatologists (at least, those that are honest) will say that no one can say for sure, because no one knows whether the assumptions they are making are valid or not. > >> But a few scientists still insist the idea is bunk. With the Kyoto >> Protocol about to come into force, Melissa Fyfe investigates the >> doubters, their financial backers and whether they are worth >> listening to. > >Ah, the technique of character assasination. The men who gathered at >this meeting do not insist that it is bunk, they insist that the idea >that it is caused by mankind to be bunk. Two entirely different >conclusions. But I am not surprised that a journalist would bait and >switch like that... Personally, I think that investigating potential biases in the results due to funding sources is good journalism. I'm particularly concerned that certain NGOs and governmental agencies are only funding researchers that report politically useful results, to the detriment of the science involved. I'm doubly concerned about the studies sponsored by the coal industry. To call that character assassination is to completely miss the point. Good journalism exposes more details about the sides of the issue so that we can make a better-informed judgement for ourselves. Of course, most people these days consider good journalism that which supports their positions... Of course, the ideas that we should be searching for renewable, environmentally clean energy sources for sound economic reasons or that we should avoid polluting for the same reason that we avoid dumping our sewers in the streets are equally anathema to all who have chosen to treat this issue as a political football. That, I feel, is both the most amusing and the least intelligent aspect to the whole discussion. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Sat Nov 27 02:36:13 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:36:13 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A7E81D.1040408@optusnet.com.au> The theory about what can come out of black holes is often misused in this way. The theory says that anything at all could possibly be emitted, no matter how unlikely, but anything that IS emitted WILL obey the laws of physics of this universe. It may possibly emit a small Irish man who likes making boots and is holding a pot of gold, but he will NOT have any magical powers.(And unless it emits a spaceship around him as well he will probably die very quickly.) -David Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > >>Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >>Do I properly understand you to be saying that to be objective one >>must >>be agnostic regarding the existence of leprechauns, moon maidens, >>tooth >>fairies and so on as well as regarding the existence of God? Is >>this >>really what you believe or how you conduct yourself intellectually? > > > Given the simulation argument, and what Stephen Hawking says about the > sorts of things which are capable of coming out of black holes, I > remain agnostic. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 27 03:00:33 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:00:33 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153034.01b7a210@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <005401c4d3c8$de89a8a0$74893cd1@pavilion> <20041126163411.89081.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041126153034.01b7a210@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041126185854.0291a148@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> "Mementic Stabilizer", sold in a pair of rubber suckers like snake bite kits. A grand Extropian Product idea.... >>To any sentient inhabitant of a simulation universe, its creator is a >>transcendant being, as is any agent of that creator capable of >>jockeying the rules beyond the capacity of naturally evolved sentients >>within that simulation universe. > >Mike, buy yourself a miniature silver test tube you can wear on a silver >chain around your neck when you feel these fits coming on, and keep a >flask of distilled water handy. Possession by Silly Memes can be a >frightful affliction. A mind is a terrible thing to lose. > >Damien Broderick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 27 03:03:33 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:03:33 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <41A793EE.8040106@mac.com> <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041126190114.0290c830@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Geez, the SA argument has the same deistic flaw, who or what made the Simulator? Another one? The BottomMost Turtle? I go with Occam - lack of evidence, will think further on topic upon presentation of same. >Given the simulation argument, and what Stephen Hawking says about the >sorts of things which are capable of coming out of black holes, I >remain agnostic. > >===== >Mike Lorrey ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 27 03:10:58 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:10:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041127031058.CC3D557E2B@finney.org> David, , writes: > The theory about what can come out of black holes is often > misused in this way. The theory says that anything at all > could possibly be emitted, no matter how unlikely, but > anything that IS emitted WILL obey the laws of physics > of this universe. Right, and besides, Hawking claims to have fixed this. Stuff that comes out isn't random but rather reflects the state of what went in. Which is good because otherwise it violates the information-preserving properties which are fundamental to quantum mechanics. Most physicists have believed this is how it would come out, but a big name like Hawking coming up with a proof should really put the issue to bed. Last I heard he hadn't published yet, but after all he types pretty slow so people are willing to be patient... Hal From jbloch at humanenhancement.com Sat Nov 27 03:56:05 2004 From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:56:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041126144200.57046.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A7FAD5.5080606@humanenhancement.com> Mike, I must disagree with you here. Few atheists I know, myself included, would say that they definitively know god(s) do not exist. Rather, in the absence of any evidence to support the (positive) claim that god(s) _do_ exist, the default position must be that they do not; it is not a claim that requires evidence, as you intimate, since the burden of proof is on those making the positive claim. And, connected therewith, I'm sure that almost everyone out there who declares thay they definitively do not believe in god(s) would change that opinion in the face of truly incontravertable evidence (just as I, who does not believe in the Loch Ness Monster, would immediately change that opinion if one were to be hauled up in a net tomorrow). Alas, religion to date has failed to provide such evidence. And your appeal to the Simulation Argument, as if it were some panacea to the question of the existence of god(s), seems quite incongruous. Could you elaborate on why you think it points to proof of the existence of god(s)? Joseph Mike Lorrey wrote: > >On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim that there is no God, or >other universe-creator-being, humanity-creator-being, etc... is a claim >to a proof which is not in evidence, and, given the Simulation >Argument, is contrary to evidence currently available. > From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 27 04:15:57 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:15:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] anthropogenic-climate-change skeptics in Oz Message-ID: <20041127041557.2B96D57E2B@finney.org> Brent Neal writes: > Go and actually read climatology journals. There are precious few > climatologists who will deny global warming exists. The argument currently > (for everyone except left- and right-wing political ideologues with no > real education) is which effects and to what extent human influence is > affecting the climate. And, just so that you make no mistake, there is > no consensus on what that is. To say that most of them agree that global > warming is mostly due to natural causes is either a gross misunderstanding > or pure ideology. Most climatologists (at least, those that are honest) > will say that no one can say for sure, because no one knows whether the > assumptions they are making are valid or not. In the popular press I get the impression that there is actually a pretty strong emerging consensus that the human contribution is very significant. The precise details are still uncertain but I don't think many scientists would still maintain that natural contributions overwhelm human ones. Some excerpts from that article, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html?oneclick=true (bugmenot.com gave me pharkedup/idea as a login to read it): : The 2504 scientists and reviewers who work under the banner of the United : Nations-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) look : set to make even stronger pronouncements about the role of humans on : climate in their next assessment, due in 2007. The scientific mainstream : has become more confident about how global warming is affecting the world, : particularly in the past 10 years. The panel's chairman, Dr Rajendra : Pachauri, told The Age: "One can say scientifically it is human action : that is driving the bulk of changes that are taking place today." : ... : While William Kininmonth is respected by his former colleagues at : the Bureau of Meteorology and they agree about the climate's natural : variability, they disagree that recent warming is natural. In a review : to be published in March in the Australian Meteorological Magazine, : University of Melbourne associate professor of meteorology Kevin Walsh : will argue that Kininmonth has failed to present the case for natural : warming. "Some of his detailed arguments are a little bit curious," : Dr Walsh told The Age. "Some of his statements actually contradict : well-accepted work." : : But strangely enough, the Lavoisier Group heard that message on Monday : night. In what seemed like a coup, Hugh Morgan had secured the respected : John Zillman, former head of the Bureau of Meteorology, to launch the : book. Dr Zillman agreed, but made it clear that there were significant : parts of the book that he disagreed with. Dr Zillman, who is known to : be quite conservative about climate science, said he was concerned about : appearing at a Lavoisier Group book launch, but did so in the interests : of debate. : : He says he is not aware of any sceptic argument that has invalidated the : mainstream science, and is now convinced - although would not have been : 10 years ago - that it is mostly humans changing the world's climate. "I : won't be expecting to be invited back as a regular," he said. As we know, Russia recently ratified the Kyoto treaty which is sufficient for it to go into effect. It sets targets for the various nations to reduce their emissions, although as this article notes, countries also get credits for growing forests (and apparently, for failing to cut down forests) which would help Australia, if they chose to participate. I exchanged some email last year with a climatologist who strongly supported Kyoto, and he made an interesting admission which I think is widely accepted in the community. He said that although he supported Kyoto, and it would be "enormously difficult" for the U.S. and Japan in particular to meet its standards, it would actually have "zero impact" on climate! So why support it? Why support a policy which would impose tremendous economic pain for zero benefit? Because, he explained, it would set a precedent for international cooperation to work on the problem of global warming. A successful Kyoto implementation would pave the way for future accords, ones with some real bite to them, that could genuinely reduce greenhouse emissions. That was his reasoning, anyway. Like many of us here, I have greater expectations for the rate of future technological advancement than society as a whole. This would suggest that we will be able to handle global warming at a relatively much lower cost a few decades from now than today. Nanotech and other advanced technologies will put us into position to be able to remediate and even reverse the effects of global warming. And the world will be much wealthier and more powerful than today, making the costs of fixing the problem relatively cheap. Now, I can understand why policy makers can't afford to rely on pie in the sky future projections to avoid present problems. There is no guarantee that our hoped-for technologies will actually work, and if they don't and we leave the problem for the future, we will have a real mess on our hands. This is another area where Robin Hanson's "futarchy" concept could work well. If society can agree on goals for some measure that balances future economic production against environmental quality, futarchy can set the levels of greenhouse reductions which will best achieve those goals, and then greenhouse emission markets (which I understand Kyoto will experiment with) can find optimal ways to reach those emission targets. Everything happens efficiently with a minimum of bureaucratic and political interference (which means every bureaucrat and politician will oppose this loss of power). Hal P.S. Some http://www.ideosphere.com/ Foresight Exchange (play money idea futures) claims relating to global warming: WarmSU Pres Mentions Global Warming The president will use the phrase "global warming" in a state of the union address before 2008. Last trade means 60% probability. Had been trading at 80% prior to the election. CO2LVL CO2 Level 2030 Prediction of CO2 level in 2030. Current price implies a level of 476 PPM. Was 376 in 2003. FX is predicting an average increase of 3.7 PPM/year over the next 30 years. The highest increase rate so far observed was 2.9 PPM/year in 1997-1998, and FX is predicting that the *average* rate will become much higher than this(!). SLvl 1 m rise in Sea Level Sea level will rise 1 meter by 2030 over the 1994 level. Last trade 32% (!!!). I don't know what the market is thinking, I just took a negative position on this. No one with a shred of credibility is predicting this kind of rise. From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 27 04:22:42 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:22:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Freitas' path to nanotech Message-ID: <20041127042242.4DF5157E2B@finney.org> Robert Freitas has published an abridged version of a talk he gave at the Foresight Conference last month, http://www.molecularassembler.com/Papers/PathDiamMolMfg.htm , "Pathway to Diamond-Based Molecular Manufacturing". IMO this has the most significant and impressive ideas about a possible path to Drexlerian nanotech in years. I don't have time to write about it in detail, but Freitas basically describes a method which is (arguably) technologically feasible today, for building a limited variety of diamondoid structures, with a somewhat more sketchy path towards a self-reproducing system. There are a number of question marks and open problems, but it is a far more plausible and detailed path than anything I have seen from Drexler or Merkle. I'll try to write more soon. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 04:53:49 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:53:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41A7FAD5.5080606@humanenhancement.com> Message-ID: <20041127045349.75072.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Joseph Bloch wrote: > And your appeal to the Simulation Argument, as if it were some > panacea > to the question of the existence of god(s), seems quite incongruous. > Could you elaborate on why you think it points to proof of the > existence of god(s)? It is pretty clear and easy to understand: the Simulation Argument states that the odds of being in a simulation universe are so much greater than the odds of being in a non-simulated universe, that the sentient inhabitants of any given universe must consider being in a simulation universe to be the default assumption until and unless proven otherwise. Since the existence of a simulation universe implicates the existence of a being running the simulation, i.e. the creator god of that universe, is an obvious and logical result. It is irrational to assume a simulation universe to exist without accepting the existence of a being existing that created and is responsible for that universe. The Simulation Argument is inherently Deist in its formulation. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 04:59:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:59:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] anthropogenic-climate-change skeptics in Oz In-Reply-To: <20041127041557.2B96D57E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041127045956.75537.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > In the popular press I get the impression that there is actually a > pretty strong emerging consensus that the human contribution is very > significant. > The precise details are still uncertain but I don't think many > scientists would still maintain that natural contributions overwhelm > human ones. Listening to the popular press is your first mistake. On the contrary, as climate simulations get more and more accurate, they increasingly show two things: a) the projected future temperature change is increasingly smaller, and, b) the contribution of anthropic causes is increasingly smaller. A third thing being found out is that 'global warming' is increasingly NOT. It is essentially a phenomenon of the arctic north, and, when looked at in conjunction with northern hemisphere warming on Mars and Uranus, it is clear that there are significant natural phenomenon which scientists are only beginning to understand. Last time I looked, they weren't burning oil on Mars or Uranus. > Some excerpts from that article, > http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/11/26/1101219743320.html?oneclick=true > (bugmenot.com gave me pharkedup/idea as a login to read it): > > : The 2504 scientists and reviewers who work under the banner of the > United > : Nations-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) > look > : set to make even stronger pronouncements about the role of humans > on > : climate in their next assessment, due in 2007. A significant number of these 2504 scientists have made serious objections to the conclusions of the IPCC and have stated that the data that was used from their own studies actually demonstrated the opposite of the IPCC reports conclusions. In fact, the IPCC's original draft drew conclusions entirely contradictory to the final draft which was written by the politicians, not the scientists. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 05:12:17 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:12:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <1101482818.18348.7363.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote: > On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 09:42, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- "Fred C. Moulton" wrote:> > > > Definition 2 seems to be dealing with religious matters but here > > > again there is nothing which logically links Atheism with faith. > > > For > > > example you can be an Atheist without having a "firm belief in > > > something for which there is no proof". > > > > On the contrary. A firm belief in the claim that there is no God, > > or other universe-creator-being, humanity-creator-being, etc... > > is a claim > > to a proof which is not in evidence, and, given the Simulation > > Argument, is contrary to evidence currently available. > > I think you may have made an editing error because what you sent does > not address the point I was making. You may want to try again. I think my point is quite clear, and the fact that you can't see it is illustrative of the blind spot that atheists find themselves in: proving a negative is impossible, ergo the belief that god does not exist is based on an impossible assumption and therefore is an article of faith. Secondly, given that the Simulation Argument states that the odds that we live in a simulation universe (which automatically implies the existence of a being that created that simulation) are far greater than that we do not, the atheist belief that we live in an unsimulated universe is arguing against the odds and therefore reaches a similar, but not quite so absolute, degree of impossibility. Ergo, any given atheist believes in two impossible things before breakfast, whether they are able to articulate them so clearly or not is irrelevant. How again do you distinguish yourself from a theist? The only difference between a theist and an atheist is a space. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Nov 27 06:19:32 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:19:32 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <1101482818.18348.7363.camel@localhost> <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041126235107.019eeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:12 PM 11/26/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: >[I:] >proving a negative is impossible, ergo the belief that god does not >exist is based on an impossible assumption and therefore is an article >of faith. >[II:] >the atheist belief that we live in an unsimulated >universe is arguing against the odds and therefore reaches a similar, >but not quite so absolute, degree of impossibility. Mike, the first of your claims above is irrelevant and the second is a classic case of bait and switch. Both fail if the definition of `god' is used in any of the ways current among contemporary theologians. By apparently making a claim in defence of current religious beliefs while actually arguing in favor of a sort of Wizard of Oz behind the curtain, you entirely beg the interesting issues at the heart of Christianity, Islam, Judaism and indeed any form of modern faith more sophisticated than scientology. The argument against traditional accounts of deity does not require proving a negative; it simply points out the abundant incoherence of those attributes classically ascribed to a divinity. It is exactly like denying the reality (outside of words lacking a referent) of phenomena such as `square circle' or `pitch-black light'. Any god worth its worship is held to be timeless and incomposable, yet capable of planning, thinking, changing its mind, communicating in temporal sequence (all features of time and division of parts), and multiplying entities beyond itself. So claim I collapses instantly, except for fans of Tertulian. Nobody rational needs to disprove what cannot be reasonably conceived and asserted. The key switch after the bait in claim II is to draw upon the idea that one turtle of the kind we know (and are) has been built or `fathered' by another turtle of the same general kind, one layer down--and then calling the second turtle a `god'. This is apologetics at the level of a village parson. No religious person today construes deity as a sort of heavenly hacker running an exaflop computer; that would be regarded as vulgar to the point of blasphemy. Suppose this simulation postulate is correct, however, as it might be. What sorts of religious or ethical consequences follow for human conduct and expectations? Yes, we might be erased if the hacker gets tired of running the sim; we might find (or be) glitches in the code. But what sanction could there possibly be for *worship* of such a programmer? What moral authority would such a `god' have over us, other than brute force? What duties would be entailed upon us (except, perhaps, self-respecting revolt against its arbitrary dictats if they were disclosed in a convincing fashion)? As Robin Hanson has pointed out, the specific ethical precepts that seem to follow from the simulation hypothesis seem distinctly unpleasant; one is advised to act in ways at odds with any of the normative principles in existing faiths and humanist doctrines. So once again, this bait and switch leaves us with a mockery of what theists *think* they're claiming to be true (but which we already know, by rebuttal of claim I, to be simply incoherent in any case). Damien Broderick From moulton at moulton.com Sat Nov 27 04:46:27 2004 From: moulton at moulton.com (Fred C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:46:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1101530787.20563.7594.camel@localhost> On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 00:12, Mike Lorrey wrote: > I think my point is quite clear, and the fact that you can't see it is > illustrative of the blind spot that atheists find themselves in: > proving a negative is impossible, ergo the belief that god does not > exist is based on an impossible assumption and therefore is an article > of faith. Mike I am confident that you are well meaning but unfortunately you are confused at very a fundamental level. You continue to have a false idea of Atheism even after several of us have tried to explain it to you. You fail to understand that an Atheist does not have to prove the non-existence of anything. Once you understand that the meaning of the term Atheism then perhaps the conversation might continue. But I will admit that I can not think of a way to help you overcome your confusion so I will step aside for a moment so that perhaps some other participant can explain it to you. Regards Fred From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 27 08:17:46 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:17:46 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127000543.46221.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127000543.46221.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A8382A.5030902@mac.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >--- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > >>How so? The Simulation Argument says such may be possible. But "may >>be or is possible" is not a sufficient ground for believing "it is >>so". >> >> > >On the contrary, the SA says that the odds of us living in a simulation >universe are very much greater than that we live in a non-simulation >universe. A non-simulation universe would be one without a >creator-god-metasysop-uberhacker. Ergo, an atheist believes what he/she >believes in spite of odds to the contrary, thus believes in the >practically impossible. > > You left out previous posts in this series. That the odds are good (though not as high as originally thought) that we are in a sim, that is not the same as certainty. Also as previously pointed out by myself and others even that we probably are in a sim doesn't mean the creator[s] of the sim are in any way like the normal Christian (or any other) notion of God. So again, your argument does not hold. >Secondly, that the atheist believes in an impossible proof (a proof >that claims that no god exists, when it is impossible to prove a >negative), demonstrates that atheists have an unfounded faith in two >degrees of impossibility. > > The atheist does not believe in such a proof. The atheist simply believes that the best thinking she can do on the subject leans most strongly to there being no God. That is all. Even if the Sim Argument led to the likelihood of a creator that cares about the creation sufficiently this is still a far cry from a God much less one of say, Chrisitian configuration. You can't just wave the Simulation Argument and some bogus logical trap that no real atheists are caught by and thereby fairly accuse atheists of being people of faith. What in heck is the point of your even attempting such an exercise anyway? - s From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 27 08:20:23 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:20:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A838C7.1080201@mac.com> Wait. Stephen Hawking says that tooth faires can come out of black holes???! Oh man! You must have hit the motherlode of the good stuff! :-) - s Mike Lorrey wrote: >--- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > >>Mike Lorrey wrote: >> >> > > > >>Do I properly understand you to be saying that to be objective one >>must >>be agnostic regarding the existence of leprechauns, moon maidens, >>tooth >>fairies and so on as well as regarding the existence of God? Is >>this >>really what you believe or how you conduct yourself intellectually? >> >> > >Given the simulation argument, and what Stephen Hawking says about the >sorts of things which are capable of coming out of black holes, I >remain agnostic. > >===== >Mike Lorrey >Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH >"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. >It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." > -William Pitt (1759-1806) >Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Nov 27 08:27:38 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:27:38 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041126190114.0290c830@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <41A793EE.8040106@mac.com> <20041127000756.42286.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041126190114.0290c830@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A83A7A.5040006@mac.com> The argument only says that it is unlikely we are on the bottomest layer. There need be no infinite regress. Of course the argument does depend on several layers of IFs that have not been fully vetted. It is certainly possible that this is an unsimulated base level world capable of creating sims. Just as it is possible that there are no post-Singularity intelligences in our galaxy at this time. But it seems unlikely. -s Hara Ra wrote: > Geez, the SA argument has the same deistic flaw, who or what made the > Simulator? Another one? The BottomMost Turtle? I go with Occam - lack > of evidence, will think further on topic upon presentation of same. > >> Given the simulation argument, and what Stephen Hawking says about the >> sorts of things which are capable of coming out of black holes, I >> remain agnostic. >> >> ===== >> Mike Lorrey > > > > > ================================== > = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = > = harara at sbcglobal.net = > = Alcor North Cryomanagement = > = Alcor Advisor to Board = > = 831 429 8637 = > ================================== > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Sat Nov 27 08:29:21 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 19:29:21 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <1101530787.20563.7594.camel@localhost> References: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <1101530787.20563.7594.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <41A83AE1.6080000@optusnet.com.au> I think it is obvious that people are using words in different ways. Mike sees atheism as a belief in the non-existance of God. Others are seeing it as a lack of belief in God. I think that non-belief is what Mike would call agnosticism (and I agree for what its worth). To get anything productive out of this it would probably be a good idea to define how you are using the terms : God, atheism, agnosticism, belief, faith and babel-fish. -David. Fred C. Moulton wrote: > On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 00:12, Mike Lorrey wrote: > >>I think my point is quite clear, and the fact that you can't see it is >>illustrative of the blind spot that atheists find themselves in: >>proving a negative is impossible, ergo the belief that god does not >>exist is based on an impossible assumption and therefore is an article >>of faith. > > > Mike > > I am confident that you are well meaning but unfortunately you are > confused at very a fundamental level. You continue to have a false idea > of Atheism even after several of us have tried to explain it to you. > You fail to understand that an Atheist does not have to prove the > non-existence of anything. > > Once you understand that the meaning of the term Atheism then perhaps > the conversation might continue. But I will admit that I can not think > of a way to help you overcome your confusion so I will step aside for a > moment so that perhaps some other participant can explain it to you. > > Regards > > Fred > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From Walter_Chen at compal.com Sat Nov 27 08:42:59 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:42:59 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <483D64E30D008A4E930645FE7B92CEA406849C@tpeexg01.compal.com> The point is like this: Atheists are not necessarily more scientific or superior than theists. Since why and how comes the universe and the existence of God(s) are the most profound questions that nobody can answer or prove to satisfy the human beings until now, both theists and atheists should respect each other and work together to find the final answer (if it exists). Maybe the final answer is partly objective and partly subjective. Thanks. Walter. --------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From neptune at superlink.net Sat Nov 27 13:13:00 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 08:13:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041126150354.67824.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004e01c4d482$d29f2aa0$4f893cd1@pavilion> On Friday, November 26, 2004 10:03 AM Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com wrote: >> Another one is belief without justification -- >> "firm belief in something for which there is >> no proof." This could even meaning >> holding a believe that seems logically >> or evidentially consistent with the rest of >> one's beliefs, but for which there's no >> particular decesive proof or evidence for >> it one way or the other. (An example could >> be belief that there's intelligent life on other >> worlds. Notice that this isn't really all that >> radical a claim.) >> >> A third and much more radical one is >> Tertullian's type of faith -- believing >> something because it goes against proof >> and evidence -- believing things because >> they are impossible or illogical, actually >> contradition logic and the evidence. To >> put it bluntly: holding an irrational belief. > > Well, in that case I can clearly state that > atheism is a tertullian form of faith, particularly > because it is inherently impossible to prove > a negative, i.e. it is impossible to prove the > non-existence of God. Ergo, atheists believe > the impossible. Wrong! Again, Mike confuses belief with justification for a particular belief. (And, as I've stated before, atheism is merely the lack of belief in God/gods.) Merely being an atheist (or a theist) does not commit one to a particular justification. Yes, there could be Tertullian atheists but that doesn't mean atheism is necessarily Tertullian. (As I've mentioned earlier, too, not all theists hold their theism because of a Tertullian fath in God. Recall, Tertullian faith is believing _against_ logic and evidence.) On a very trivial level, a person might not have ever thought of the idea of God/gods and just never have come to a belief about God/gods. That person would lack a belief in God/gods. Let's say there was a machine called the Belief Detector -- a machine that detects specific beliefs in people's minds when it's close enough to them:) -- and the dial was set to "God/gods" and it was place next to this person. It would register "No belief." That would make the person an atheist. Yet she would have no particular justification for her atheism because she merely lacked the belief. It's not that she had the presence of a conviction that, "There is/are no God/gods." She could NOT be, by definition, a Tertullian atheist. Why? Her lack of belief is not against logic and evidence. Her lack of belief does not arise in that fashion. Now, as for proving the negative, what is to be proved? As George H. Smith, Michael Martin, and others have pointed out, the concept of God/gods is flawed in the conventional and traditional definitions -- i.e., a transcendent being that is omnipotent, omniscient, etc. It's contradictory and incoherent. (I'm not using Smith, Martin, etc. as authorities here, just giving credit where credit is due. Plus, it'd be easier on me for you to read their works than for me to either regurgitate their views or ramify my own on the subject in this venue.:) Damien Broderick came up with some examples similar to "God/gods:" "square circle" and "pitch-black light." One need not prove that square circles do not exist because there are plainly contradictory and meaningless -- at least, in the English language as the words are usually defined. The proving a negative only works for things that are logically possible. The concept of God or gods does not fit that bill. Regards, Dan See "Family, Social Order, and Government" at: http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/FamilySOG.html From riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 27 15:48:53 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 10:48:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> References: <20041124235533.56343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <470a3c5204112423157c830672@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Rewriting history, and rewriting science, are always first steps toward > a totalitarian Orwellian system. Let's hope both types of talibanism are > only temporary reactions to the overheated political climate. The US became a world power because of risk taking. You lose some, but you win so much more. Now it appears to be in decline, thanks to risk avoidance... 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 riel at surriel.com Sat Nov 27 15:54:39 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 10:54:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Brazil and China to legalize genetically modifiedcrops In-Reply-To: <033901c4d186$94a79510$e1964c44@kevin> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041123105502.03897c98@pop-server.austin.rr.com> <033901c4d186$94a79510$e1964c44@kevin> Message-ID: On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Kevin Freels wrote: > This is good news. One thing I have been wondering lately is why we > don't do the same thing with meat. Because a field of naturally occurring grass is much cheaper than building a factory ? 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 cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 27 17:00:23 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:00:23 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <1101530787.20563.7594.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <003e01c4d4a2$963431d0$60b32643@kevin> A search of the word turns up many definitions. Webster's calls atheism "2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity " If this is the case, the Mike is correct. Others put it as a lack of belief which in that case, Mike would be wring. I tried the Oxford Dictinary, but they want a $295 subscription for a year which I thought to be a bit much for the purposes of this conversation.:-) Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fred C. Moulton" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... > On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 00:12, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > I think my point is quite clear, and the fact that you can't see it is > > illustrative of the blind spot that atheists find themselves in: > > proving a negative is impossible, ergo the belief that god does not > > exist is based on an impossible assumption and therefore is an article > > of faith. > > Mike > > I am confident that you are well meaning but unfortunately you are > confused at very a fundamental level. You continue to have a false idea > of Atheism even after several of us have tried to explain it to you. > You fail to understand that an Atheist does not have to prove the > non-existence of anything. > > Once you understand that the meaning of the term Atheism then perhaps > the conversation might continue. But I will admit that I can not think > of a way to help you overcome your confusion so I will step aside for a > moment so that perhaps some other participant can explain it to you. > > Regards > > Fred > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 17:15:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:15:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <004e01c4d482$d29f2aa0$4f893cd1@pavilion> Message-ID: <20041127171510.51706.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Technotranscendence wrote: > On Friday, November 26, 2004 10:03 AM Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com > wrote: > > Well, in that case I can clearly state that > > atheism is a tertullian form of faith, particularly > > because it is inherently impossible to prove > > a negative, i.e. it is impossible to prove the > > non-existence of God. Ergo, atheists believe > > the impossible. > > Wrong! Again, Mike confuses belief with justification for a > particular > belief. (And, as I've stated before, atheism is merely the lack of > belief in God/gods.) Merely being an atheist (or a theist) does not > commit one to a particular justification. Yes, there could be > Tertullian atheists but that doesn't mean atheism is necessarily > Tertullian. (As I've mentioned earlier, too, not all theists hold > their theism because of a Tertullian fath in God. Recall, > Tertullian faith is believing _against_ logic and evidence.) A person without a belief in god, but also without a belief in the non-existence of god, is more properly described as an agnostic. A belief without justification is a faith. > On a very trivial level, a person might not have ever thought of the > idea of God/gods and just never have come to a belief about God/gods. > That person would lack a belief in God/gods. Let's say there was a > machine called the Belief Detector -- a machine that detects specific > beliefs in people's minds when it's close enough to them:) -- and the > dial was set to "God/gods" and it was place next to this person. It > would register "No belief." That would make the person an atheist. No, it would make them an agnostic or an atheist, depending on what a follow up detection said about their belief in the non-existence of god. > > Now, as for proving the negative, what is to be proved? As George H. > Smith, Michael Martin, and others have pointed out, the concept of > God/gods is flawed in the conventional and traditional definitions -- > > i.e., a transcendent being that is omnipotent, omniscient, etc. It's > contradictory and incoherent. (I'm not using Smith, Martin, etc. as > authorities here, just giving credit where credit is due. Plus, it'd > be easier on me for you to read their works than for me to either > regurgitate their views or ramify my own on the subject in this > venue.:) > Damien Broderick came up with some examples similar to "God/gods:" > "square circle" and "pitch-black light." One need not prove that > square > circles do not exist because there are plainly contradictory and > meaningless -- at least, in the English language as the words are > usually defined. > > The proving a negative only works for things that are logically > possible. The concept of God or gods does not fit that bill. Now you are putting yourself into tertullian territory again, by justifying, via a claim to logical proof, that the concept of god does not have a logical possibility of existence in any sort of reality. This is an assertion to justification of a belief in the non-existence of god. An assertion about 'square circles' and 'pitch black light' being impossible are easily dismissed: non-euclidean geometries could easily posit the existence of square circles, just as they include rules like parallel lines that touch, etc. while 'pitch black light' is easily demonstrated as photons transmitted at ultra-violet frequencies.... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 27 17:29:23 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:29:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <483D64E30D008A4E930645FE7B92CEA406849C@tpeexg01.compal.com> Message-ID: <007301c4d4a6$a358ec30$6600a8c0@brainiac> RE: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition...From: Walter_Chen at compal.com > The point is like this: Atheists are not necessarily more scientific or superior than theists. I would think that atheists *are* probably more scientific (not all of them, but in a greater majority than theists), but "superior" is a loaded word and concept to use in this context, to the point of being completely meaningless. However, compared to the history of humankind beforehand, the ideas that came out of the Enlightenment (taking the viewpoint away from imaginary, invisible, omnipotent, humorless and somewhat insecure being(s) and focusing on humans) proved better for us all. > Since why and how comes the universe and the existence of God(s) are the most profound questions that nobody can answer or prove to satisfy the human beings until now, both theists and atheists should respect each other and work together to find the final answer (if it exists). You incorrectly state that "why and how ... the existence of god(s)" is "one of the profound questions that nobody can answer." I mean - I don't know how to put it more gently, but - that's twaddle. You also state that both theists and atheists "should" respect each other. It seems you are confusing "should respect each other" with "should respect each other's *right*" to believe what they want. Working together in a pluralistic society, however, is a good idea (... and this charming scene was inspired by another basic concept from the Enlightenment - tolerance). > Maybe the final answer is partly objective and partly subjective. Maybe there is no such thing as a "final answer" (whatever that means). Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 27 17:36:51 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:36:51 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041127171510.51706.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <007a01c4d4a7$ae702ab0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > A person without a belief in god, but also without a belief in the > non-existence of god, is more properly described as an agnostic. Mike, are you saying that *no one* can rightly be an a(insertanycrazyideaofyourchoice)ist? > A belief without justification is a faith. ... and that, therefore, anyone who professes to be an a(insertanycrazyideaofyourchoice)ist is a "faithful" person? Does the proposal that "the burden of proof is on the person asserting the belief" make any sense to you? Olga From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 18:47:36 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 10:47:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <007a01c4d4a7$ae702ab0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Mike Lorrey" > > > A person without a belief in god, but also without a belief in the > > non-existence of god, is more properly described as an agnostic. > > Mike, are you saying that *no one* can rightly be an > a(insertanycrazyideaofyourchoice)ist? Nope. I am asserting that in order to be an atheist, you must believe in the non-existence of god. To simply not have faith in or knowledge knowledge of god's existence is agnosticism. If you believe a negative (i.e. something which is unprovable) you have faith, ergo real atheism is a faith. > > > A belief without justification is a faith. > > ... and that, therefore, anyone who professes to be an > a(insertanycrazyideaofyourchoice)ist is a "faithful" person? Exactly. > > Does the proposal that "the burden of proof is on the person > asserting the belief" make any sense to you? And when the person with the belief cannot demonstrate a proof (because proving a negative is impossible) then they are believing on faith alone. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From hal at finney.org Sat Nov 27 19:12:18 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:12:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041127191218.A8C6F57E2B@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > I am asserting that in order to be an atheist, you must believe > in the non-existence of god. To simply not have faith in or knowledge > knowledge of god's existence is agnosticism. Isn't it more reasonable to ascribe a probability to the existence of the Jewish God, as well as to the Christian God, the Moslem God, and all the other Gods who have been proposed to exist? And of course, we would ascribe a probability to the existence of any other hypothetical entity? How would you classify someone who thought it was extremely improbable that any of these Gods existed? Atheist or agnostic? Does it make a difference how improbable they judge it to be? Is there some specific probability level below which a reasonable person could not (in your judgement) classify God's existence? Hal From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Nov 27 19:22:26 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:22:26 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c4d4b6$6ef89de0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > > > A person without a belief in god, but also without a belief in the > > > non-existence of god, is more properly described as an agnostic. [etc.] Unfortunately, many people don't understand "agnostic" very well - especially people with beliefs regarding "god(s)." God-believers - will *often count agnostics as one of them* (putting them in the category of a "weak believer") by default. As I'm ecumenical towards religiosity (i.e., I *dislike* all forms of religiosity) - I don't want to be counted as one of the "faithful." I have actually taken to calling myself a nontheist for some years (although I sometimes have to explain the term "notheist" term to people who have never heard it, something the term "atheist" does not make me do). I am also a nonsupernaturalist. Call me what you will, but however you slice and dice it, I am not a person who takes a belief based on "faith." And to call a "faithless" person "faithful" is just an exercise in futility. As to the dictionary definition (written for the convenience of the public - and therefore somewhat dumbed down) of atheist, sometimes the definitions are not right on. Years ago I was getting rid of some old books, and happened to notice that in the encyclopedia set my husband has had since his childhood - the section on "atheists" was written by people with "Rev." in front of their names, and various other theologians ...! (What a surprise ... ?) A good working for definition of "faith" is "an admission that one does not have proof." Certainly one can't prove a negative - so why not simply deal with reality? Who cares about proving something that doesn't exist .. if it *doesn't* exist? > And when the person with the belief cannot demonstrate a proof (because > proving a negative is impossible) then they are believing on faith alone. Aaaargh ...!!! Olga From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 19:30:33 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 11:30:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127191218.A8C6F57E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041127193033.93671.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > Mike Lorrey writes: > > I am asserting that in order to be an atheist, you must believe > > in the non-existence of god. To simply not have faith in or > knowledge > > knowledge of god's existence is agnosticism. > > Isn't it more reasonable to ascribe a probability to the existence of > the Jewish God, as well as to the Christian God, the Moslem God, and > all the other Gods who have been proposed to exist? And of course, we > would ascribe a probability to the existence of any other hypothetical > entity? It might be more reasonable, but the arguments made by pseudo-atheists as to their preferred probabilities are demolished by the Simulation Argument. A person who ascribed any probabilities they regarded to be within the realm of possibility (say, in the range of winning a lottery, being hit by lightning or an asteroid/comet/meteorite, seeing the Sun go nova, meeting intelligent alien life forms) must be an agnostic. Atheist odds for the existence of any hypothetical supernatural entity would be in the range of being beyond the odds of one unique event occuring the the entire lifespan of the universe. Like a terrorist, a theist only has to get it right once for all atheists who ever existed or ever will exist to be wrong. > How would you classify someone who thought it was extremely > improbable that any of these Gods existed? Atheist or agnostic? I'd classify them as a Poor Gambler. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 27 21:18:21 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:18:21 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] atheists launch dumb song lyrics In-Reply-To: <20041126180642.CFB2F57E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <007601c4d4c6$a5ae1940$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > "Hal Finney" > Amara writes: > > San Jose is more populated, but unless you are from > California, or the from western US, the probability is low that you know where it is. > > Of course this problem was immortalized in the song of the > lost traveller: "Do you know the way to San Jose?" Ja, I actually like the song, and I've been a Dionne Warwick fan ever since, but for cryin out loud, the lyrics are stupid. Has she ever heard of a MAP? All this time we were told women didn't mind asking directions. Most gas station people have a least a vague notion of where San Jose might be found. Those lyrics are so dumb, it reminds me of the Dana Carvey comedy routine "Chopping Broccoli". The routine is about how rock and roll songs have lyrics that are so dumb, you are certain that they just made them up on the spot, just started strumming the guitar and singing whatever came to mind. He came up with this: There's a lady I know If I didn't know her She'd be the lady I didn't know. And my lady, she went downtown She bought some broccoli She brought it home. She's chopping broccoli Chopping broccoli Chopping broccoli Chopping broccoli She's chopping broccoli She's chopping broccoli She's chop.. ooh! She's chopping broccola-ah-ie! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shes cold as ice paradice and the feelin wasa nice ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ New beginnings New beginnings New beginnings New beginnings ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Going to the club, gotta work out, work out Going to the club, gotta work out, work out ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ shes my lady shes my girl shes my little little girl ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ dead dog lyin in the ditch cigarette smoker has an itch secret whores with ancient vices lucky has the lowest prices im gettin higher...im gettin higher...in the world {8^D From benboc at lineone.net Sat Nov 27 22:00:28 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:00:28 +0000 Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <200411271900.iARJ0Z008494@tick.javien.com> References: <200411271900.iARJ0Z008494@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <41A8F8FC.1080202@lineone.net> Damien Broderick wrote: "...what sanction could there possibly be for *worship* of such a programmer? What moral authority would such a `god' have over us, other than brute force? What duties would be entailed upon us (except, perhaps, self-respecting revolt against its arbitrary dictats if they were disclosed in a convincing fashion)?" I have a question, quite apart from the other considerations here: You seem to be assuming that the kind of god that religious people believe in is automatically due the kind of worship they give it. Your quite reasonable questions refer to a celestial hacker, but I'd like to know what sanction could there possibly be for worship of ANY god, however it is construed? What moral authority could any god really have over us, other than brute force? As far as i can see, the only valid moral authority has to come from within each person, not imposed from outside, regardless of the source. If somebody tells me that eating peanut butter on wednesday is wrong, i'm going to want to know why, and it'd better be a good reason, that i can consider and agree with. Otherwise, it's just bullying. Maybe i would refrain from doing it if i was persuaded that i would go to hell, or suffer some equally undesirable fate, but that's got nothing to do with behaving morally. Even if you do believe in a god, that's no reason to respect it, let alone follow it's percieved wishes. Surely there must be, somewhere in our history, at least one sect whose scripture reads something like "we believe in almighty god, and we think he's a complete bastard"? (btw, this thread is, for a change, very entertaining. Now i know why i keep coming back!) Just to contribute my little bit of oxygen to the discussion, my dictionary defines Atheism as "Rejection of belief in God or gods". I think that that's not quite the same thing as asserting that god or gods don't exist (Anti-theism?), just that one rejects belief in them. Makes sense, as i always understood "a-something" to mean "not-something", not "anti-something". An Agnostic, in my 1979 English english dictionary, is "A person who claims, with respect to any particular question, that the answer cannot be known with certainty." I don't know what the correct term is for someone who just doesn't care whether or not gods exist. So, there are Anti-theists, who say "There is/are no god/s", Atheists, who don't believe in god/s, Agnostics, who don't know, and Don't-care-ists, who, er, don't care one way or the other. Oh, and of course, there's anti-religious people, who think that religion itself (irrespective of the existence or not of gods) is a Bad Thing. ben (who tries hard to be all of the above, and is especially happy to be an agnostic, 'cos "There's nothing an agnostic can't do, if he really doesn't know whether he believes in anything or not.") From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Nov 27 22:18:04 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:18:04 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041127193033.93671.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <010701c4d4ce$f7358d90$b8232dcb@homepc> Either God, sufficiently defined as to be a meaningful referent between two people discussing the word, exists or doesn't exist. So the proposition "that God exists" is either true or false but not necessarily falsifiable. Some definitions of God are internally inconsistent and such a God cannot exist. In such cases it is not a matter of belief to assert that God does not exist, it is a matter of logic. But people play with words like God and in so doing change the meaning of the word making the referent a source of confusion. For example Spinoza said "God is that being than which none greater can exist." And then added the stipulation that to exist in reality is better (i.e. greater) than to exist merely in the imagination. Spinoza's conception of God as thus far outlined does not violate the contingency of the universe. On the contrary it seems specifically designed to fit within it. God is merely the greatest being existing in reality. However much smaller contingency may make the real world than any imaginary one God would still be the greatest existing thing in that real world. Thinking of God in that way Spinoza could not be an atheist even if he was the only sentient thinker in the universe - as Spinoza would then be God. Not a very impressive one by other conceptions of God perhaps but the best one that could exist in reality for Spinoza. Brett Paatsch From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Nov 27 22:43:53 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:43:53 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence In-Reply-To: <20041126223623.59832.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008201c4d4d2$92b6ca10$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Stephen Hawking likely would not have survived past > childhood 200 years ago... Hawking didn't get ALS until he was already an adult. Were you referring to other medical problems he had as a child? I did hear (I think) that Hawking sets a new record every day for the longest ALS survivor. spike From jbloch at humanenhancement.com Sat Nov 27 22:56:44 2004 From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:56:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127045349.75072.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127045349.75072.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A9062C.1040602@humanenhancement.com> Intelligent Design by any other name would sound as silly... Joseph Mike Lorrey wrote: > >It is pretty clear and easy to understand: the Simulation Argument >states that the odds of being in a simulation universe are so much >greater than the odds of being in a non-simulated universe, that the >sentient inhabitants of any given universe must consider being in a >simulation universe to be the default assumption until and unless >proven otherwise. > From sentience at pobox.com Sat Nov 27 23:00:29 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:00:29 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127191218.A8C6F57E2B@finney.org> References: <20041127191218.A8C6F57E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <41A9070D.7060900@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > > How would you classify someone who thought it was extremely improbable > that any of these Gods existed? Atheist or agnostic? Does it make a > difference how improbable they judge it to be? Is there some specific > probability level below which a reasonable person could not (in your > judgement) classify God's existence? I'd say that someone who assigns a probability of less than 1/googolplex to a given classical theological deity is being overconfident. Saying that said deity is internally inconsistent is not a valid defense; there will be a probability that you are mistaken about what is logically impossible. Googolplex = 10^(10^100). That's enough room to fit a pretty huge amount of Kolmogorov complexity, which is what we use to quantify the prior of Occam's Razor. The probability would be greater than 1/googolplex, but less than 1/googol (which is *not* enough room to fit a decent amount of Kolmogorov complexity - e.g. you could not encode the Bible in log2(googol) bits.) Of course, as Ben pointed out, the moral indefensibility of God has nothing to do with God existing or not. Torturing anyone who refuses to worship you or slaughtering children as a lesson to their parents is WRONG, period, end of story. I am tempted to say, "Let us make no distinction between the terrorists and those who worship them", but theists don't deserve that. Otherwise nice rabbis are somehow capable of reading the Bible and not taking moral notice of the part where God deliberately slaughters children who happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time (Egypt during the Ten Plagues). That part of the brain gets suspended somehow. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Sat Nov 27 23:02:39 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:02:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Not believing in Eris is also a religion Message-ID: <41A9078F.2090809@pobox.com> I'm always amused by people who insist that atheism is a religion. Do I need a separate form of atheism for each religion I don't believe in? Am I just an atheistic Jew, or also an atheistic Christian, an atheistic neo-pagan, and an atheistic Dionysian? Maybe I should become an atheistic druid so I can tell people I don't believe in trees. I bet you didn't even know you were an atheistic Flomnurker until I just now told you. Remember, not believing in Flomnurk is also a religion. They have religious observances and everything - if you don't believe in Flomnurk, you need to salute all purple things and blow your nose twice before going to bed. You also need to tithe 10% of your annual income to an P.O. Box in Missouri. If you slip me fifty bucks, I'll tell you enough about Flomnurk that you can believe in it, so you can save your money. It's amazing to me that I belong to an infinite number of religions by virtue of no one having ever conceived of them. And a Christian, of course, would be an "atheistic atheist", because not believing in atheism is also a religion. If you don't believe this, that makes you an atheistic atheistic atheist. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From fortean1 at mindspring.com Sat Nov 27 23:22:44 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:22:44 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] The no-need-to-change-things party Message-ID: <41A90C44.DB272AC4@mindspring.com> "First, the party is increasingly dominated by people who have no yearning for growth: public-sector workers; academics and trustafarians who both live off inherited endowments; environmentalists who want to regulate SUVs and urban sprawl; and billionaires who are too rich to aspire to anything. (One of the best statistics of the campaign is that people worth $1m-10m supported Mr Bush by a 63-37% margin, whereas those worth more than $10m favoured Mr Kerry 59-41%.) "Second, the Democratic Party is ceasing to be a mom-and-pop party. Phillip Longman of the New America Foundation points out that the fertility rate in the Kerry states is 12% lower than in the Bush states. Vermont, the home of Howard Dean and perhaps the most left-wing state in the country, produces an annual average of 49 children for every 1,000 women of child-bearing age; in Utah, where 71% of the population voted for Mr Bush, the figure is 91. In deep-blue cities such as San Francisco and Seattle you find more dogs than children. "The Democrats are not beyond redemption. Mr Clinton showed they can triumph in the suburbs by preaching economic growth and social responsibility. But they must abandon all this comforting claptrap about fear being Mr Bush's friend--and start to focus on the much more devastating truth. In America, self-styled progressives look ever more the party of the past, and confessed conservatives are the ones focusing on the future." Lexington | The fear myth The Economist November 20th-26th 2004 p. 38 -- "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 Sat Nov 27 23:22:56 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:22:56 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Post-election brain drain? U.S. scientists being enticed to Europe Message-ID: <41A90C50.24C923D1@mindspring.com> Germany and other European countries should make the most of the results of the US presidential election to woo back researchers from America, a leading stem cell researcher has suggested. Germany now has a "unique opportunity to keep scientists in Germany and recruit top scientists from around the world" because of the current "not exactly rosy" research and political situation in the United States. Already, 20 American researchers worried about the direction of American science -- especially embryonic stem cell research -- in the coming years under the Bush administration have been talking to Hans R. Sch?ler, head of the Department of Cell and Developmental Biology at the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Biomedicine in M?nsterore. America's loss may be Europe's gain... http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20041123/03 Paul W Harrison, TESL interEnglish (Finland) -- "Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress." Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1 at mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1 at msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org > [Southeast Asia veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.] From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Nov 28 00:02:26 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 11:02:26 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041127191218.A8C6F57E2B@finney.org> <41A9070D.7060900@pobox.com> Message-ID: <016b01c4d4dd$8bcaa130$b8232dcb@homepc> Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Hal Finney wrote: >> >> How would you classify someone who thought it was extremely improbable >> that any of these Gods existed? Atheist or agnostic? Does it make a >> difference how improbable they judge it to be? Is there some specific >> probability level below which a reasonable person could not (in your >> judgement) classify God's existence? > > I'd say that someone who assigns a probability of less than 1/googolplex > to a given classical theological deity is being overconfident. You're too rash Eliezer. Assigning "a probability of less than" any very very small number is not necessarily assigning a probability greater than zero. > Saying that said deity is internally inconsistent is not a valid defense; > there will be a probability that you are mistaken about what is logically > impossible. If some concept is internally inconsistent (ie. logically inconsistent) surely it doesn't matter which particular fallible all-too-human asserter points it out, what matters is that anyone capable of checking logic can check it out for themselves. And that a group of logic appreciating people will eventually come to a very strong consensus despite a few of them making errors in their early passes. > Googolplex = 10^(10^100). That's enough room to fit a pretty huge amount > of Kolmogorov complexity, which is what we use to quantify the prior of > Occam's Razor. Who's we? I doubt Occam could have been included in that subset. He'd have died too soon. > The probability would be greater than 1/googolplex, but less than > 1/googol (which is *not* enough room to fit a decent amount of Kolmogorov > complexity - e.g. you could not encode the Bible in log2(googol) bits.) > > Of course, as Ben pointed out, the moral indefensibility of God has > nothing to do with God existing or not. Torturing anyone who refuses to > worship you or slaughtering children as a lesson to their parents is > WRONG, period, end of story. It is interesting that you say this. And I agree with it. But my agreement is not intellectual. Out of curiousity, given that you are someone who places some importance in the notion of "friendliness" and who also respects clear thinking and logic, on what basis other than personal preference do you assert that ANYTHING is "WRONG"? Are you asserting anything stronger than your emotional agreement or something other than mere sentiment in your view? I'm curious as to what your values are based on in your view or if you take WRONGNESS as axiomatic. If they are axiomatic perhaps your own notion of friendliness might not be ultimately communicable. Brett Paatsch From jbloch at humanenhancement.com Sun Nov 28 00:49:21 2004 From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 19:49:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41A92091.3050409@humanenhancement.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 28 01:27:05 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 01:27:05 +0000 Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41A8F8FC.1080202@lineone.net> References: <200411271900.iARJ0Z008494@tick.javien.com> <41A8F8FC.1080202@lineone.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:00:28 +0000, ben wrote: > > I don't know what the correct term is for someone who just doesn't care > whether or not gods exist. > > So, there are Anti-theists, who say "There is/are no god/s", Atheists, > who don't believe in god/s, Agnostics, who don't know, and > Don't-care-ists, who, er, don't care one way or the other. Oh, and of > course, there's anti-religious people, who think that religion itself > (irrespective of the existence or not of gods) is a Bad Thing. > Well, playing with the visual thesaurus, I find ------ agnostic/doubter - a person who doubts the truth of religion is a type of non-religious person ( a person who does not manifest devotion to a deity) which include:- nihilist - someone who rejects all theories of morality or religious belief. or gentile/heathen/pagan/infidel - a person who does not acknowledge *your* God or rationalist/positivist - someone who emphasizes observable facts and excludes metaphysical speculation about origins or ultimate causes or deist/freethinker - a person who believes that God created the universe, then abandoned it or blasphemer - a person who speaks disrespectfully of sacred things or nonbeliever/unbeliever/disbeliever - someone who refuses to believe (as in a divinity) which is a type of atheist - someone who denies the existence of god or is a type of materialist/irreligionist - someone who thinks that nothing exists but physical matter All clear now? :) BillK From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 28 01:32:56 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:32:56 -0800 Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00b701c4d4ea$30aee2e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:00:28 +0000, ben wrote: > > > > I don't know what the correct term is for someone who just > > doesn't care whether or not gods exist... Apatheist? {8^D spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 02:04:31 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:04:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <00b701c4d4ea$30aee2e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041128020431.22219.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:00:28 +0000, ben wrote: > > > > > > I don't know what the correct term is for someone who just > > > doesn't care whether or not gods exist... > > > Apatheist? Dontgiveagoddamnist? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From Walter_Chen at compal.com Sun Nov 28 02:14:50 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 10:14:50 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <483D64E30D008A4E930645FE7B92CEA40684A1@tpeexg01.compal.com> OK. I should say "nowadays Atheists are not necessarily more scientific or more true than theists." And I consider "why and how comes the universe" and "the existence of God(s) or not" are the most profound questions for human beings. And I don't expect the answer is just "42". Human beings can always make some progress (maybe slowly). Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Olga Bourlin Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 1:29 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... From: Walter_Chen at compal.com > The point is like this: Atheists are not necessarily more scientific or superior than theists. I would think that atheists *are* probably more scientific (not all of them, but in a greater majority than theists), but "superior" is a loaded word and concept to use in this context, to the point of being completely meaningless. However, compared to the history of humankind beforehand, the ideas that came out of the Enlightenment (taking the viewpoint away from imaginary, invisible, omnipotent, humorless and somewhat insecure being(s) and focusing on humans) proved better for us all. > Since why and how comes the universe and the existence of God(s) are the most profound questions that nobody can answer or prove to satisfy the human beings until now, both theists and atheists should respect each other and work together to find the final answer (if it exists). You incorrectly state that "why and how ... the existence of god(s)" is "one of the profound questions that nobody can answer." I mean - I don't know how to put it more gently, but - that's twaddle. You also state that both theists and atheists "should" respect each other. It seems you are confusing "should respect each other" with "should respect each other's *right*" to believe what they want. Working together in a pluralistic society, however, is a good idea (... and this charming scene was inspired by another basic concept from the Enlightenment - tolerance). > Maybe the final answer is partly objective and partly subjective. Maybe there is no such thing as a "final answer" (whatever that means). Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dgc at cox.net Sun Nov 28 05:05:10 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 00:05:10 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Independence In-Reply-To: <41A7C2B9.9090201@humanenhancement.com> References: <002101c4d3ec$bf705850$8bb32643@kevin> <41A7C2B9.9090201@humanenhancement.com> Message-ID: <41A95C86.2070800@cox.net> Joseph Bloch wrote: > Kevin, > > That's actually not true. Blacks (and women) were not "not allowed > equal rights as whites". Article I, Section 2, dealing with the number > of Representatives each State is entitled to, merely set the value of > a _slave_ as 3/5 of a non-slave (non-taxpaying Indians not being > included at all). Free blacks were counted fully equally to free whites. > > The 3/5ths rule, often quoted, had nothing to do with rights per se. > It had only to do with calculating population when apportioning > Representatives in Congress. As with all such things, it was the > result of a long process of political compromise. But the key was the > status of the individual as slave or free, which did not necessarily > map to racial origin. There were plenty of free blacks in the United > States at the time (even in many of the slaveholding states). > > That being said, to answer your question, no; I've never heard of any > such thing. Perhaps it's due to the fact that it is a moot point > (there being no "intelligent beings" in the United States who aren't > human. Yet.). Generally, such changes don't come to the fore > beforehand; they are done in reaction to a problem that has arisen. > When the first truely self-aware AI, or Uplifted chimpanzee, emerges, > one might very well see such a movement emerge, although one might > well see a movement to specifically declare "personhood" as being > restricted _solely_ to humans; I predict both movements emerging in > response to the same triggering event. > > Joseph > Thanks, Joseph, for a concise and competent historical analysis. Your analysis has a potential drawback: Past changes operated at a particular pace. The political and constitional processes are aligned to that pace. Unfortunately, the emergence of non-human intelligence is likely to occur at a much faster pace, and the traditional mechanism are unlikely to adapt quickly enough. This is an obvious example of Clarke's Law: an order-of-magnitude quantitative change is a qualitative change. Chimpanzee or Dolphin enhancement are constrained by the generation time, and may thereby remain within the historical pace (though I doubt it.) AIs are not constrained, and therefore fall outside of your analysis. By the time the political/contsitutional/societal consensus can react to the emergence of an AI, the AI may very well have decide to take over some aspect (or all aspects) of the political/economic system. If the AI is ethical given a human concept of ethics, it might be a good idea to specify in advance how we humans think an ethical AI should interact with humanity. From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 28 06:07:37 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 00:07:37 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Declaration of Very Fast Independence In-Reply-To: <41A95C86.2070800@cox.net> References: <002101c4d3ec$bf705850$8bb32643@kevin> <41A7C2B9.9090201@humanenhancement.com> <41A95C86.2070800@cox.net> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041128000351.01a0e000@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:05 AM 11/28/2004 -0500, Dan Clemmensen wrote: >By the time the political/contsitutional/societal consensus >can react to the emergence of an AI, the AI may very well >have decide to take over some aspect (or all aspects) of the >political/economic system. An outcome that seems to me very possible (in view of Fermi) is summarized nicely by Ken MacLeod, in his new novel Newton's Wake: < Once you reach singularity, there are further singularities within it, faster and faster, and in very short order the intelligences involved have fucked off out of our universe, or lost interest in it--we don't know. > Damien Brodrick From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Sun Nov 28 14:38:37 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:38:37 +0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127191218.A8C6F57E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041128172336.00b2b3e0@pop.cris.net> At 11:12 AM 11/27/04 -0800, you Hal Finney wrote: >Isn't it more reasonable to ascribe a probability to the existence of >the Jewish God, as well as to the Christian God, the Moslem God, and all >the other Gods who have been proposed to exist? And of course, we would >ascribe a probability to the existence of any other hypothetical entity? > >How would you classify someone who thought it was extremely improbable >that any of these Gods existed? Atheist or agnostic? Does it make a >difference how improbable they judge it to be? Is there some specific >probability level below which a reasonable person could not (in your >judgement) classify God's existence? From the review by Craig Waterman of The Probability of God: A Simple Calculation That Proves The Ultimate Truth by Stephen D. Unwin (E-SKEPTIC #3 of 2004. JANUARY 12, 2004): A more serious problem with the work is that the author wishes to proceed from a position of ignorance as to the existence of a god (p. 4), yet he arbitrarily limits consideration to the traditional conception of his Judeo-Christian god alone. On what bases are all other god concepts excluded? Special pleading leads to a fatal skewing of the numbers towards the author's pet concept. This fallacy of special pleading forms the core of the Unwin's book and is the same fallacy which kills Pascal's Wager, for the following reason: It does not follow that if the atheists are wrong then the Christians are correct, and it does not follow that if the Christians are wrong then the atheists are correct. It may well be that the atheists are wrong AND the Christians are wrong, so the issue cannot validly be cast as an either/or proposition. To do so is to employ a false dichotomy. Through special pleading, Unwin begins by invoking an a-priori 50% probability towards his god's existence by arguing that 50% is an expression of maximum ignorance (p. 58). I found this position astounding. What of other speculations? Are we merely brains in vats hooked to computers? Do magic elves steal socks from the dryer? Do Space-Penguins live in the center of the moon? Claiming ignorance, the author to be consistent would have us assign an a-priori 50% probability that each of these claims is true. If we begin with the acknowledgment that we are ignorant as to which, if any, of the potential god concepts might actually be true, then there is no bases to favor one concept to the exclusion of all others. Thus ALL potential god concepts must be taken into account, of which the Judeo-Christian concept is but one among an almost inexhaustible number. So the proper a-priori probability given a position of total ignorance is a figure so small as to border on zero, and certainly provides no rational grounds for belief. The 50% figure is purely gratuitous, subverts the burden of proof, and simply dismisses every other potential-god concept. ===== Best! Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Sun Nov 28 15:09:59 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:09:59 +0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <003e01c4d4a2$963431d0$60b32643@kevin> References: <20041127051217.80995.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <1101530787.20563.7594.camel@localhost> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041128124937.00aa17e0@pop.cris.net> At 11:00 AM 11/27/04 -0600, Kevin Freels wrote: >A search of the word turns up many definitions. Webster's calls atheism >I tried the Oxford Dictinary, but they want a $295 subscription for a year >which I thought to be a bit much for the purposes of this conversation.:-) >From The OED on CD-ROM (the complete text of the 20-volume Second Edition) presented by a friend from FIU, sans formatting, alas: atheism Also 6 athisme. [a. F. atheisme (16th c. in Littre), f. Gr. .....: see atheal and -ism. Cf. It. atheismo and the earlier atheonism.] Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism). 1587 Golding De Mornay xx. 310 Athisme, that is to say, vtter godlesnes. 1605 Bacon Adv. Learn. i. i. ?3 A little or superficial knowledge of philosophy may incline the mind of man to atheism. 1711 Addison Spect. No. 119 35 Hypocrisy in one Age is generally succeeded by Atheism in another. 1859 Kingsley Lett. (1878) II. 75 Whatever doubt or doctrinal Atheism you and your friends may have, don?t fall into moral Atheism. and atheist n. (and a.) Also 6 atheyst, 6?7 athist(e. [a. F. atheiste (16th c. in Littre), or It. atheista: see prec. and -ist.] A. n. 1. One who denies or disbelieves the existence of a God. [a1568 Coverdale Hope of Faithf. Pref. Wks. II. 139 Eat we and drink we lustily; to-morrow we shall die: which all the epicures protest openly, and the Italian atheoi.] 1571 Golding Calvin on Ps. Ep. Ded. 3 The Atheistes which say..there is no God. 1604 Rowlands Looke to it 23 Thou damned Athist..That doest deny his power which did create thee. 1709 Shaftesbury Charac. i. i. ?2 (1737) II. 11 To believe nothing of a designing Principle or Mind, nor any Cause, Measure, or Rule of Things, but Chance..is to be a perfect Atheist. 1876 Gladstone in Contemp. Rev. June 22 By the Atheist I understand the man who not only holds off, like the sceptic, from the affirmative, but who drives himself, or is driven, to the negative assertion in regard to the whole Unseen, or to the existence of God. 2. One who practically denies the existence of a God by disregard of moral obligation to Him; a godless man. 1577 Hanmer Anc. Eccl. Hist. 63 The opinion which they conceaue of you, to be Atheists, or godlesse men. 1660 Stanley Hist. Philos. 323/2 An Atheist is taken two ways, for him who is an enemy to the Gods, and for him who believeth there are no Gods. 1667 Milton P.L. i. 495 When the Priest Turns Atheist, as did Ely?s Sons. 1827 Hare Guesses Ser. i. (1873) 27 Practically every man is an atheist, who lives without God in the world. B. attrib. as adj. Atheistic, impious. 1667 Milton P.L. vi. 370 The Atheist crew. 1821 Lockhart Valerino II. xi. 316 Borne from its wounded breast an atheist cry Hath pierced the upper and the nether sky. And from Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary on CD, V2.2, 1999: a?the?ism n. 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God. 2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. This suspiciously echoed by another American lexical authority, American Heritage Dictionary: 1.a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods And finally, The Britannica's, Ultimate 2003 Reference Suit CD-ROM, article (LONG!!!): atheism Introduction in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable. The dialectic of the argument between forms of belief and unbelief raises questions concerning the most perspicuous delineation, or characterization, of atheism, agnosticism, and theism. It is necessary not only to probe the warrant for atheism but also carefully to consider what is the most adequate definition of atheism. This article will start with what have been some widely accepted, but still in various ways mistaken or misleading, definitions of atheism and move to more adequate formulations that better capture the full range of atheist thought and more clearly separate unbelief from belief and atheism from agnosticism. In the course of this delineation the section also will consider key arguments for and against atheism. Atheism as rejection of religious beliefs A central, common core of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is the affirmation of the reality of one, and only one, God. Adherents of these faiths believe that there is a God who created the universe out of nothing and who has absolute sovereignty over all his creation; this includes, of course, human beings-who are not only utterly dependent on this creative power but also sinful and who, or so the faithful must believe, can only make adequate sense of their lives by accepting, without question, God's ordinances for them. The varieties of atheism are numerous, but all atheists reject such a set of beliefs. Atheism, however, casts a wider net and rejects all belief in "spiritual beings," and to the extent that belief in spiritual beings is definitive of what it means for a system to be religious, atheism rejects religion. So atheism is not only a rejection of the central conceptions of Judeo-Christianity and Islam, it is, as well, a rejection of the religious beliefs of such African religions as that of the Dinka and the Nuer, of the anthropomorphic gods of classical Greece and Rome, and of the transcendental conceptions of Hinduism and Buddhism. Generally atheism is a denial of God or of the gods, and if religion is defined in terms of belief in spiritual beings, then atheism is the rejection of all religious belief. It is necessary, however, if a tolerably adequate understanding of atheism is to be achieved, to give a reading to "rejection of religious belief" and to come to realize how the characterization of atheism as the denial of God or the gods is inadequate. Atheism and theism To say that atheism is the denial of God or the gods and that it is the opposite of theism, a system of belief that affirms the reality of God and seeks to demonstrate his existence, is inadequate in a number of ways. First, not all theologians who regard themselves as defenders of the Christian faith or of Judaism or Islam regard themselves as defenders of theism. The influential 20th-century Protestant theologian Paul Tillich, for example, regards the God of theism as an idol and refuses to construe God as a being, even a supreme being, among beings or as an infinite being above finite beings. God, for him, is "being-itself," the ground of being and meaning. The particulars of Tillich's view are in certain ways idiosyncratic, as well as being obscure and problematic, but they have been influential; and his rejection of theism, while retaining a belief in God, is not eccentric in contemporary theology, though it may very well affront the plain believer. Second, and more important, it is not the case that all theists seek to demonstrate or even in any way rationally to establish the existence of God. Many theists regard such a demonstration as impossible, and fideistic believers (e.g., Johann Hamann and Seren Kierkegaard) regard such a demonstration, even if it were possible, as undesirable, for in their view it would undermine faith. If it could be proved, or known for certain, that God exists, people would not be in a position to accept him as their sovereign Lord humbly on faith with all the risks that entails. There are theologians who have argued that for genuine faith to be possible God must necessarily be a hidden God, the mysterious ultimate reality, whose existence and authority must be accepted simply on faith. This fideistic view has not, of course, gone without challenge from inside the major faiths, but it is of sufficient importance to make the above characterization of atheism inadequate. Finally, and most important, not all denials of God are denials of his existence. Believers sometimes deny God while not being at all in a state of doubt that God exists. They either willfully reject what they take to be his authority by not acting in accordance with what they take to be his will, or else they simply live their lives as if God did not exist. In this important way they deny him. Such deniers are not atheists (unless we wish, misleadingly, to call them "practical atheists"). They are not even agnostics. They do not question that God exists; they deny him in other ways. An atheist denies the existence of God. As it is frequently said, atheists believe that it is false that God exists, or that God's existence is a speculative hypothesis of an extremely low order of probability. Yet it remains the case that such a characterization of atheism is inadequate in other ways. For one it is too narrow. There are atheists who believe that the very concept of God, at least in developed and less anthropomorphic forms of Judeo-Christianity and Islam, is so incoherent that certain central religious claims, such as "God is my creator to whom everything is owed," are not genuine truth-claims; i.e., the claims could not be either true or false. Believers hold that such religious propositions are true, some atheists believe that they are false, and there are agnostics who cannot make up their minds whether to believe that they are true or false. (Agnostics think that the propositions are one or the other but believe that it is not possible to determine which.) But all three are mistaken, some atheists argue, for such putative truth-claims are not sufficiently intelligible to be genuine truth-claims that are either true or false. In reality there is nothing in them to be believed or disbelieved, though there is for the believer the powerful and humanly comforting illusion that there is. Such an atheism, it should be added, rooted for some conceptions of God in considerations about intelligibility and what it makes sense to say, has been strongly resisted by some pragmatists and logical empiricists. While the above considerations about atheism and intelligibility show the second characterization of atheism to be too narrow, it is also the case that this characterizationis in a way too broad. For there are fideistic believers, who quite unequivocally believe that when looked at objectively the proposition that God exists has a very low probability weight. They believe in God not because it is probable that he exists-they think it more probable that he does not-but because belief is thought by them to be necessary to make sense of human life. The second characterization of atheism does not distinguish a fideistic believer (a Blaise Pascal or a Kierkegaard) or an agnostic (a T. H. Huxley or a Leslie Stephen) from an atheist such as Baron d'Holbach or Thomas Paine. All believe that "There is a God" and "God protects humankind," however emotionally important they may be, are speculative hypotheses of an extremely low order of probability. But this, since it does not distinguish believers from nonbelievers and does not distinguish agnostics from atheists, cannot be an adequate characterization of atheism. It may be retorted that to avoid apriorism and dogmatic atheism the existence of God should be regarded as a hypothesis. There are no ontological (purely a priori) proofs or disproofs of God's existence. It is not reasonable to rule in advance that it makes no sense to say that God exists. What the atheist can reasonably claim is that there is no evidence that there is a God, and against that background he may very well be justified in asserting that there is no God. It has been argued, however, that it is simply dogmatic for an atheist to assert that no possible evidence could ever give one grounds for believing in God. Instead, atheists should justify their unbelief by showing (if they can) how the assertion is well-taken that there is no evidence that would warrant a belief in God. If atheism is justified, the atheist will have shown that in fact there is no adequate evidence for the belief that God exists, but it should not be part of his task to try to show that there could not be any evidence for the existence of God. If the atheist could somehow survive the death of his present body (assuming that such talk makes sense) and come, much to his surprise, to stand in the presence of God, his answer should be, "Oh! Lord, you didn't give me enough evidence!" He would have been mistaken, and realize that he had been mistaken, in his judgment that God did not exist. Still, he would not have been unjustified, in the light of the evidence available to him during his earthly life, in believing as he did. Not having any such postmortem experiences of the presence of God (assuming that he could have them), what he should say, as things stand and in the face of the evidence he actually has and is likely to be able to get, is that it is false that God exists. (Every time one legitimately asserts that a proposition is false one need not be certain that it is false. "Knowing with certainty" is not a pleonasm.) The claim is that this tentative posture is the reasonable position for the atheist to take. An atheist who argues in this manner may also make a distinctive burden-of-proof argument. Given that God (if there is one) is by definition a very recherche reality-a reality that must be (for there to be such a reality) transcendent to the world-the burden of proof is not on the atheist to give grounds for believing that there is no reality of that order. Rather, the burden of proof is on the believer to give some evidence for God's existence; i.e., that there is such a reality. Given what God must be, if there is a God, the theist needs to present the evidence, for such a very strange reality. He needs to show that there is more in the world than is disclosed by common experience. The empirical method, and the empirical method alone, such an atheist asserts, affords a reliable method for establishing what is in fact the case. To the claim of the theist that there are in addition to varieties of empirical facts "spiritual facts" or "transcendent facts," such as it being the case that there is a supernatural, self-existent, eternal power, the atheist can assert that such "facts" have not been shown. It will, however, be argued by such atheists, against what they take to be dogmatic aprioristic atheists, that the atheist should be a fallibilist and remain open-minded about what the future may bring. There may, after all, be such transcendent facts, such metaphysical realities. It is not that such a fallibilistic atheist is really an agnostic who believes that he is not justified in either asserting that God exists or denying that he exists and that what he must reasonably do is suspend belief. On the contrary, such an atheist believes that he has very good grounds indeed, as things stand, for denying the existence of God. But he will, on the second conceptualization of what it is to be an atheist, not deny that things could be otherwise and that, if they were, he would be justified in believing in God or at least would no longer be justified in asserting that it is false that there is a God. Using reliable empirical techniques, proven methods for establishing matters of fact, the fallibilistic atheist has found nothing in the universe to make a belief that God exists justifiable or even, everything considered, the most rational option of the various options. He therefore draws the atheistical conclusion (also keeping in mind his burden-of-proof argument) that God does not exist. But he does not dogmatically in a priori fashion deny the existence of God. He remains a thorough and consistent fallibilist. Atheism and metaphysical beliefs Such a form of atheism (the atheism of those pragmatists who are also naturalistic humanists), though less inadequate than the first formation of atheism, is still inadequate. God in developed forms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is not, like Zeus or Wotan, construed in a relatively plain anthropomorphic way. Nothing that could count as "God" in such religions could possibly be observed, literally encountered, or detected in the universe. God, in such a conception, is utterly transcendent to the world; he is conceived of as "pure spirit," an infinite individual who created the universe out of nothing and who is distinct from the universe. Such a reality-a reality that is taken to be an ultimate mystery-could not be identified as objects or processes in the universe can be identified. There can be no pointing at or to God, no ostensive teaching of "God," to show what is meant. The word God can only be taught intralinguistically. "God" is taught to someone who does not understand what the word means by the use of descriptions such as "the maker of the universe," "the eternal, utterly independent being upon whom all other beings depend," "the first cause," "the sole ultimate reality," or "a self-caused being." For someone who does not understand such descriptions, there can be no understanding of the concept of God. But the key terms of such descriptions are themselves no more capable of ostensive definition (of having their referents pointed out) than is "God," where that term is not, like "Zeus," construed anthropomorphically. (That does not mean that anyone has actually pointed to Zeus or observed Zeus but that one knows what it would be like to do so.) In coming to understand what is meant by "God" in such discourses, it must be understood that God, whatever else he is, is a being that could not possibly be seen or be in any way else observed. He could not be anything material or empirical, and he is said by believers to be an intractable mystery. A nonmysterious God would not be the God of Judaism, Christianity, and Isl(m. This, in effect, makes it a mistake to claim that the existence of God can rightly be treated as a hypothesis and makes it a mistake to claim that, by the use of the experimental method or some other determinate empirical method, the existence of God can be confirmed or disconfirmed as can the existence of an empirical reality. The retort made by some atheists, who also like pragmatists remain thoroughgoing fallibilists, is that such a proposed way of coming to know, or failing to come to know, God makes no sense for anyone who understands what kind of reality God is supposed to be. Anything whose existence could be so verified would not be the God of Judeo-Christianity. God could not be a reality whose presence is even faintly adumbrated in experience, for anything that could even count as the God of Judeo-Christianity must be transcendent to the world. Anything that could actually be encountered or experienced could not be God. At the very heart of a religion such as Christianity there stands a metaphysical belief in a reality that is alleged to transcend the empirical world. It is the metaphysical belief that there is an eternal, ever-present creative source and sustainer of the universe. The problem is how it is possible to know or reasonably believe that such a reality exists or even to understand what such talk is about. It is not that God is like a theoretical entity in physics such as a proton or a neutrino. They are, where they are construed as realities rather than as heuristically useful conceptual fictions, thought to be part of the actual furniture of the universe. They are not said to be transcendent to the universe, but rather are invisible entities in the universe logically on a par with specks of dust and grains of sand, only much, much smaller. They are on the same continuum; they are not a different kind of reality. It is only the case that they, as a matter of fact, cannot be seen. Indeed no one has an understanding of what it would be like to see a proton or a neutrino-in that way they are like God-and no provision is made in physical theory for seeing them. Still, there is no logical ban on seeing them as there is on seeing God. They are among the things in the universe, and thus, though they are invisible, they can be postulated as causes of things that are seen. Since this is so it becomes at least logically possible indirectly to verify by empirical methods the existence of such realities. It is also the case that there is no logical ban on establishing what is necessary to establish a causal connection, namely a constant conjunction of two discrete empirical realities. But no such constant conjunction can be established or even intelligibly asserted between God and the universe, and thus the existence of God is not even indirectly verifiable. God is not a discrete empirical thing or being, and the universe is not a gigantic thing or process over and above the things and processes in the universe of which it makes sense to say that the universe has or had a cause. But then there is no way, directly or indirectly, that even the probability that there is a God could be empirically established. Atheism and intuitive knowledge The gnostic may reply that there is a nonempirical way of establishing or making it probable that God exists. The claim is that there are truths about the nature of the cosmos neither capable of verification nor standing in need of verification. There is, gnostics claim against empiricists, knowledge of the world that transcends experience and comprehends the sorry scheme of things entire. Since the thorough probings of such epistemological foundations by David Hume and Immanuel Kant, scepticism about how, and indeed even that, such knowledge is possible is very strong indeed. With respect to knowledge of God in particular, both Hume and Kant provide powerful critiques of the traditional attempts to prove the existence of God (notwithstanding the fact that Kant remained a Christian). While some of the details of their arguments have been rejected and refinements rooted in their argumentative procedure have been developed, there is a considerable consensus among philosophers and theologians that arguments of the general type as those developed by Hume and Kant show that no proof of God's existence is possible. Alternatively, to speak of "intuitive knowledge" (an intuitive grasp of being or of an intuition of the reality of the divine being) is to make an appeal to something that is not sufficiently clear to be of any value in establishing anything. Prior to the rise of anthropology and the scientific study of religion, an appeal to revelation and authority as a substitute for knowledge or warranted belief might have been thought to have considerable force. But with a knowledge of other religions and their associated appeals to revealed truth, such arguments are without probative force. Claimed, or alleged, revelations are many, diverse, and not infrequently conflicting; without going in a small and vicious circle, it cannot be claimed, simply by appealing to a given putative revelation, that the revelation is the "true revelation" or the "genuine revelation" and that others are mistaken or, where nonconflicting, mere approximations to the truth. Similar things need to be said for religious authority. Moreover, it is at best problematic whether faith could sanction speaking of testing the genuineness of revelation or of the acceptability of religious authority. Indeed, if something is a "genuine revelation," there is no using reason to assess it. But the predicament is that plainly, as a matter of anthropological fact, there is a diverse and sometimes conflicting field of alleged revelations with no way of deciding or even having a reasonable hunch which, if any, of the candidate revelations is the genuine article. But even if the necessity for tests for the genuineness of revelation is allowed, there still is a claim that clearly will not do, for such a procedure would make an appeal to revelation and authority supererogatory. It is, where such tests are allowed, not revelation or authority that can warrant the most fundamental religious truths on which the rest depend. It is something else-that which establishes the genuineness of the revelation or authority-that guarantees these religious truths (if such there be), including the proposition that God exists. But the question returns, like the repressed, what that fundamental guarantee is or could be. Perhaps such a belief is nothing more than a cultural myth. There is, as has been shown, neither empirical nor a priori knowledge of God, and talk of intuitive knowledge is without logical force. If these considerations are near to the mark, it is unclear what it means to say, as some agnostics and even atheists have, that they are sceptical God-seekers who simply have not found, after a careful examination, enough evidence to make belief in God a warranted or even a reasonable belief. It is unclear what it would be like to have, or for that matter fail to have, evidence for the existence of God. It is not that the God-seeker has to be able to give the evidence, for if that were so no search would be necessary, but that he, or at least somebody, must be able to conceive what would count as evidence if he had it so that he (and others) have some idea of what to look for. But it appears to be just that which cannot be done. Perhaps there is room for the retort that it is enough for the God-seeker not to accept any logical ban on the possibility of there being evidence. He need not understand what it would be like to have evidence in this domain. But, in turn, when one considers what kind of transcendent reality God is said to be, there seems to be an implicit logical ban on there being empirical evidence (a pleonasm) for his existence. It would seen plausible to assert that there is such a ban, though any such assertion should, of course, be made in a tentative way. Someone trying to give empirical anchorage to talk of God might give the following hypothetical case. (It is, however, important in considering the case to keep in mind that things even remotely like what is described do not happen.) If thousands of people were standing out under the starry skies and all saw-the thing went on before their very eyes-a set of stars rearrange themselves to spell out "God," they would indeed rightly be utterly astonished and think that they had gone mad. Even if they could somehow assure themselves that this was not in some way a form of mass hallucination-how they could do this is not evident-such an experience would not constitute evidence for the existence of God, for they still would be without a clue as to what could be meant by speaking of an infinite individual transcendent to the world. Such an observation (the stars so rearranging themselves), no matter how well confirmed, would not ostensively fix the reference range of "God." Talk of such an infinite individual is utterly incomprehensible and has every appearance of being incoherent. No one knows what he is talking about in speaking of such a transcendent reality. All they would know is that something very strange indeed had happened. The doubt arises whether believers, or indeed anyone else in terms acceptable to believers, can give an intelligible account of the concept of God or of what belief in God comes to once God is de-anthropomorphized. Comprehensive definition of atheism Reflection on this should lead to a more adequate statement of what atheism is and indeed as well to what an agnostic or religious response to atheism should be. Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons (which reason is stressed depends on how God is being conceived): for an anthropomorphic God, the atheist rejects belief in God because it is false or probably false that there is a God; for a nonanthropomorphic God (the God of Luther and Calvin, Aquinas, and Maimonides), he rejects belief in God because the concept of such a God is either meaningless, unintelligible, contradictory, incomprehensible, or incoherent; for the God portrayed by some modern or contemporary theologians or philosophers, he rejects belief in God because the concept of God in question is such that it merely masks an atheistic substance-e.g., "God" is just another name for love, or "God" is simply a symbolic term for moral ideals. This atheism is a much more complex notion, as are its various reflective rejections. It is clear from what has been said about the concept of God in developed forms of Judeo-Christianity that the more crucial form of atheist rejection is not the assertion that it is false that there is a God but instead the rejection of belief in God because the concept of God is said not to make sense-to be in some important way incoherent or unintelligible. Such a broader conception of atheism, of course, includes everyone who is an atheist in the narrower sense, but the converse does not obtain. Moreover, this conception of atheism does not have to say that religious claims are meaningless. The more typical and less paradoxical and tendentious claim is that utterances such as "There is an infinite, eternal creator of the universe" are incoherent and that the conception of God reflected in such a claim is unintelligible, and in that important sense the claim is inconceivable and incredible-incapable of being a rational object of belief for a philosophically and scientifically sophisticated person touched by modernity. It is this that is a central belief of many contemporary atheists. There are good empirical grounds for believing that there are no Zeus-like spiritual beings, and as this last, more ramified form of atheism avers, if there are sound grounds for believing that the nonanthropomorphic or at least radically less anthropomorphic conceptions of God are incoherent or unintelligible, the atheist has the strongest grounds for rejecting belief in God. Atheism is a critique and a denial of the central metaphysical beliefs of systems of salvation involving a belief in God or spiritual beings, but a sophisticated atheist does not simply claim that all such cosmological claims are false but takes it that some are so problematic that, while purporting to be factual, they actually do not succeed in making a coherent factual claim. The claims, in an important sense, do not make sense, and, while believers are under the illusion that there is something intelligible to be believed in, in reality there is not. These seemingly grand cosmological claims are in reality best understood as myths or ideological claims reflecting a confused understanding of their utterers' situation. It is not a well-taken rejoinder to atheistic critiques to say, as have some contemporary Protestant theologians, that belief in God is the worst form of atheism and idolatry, since the language of Jewish and Christian belief, including such sentences as "God exists" and "God created the world," is not to be taken literally but symbolically and metaphorically. Christianity, as Reinhold Niebuhr, a theologian who defends such views, once put it, is "true myth." The claims of religion are not, on such account, to be understood as metaphysical claims trying to convey extraordinary facts but as metaphorical and analogical claims that are not understandable in any other terms. Butif something is a metaphor it must at least in principle be possible to say what it is a metaphor of. Thus metaphors cannot be understandable only in metaphorical terms. There can be no unparaphrasable metaphors or symbolic expressions though, what is something else again, a user of such expressions may not be capable on demand of supplying that paraphrase. Moreover, if the language of religion becomes simply the language of myth and religious beliefs are viewed simply as powerful and often humanly compelling myths, then they are conceptions that in reality have only an atheistic substance. The believer is making no cosmological claim that the atheist is not; it is just that his talk, including his unelucidated talk of "true myths," is language that for many people has a more powerful emotive force. Agnosticism has a parallel development to that of atheism. An agnostic, like an atheist, asserts either that he does not know that God exists-or, more typically, that he cannot know or have sound reasons for believing that God exists-but unlike the atheist he does not think that he is justified in saying that God does not exist or, stronger still, that God cannot exist. Similarly, while some contemporary atheists say that the concept of God in developed theism does not make sense and thus that Jewish, Christian, and Islamic beliefs must be rejected, many contemporary agnostics believe that the concept of God is radically problematic. They maintain that they are not in a position to be able to decide whether, on the one hand, the terms and concepts of such religions are so problematic that such religious beliefs do not make sense or whether, on the other, though the talk is indeed radically paradoxical and in many ways incomprehensible, such talk has sufficient coherence to make reasonable a belief in an ultimate mystery. Such an agnostic recognizes that the puzzles about God cut deeper than perplexities concerning whether it is possible to attain adequate evidence for God's existence. Rather, he sees the need to exhibit an adequate nonanthropomorphic, extralinguistic referent for "God." (This need not commit him to the belief that there are any observations independent of theory.) Believers think that, though God is a mystery, such a referent has been secured, though what it is remains a mystery. Atheists, by contrast, believe that it has not been, and indeed some of them believe that it cannot be, secured. To talk about mystery, they maintain, is just an evasive way of talking about what is not understood. Contemporary agnostics (those agnostics who parallel the atheists characterized above) remain in doubt and are convinced that there is no rational way of resolving the doubt about whether talk in a halting fashion of God just barely secures such reference or whether it, after all, fails and that nothing religiously acceptable is referred to by "God." Intense religious commitment, as the history of fideism makes evident, has sometimes gone hand in hand with deep scepticism concerning man's capacity to know God. It is agreed by all parties to the dispute between belief and unbelief that religious claims are paradoxical. Furthermore, criteria for what is meaningless and what is not or for what is intelligible and what is not are deeply contested. It is perhaps fair enough to say that there are no generally accepted criteria. Keeping these diverse considerations in mind in the arguments between belief, agnosticism, and atheism, it is crucial to ask whether there is any good reason at all to believe that there is a personal creative reality that is beyond the bounds of space and time and transcendent to the world. Is there even a sufficient understanding of such talk so that such a reality can be the object of religious commitment? (One cannot have faith in or take on faith what one does not at all understand. People must at least in some way understand what it is that they are to have faith in to be able to have faith in it. If a person is asked to trust Irglig, he cannot do so no matter how strongly he wants to take something simply on trust.) It appears to be a brute fact that there just is that indefinitely immense collection of finite and contingent masses or conglomerations of things and processes the phrase "the universe" refers to. People can come to feel wonder, awe, and puzzlement that there is a universe at all. But that fact, or the very fact that there is a world at all, does not license the claim that there is a noncontingent reality on which the world (the sorry collection of things entire) depends. It is not even clear that such a sense of contingency gives an understanding of what such a noncontingent thing could be. Some atheists think that the reference range of "God" is so indeterminate and the concept of God so problematic that it is impossible for someone fully aware of that reasonably to believe in God; believers, by contrast, think that, though the reference range of "God" is indeterminate, it is not so indeterminate and the concept of God so problematic as to make belief irrational or incoherent. It is known, they claim, that talk of God is problematic, but it is not known, and cannot be known, whether it is so problematic as to be without a religiously appropriate sense. Agnostics, in turn, say that there is no reasonable decision procedure. It is not known and cannot be ascertained whether or not "God" secures a religiously adequate referent. What needs to be kept in mind, in reflecting on this issue, is whether a "contingent thing" is a pleonasm and "infinite reality" is without sense and whether, when people go beyond anthropomorphism (or try to go beyond it),it is possible to have a sufficient understanding of what is referred to by "God" to make faith a coherent possibility. Finally, it will not do to take a Pascalian or Dostoyevskian turn and claim that, intellectual absurdity or not, religious belief is necessary, since without belief in God morality does not make sense and life is meaningless. That claim is false, for even if there is no purpose to life there are purposes in life-things people care about and want to do-that can remain perfectly intact even in a godless world. God or no God, immortality or no immortality, it is vile to torture people just for the fun of it, and friendship, solidarity, love, and the attainment of self-respect are human goods even in an utterly godless world. There are intellectual puzzles about how people know that these things are good, but that is doubly true for the distinctive claims of a religious ethic. The point is that these things remain desirable and that life can have a point even in the absence of God. Kai E. Nielsen ========== Best! Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From hal at finney.org Sun Nov 28 18:18:42 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 10:18:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> Gennady Ra writes: > From the review by Craig Waterman of The Probability of God: A Simple > Calculation That Proves The Ultimate Truth by Stephen D. Unwin (E-SKEPTIC #3 > of 2004. JANUARY 12, 2004): > ... > Through special pleading, Unwin begins by invoking an a-priori 50% > probability towards his god's existence by arguing that 50% is an expression > of maximum ignorance (p. 58). I found this position astounding. What of > other speculations? Are we merely brains in vats hooked to computers? Do > magic elves steal socks from the dryer? Do Space-Penguins live in the center > of the moon? Claiming ignorance, the author to be consistent would have us > assign an a-priori 50% probability that each of these claims is true. I agree that this is a common error in attempts to use Bayesian-style probability analysis, this notion of 50% representing "maximum ignorance". For example, what is the probability that there is life on a planet circling the nearest star, Alpha Centauri? We have no idea! Should we say it is 50%? But we don't even know if the star has planets, let alone whether any of them are in a habitable region, or even what conditions are necessary for the formation of life. As the reviewer notes, you really need to consider all possible situations and establish a probability distribution over all of them. In the end it is unlikely that any particular situation is going to turn out to be at 50% probability. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:04:19 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:04:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041128124937.00aa17e0@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <20041128210419.42068.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gennady Ra wrote: > >From The OED on CD-ROM (the complete text of the 20-volume Second > Edition) presented by a friend from FIU, sans formatting, alas: > > atheism Also 6 athisme. > [a. F. atheisme (16th c. in Littre), f. Gr. .....: see atheal and > -ism. Cf. It. atheismo and the earlier atheonism.] > Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a God. Also, Disregard > of duty to God, godlessness (practical atheism). Thank you, Gennady, for proving my point. So, it is now proven that atheism is based upon a belief in an impossible proof, ergo it is a religion. Now, back to the original point: atheists rewriting history to keep out references to god. This is therefore clearly a violation of the principle of separation of church and state for atheists to be forcing references to god out of the public record, in the service of their faith of disbelief in the existence of god. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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 jonkc at att.net Sun Nov 28 22:03:57 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:03:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> Message-ID: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> The Forbin Project has just come out on DVD, anybody who has not already seen it has 24 hours to do so before they must hang their head in shame. The movie is 35 years old now but it is still the most intelligent and accurate portrayal of Artificial Intelligence ever put on film. In my opinion this is one of the best movies ever made, without a doubt it is the most underrated movie ever made. Be warned however this film will scare you; there is no blood or gore and the special effects are primitive by modern standards, but if The Forbin Project does not scare your brain then you have not understood it. This is one of the very rare occasions when the movie is better, much much better, than the book. When I read the book years ago I remember thinking the premise was great and with a few changes it could be really great, but as it is the book was just mediocre at best. With genius you wouldn?t expect B grade moviemakers to have they kept all the brilliant parts and eliminated all the stupid parts. All I can say is that if you don?t think this old movie is exceptional then there is something wrong with you. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Nov 28 22:27:32 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:27:32 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution again In-Reply-To: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <012601c4d599$7775d4e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> I had an idea which follows up on our discussion from last week. Assume Jared Diamond's notion that human variation can be very generally grouped in three subsets, African, European and Asian. Jared suggests that the Asian group has features that are well-adapted for cold weather, such as the shorter stature, eye shape possibly less susceptible to freezing, better suited for carrying fat, etc. The Africans then would be shaped for better survival under milder climates, but with greater competition with other carnivores, etc. The Europeans then would be somewhere in between the other two groups in those anatomical features which have been shaped by climatological conditions. Now perhaps I am pushing this entire notion too far, but try this on. Suppose that the Asians were the first humans to clothe themselves, for sheer necessity in their harsh climate, and the Africans the last to do so in their milder environs. Now, what if humans preferentially chose partners with larger penises? This would explain why humans have larger penises than chimps, would it not? Now here's where I'm speculating to some extent: if size really does matter to human females, and Asians clothed first (thus partially defeating the outward selection criterion) and Africans clothed last, would not this explain the unescapable observation well known by anyone who has been in the men's locker room? spike From jbloch at humanenhancement.com Sun Nov 28 22:28:14 2004 From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:28:14 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41AA50FE.9050504@humanenhancement.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > >Nope. I am asserting that in order to be an atheist, you must believe >in the non-existence of god. To simply not have faith in or knowledge >knowledge of god's existence is agnosticism. > > You can redefine things to mean what you want them to mean, rather than what they really mean (to the people to whom they apply), but it seems rather pointless. Much like this entire conversation, which could just as easily be had in any AOL chatroom with the word "Atheism" in the title. Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). The position that god(s) do not exist does _not_ require proof any more than the position that Santa Claus does not exist. Sorry that infuriates you so, Mike, but that's the way it is. You can torture the words all you want, you can trot out the Simulation Argument as some sort of "theism must be correct" trump card-- which it is not by any stretch of the imagination-- all you want. But it doesn't change the fact that theism is a positive assertion-- the assertion that god(s) exist in a universe that does not require their existence and provides no objective evidence of their existence-- and thus possesses the burden of proof. In the absence of evidence, the rational choice is to _not_ believe until such evidence is presented. The universe doesn't need your god, Mike. If it exists, it's doing a great job of hiding itself, much like Santa Claus. I don't have to "believe in the non-existence of god" any more than you have to "believe in the non-existence of Santa Claus". I have given you no reason to believe in the existence of the jolly ol' elf, and you have given me no evidence to believe in any god(s). Just as the rational choice is to not believe in St. Nick unless someone presents objective evidence that he exists, so too the rational choice is to not believe in god(s) unless someone presents objective evidence that it/they exist. Interestingly, the reason some people believe in Santa Claus is the same that most people believe in god(s). They were told to believe so by their parents, and children being trusting little tykes, they believe what they're told. If only they outgrew their belief in god(s) when they outgrew their belief in Santa Claus, the world, I am convinced, would be a better place. Joseph From sentience at pobox.com Sun Nov 28 22:33:00 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:33:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <41AA521C.9090800@pobox.com> John K Clark wrote: > The Forbin Project has just come out on DVD, anybody who has not already > seen it has 24 hours to do so before they must hang their head in > shame. The movie is 35 years old now but it is still the most > intelligent and accurate portrayal of Artificial Intelligence ever put > on film. In my opinion this is one of the best movies ever made, without > a doubt it is the most underrated movie ever made. Be warned however > this film will scare you; there is no blood or gore and the special > effects are primitive by modern standards, but if The Forbin Project > does not scare your brain then you have not understood it. Can't say I share your enthusiasm. Even 2001 was less anthropomorphic. The SIAI Board of Directors watched this movie some time ago, and MST3K'd it. When Colossus went bad, the comment was: "That didn't take long, even by our standards." -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From megao at sasktel.net Sun Nov 28 22:34:40 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:34:40 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Collosus/The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <41AA5280.8040800@sasktel.net> With all the re-makes of oldies that have been done and cataclysmic event themes done it is surprising that no one has tried to re-tool it. Perhaps, because it was and is just too close to reality. John K Clark wrote: > The Forbin Project has just come out on DVD, anybody who has not already > seen it has 24 hours to do so before they must hang their head in > shame. The > movie is 35 years old now but it is still the most intelligent and > accurate > portrayal of Artificial Intelligence ever put on film. In my opinion > this is > one of the best movies ever made, without a doubt it is the most > underrated > movie ever made. Be warned however this film will scare you; there is no > blood or gore and the special effects are primitive by modern > standards, but > if The Forbin Project does not scare your brain then you have not > understood > it. > > This is one of the very rare occasions when the movie is better, much > much better, than the book. When I read the book years ago I remember > thinking the premise was great and with a few changes it could be really > great, but as it is the book was just mediocre at best. With genius you > wouldn?t expect B grade moviemakers to have they kept all the > brilliant parts and eliminated all the stupid parts. All I can say is > that > if you don?t think this old movie is exceptional then there is > something wrong with you. > > John K Clark jonkc at att.net > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Nov 28 22:36:54 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:36:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041128210419.42068.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20041128124937.00aa17e0@pop.cris.net> <20041128210419.42068.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041128162953.01a12ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:04 PM 11/28/2004 -0800, Mike misses the point yet again: > it is now proven that >atheism is based upon a belief in an impossible proof, ergo it is a >religion. Rubbish. Keep reading what Gennady posted by Kai E. Nielsen, and try to address the hard parts: Damien Broderick From neptune at superlink.net Sun Nov 28 22:52:21 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:52:21 -0500 Subject: Stratoconian Presumption/was Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... References: <20041127184736.66283.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <41A92091.3050409@humanenhancement.com> Message-ID: <01e201c4d59c$ebd2ed20$d0893cd1@pavilion> Since Mike Lorrey seems to be getting stuck on this point... Olga probably put it best. If one were to have to believe any idea until one had a refutation of that idea handy, then one's mind will be clogged with an infinite number of wrong and probably dangerously wrong ideas. Just think of simple one. X hears a loud growl from behind the door. Think of all things that the growl could be -- no matter how ludichrist. Yet in order to live and function in the world X has to not work from that sort of wide open epistemic stance of finding disproofs, but to find some other method. Hence, things like Ockham's Razor and "burden of proof" arguments. In other words, there has to be a reason to accept an idea into one's beliefs. However, this Stratoconian Presumption -- as applied to a Creator; basically Strato argued that it was much simpler to posit an uncreated cosmos than an uncreated creator plus a cosmos unless someone could offer other proof -- is aside from the argument that the idea of God itself is flawed -- as Damien put it like a "square circle." Mike offered that there might be another logic we don't understand. Granted, but that cuts any way anyone wants it to. (I could argue that in a future, better logic, everything I say is right and anytime Mike contradicts me he is wrong. Does anyone else find this "argument from future logic(s)" rather ad hoc?:) Logic beyond what we now know might actually prove to Mike's content that there is no God. There's no way to know in advance and until we have that better logic, sticking with logic as we know it -- and understanding some of its limits (Cf. Graham Priest's _An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic_) -- it's safe to state that the concept basically makes no sense and is incoherent. (It's also likely that future advances in logic will not overturn the logic of this argument, but will merely add to it.) Actually, too, theists were the first to admit this. Tertullian was a Christian. He invented the Tertullian Argument! We've had how many centuries since his time to reform logic and refine the idea of God? Regards, Dan http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/ "We have seen Good men made evil wrangling with the evil. Straight minds grown crooked fighting crooked minds. Our peace betrayed us; we betrayed our peace. Look at it well. This was the good town once." -- from "The Good Town" by Edwin Muir From aelfrice at yahoo.ie Sun Nov 28 23:04:03 2004 From: aelfrice at yahoo.ie (Bryan Carney) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:04:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <20041128210419.42068.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041128210419.42068.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:04:19 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey wrote: [snip ONE definition of atheism] > Thank you, Gennady, for proving my point. So, it is now proven that > atheism is based upon a belief in an impossible proof, ergo it is a > religion. This is false. It is more accurate to state that some atheists postulate their opinion on an impossible truth, namely god can not exist. This is just another example of a semantically inspired discourse where symbols are greatly over-emphasized. > Now, back to the original point: atheists rewriting history to keep out > references to god. This is therefore clearly a violation of the > principle of separation of church and state for atheists to be forcing > references to god out of the public record, in the service of their > faith of disbelief in the existence of god. If it is established that atheism is a religion than it is a clear violation of the separation of church and state to favor one over the other. All things being equal, if theists were upset with atheistic wordings in public documents than we should still be having this conversation. It may seem like too much complexity and hidden motives to be prattling over the word god but, because of altruism or selfishness, good citizens should be honest about their incorporating documents - or change them. History is history. I don't care about attempts to erase past usages of words. I do care about the state of the democracy in which I live. Regards, Bryan Carney From pharos at gmail.com Sun Nov 28 23:04:38 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:04:38 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041128162953.01a12ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20041128124937.00aa17e0@pop.cris.net> <20041128210419.42068.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041128162953.01a12ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:36:54 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 01:04 PM 11/28/2004 -0800, Mike misses the point yet again: > > > it is now proven that > >atheism is based upon a belief in an impossible proof, ergo it is a > >religion. > > Rubbish. Keep reading what Gennady posted by Kai E. Nielsen, and try to > address the hard parts: > Mike, your hangup on disbelief is specifically addressed in Atheism 101. See:- Specifically:- Belief vs. Disbelief Believing, Not Believing, and Denying Gods Question: Isn't not believing in any gods the same as believing there are no gods? Short answer - No. Long answer - Read the article and the 101. Quote:- Logically speaking, mere disbelief in the truth of a proposition cannot be treated as equivalent to the belief that the proposition is false and that the opposite is true. If you make a claim and I disbelieve it, I am not necessarily saying that your claim is false. I may not understand it well enough to say one way or the other. Or I may lack enough information to test your claim. Or I may simply not care enough to think about it. Summary: As we can see, not only are disbelief and denial different things, but there are different levels to disbelief, just as there are to belief. If you are interested in learning in what sense a particular atheist "disbelieves" in a god, you will have to ask. Different atheists disbelieve in different ways and for different reasons. BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 23:28:28 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:28:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41AA50FE.9050504@humanenhancement.com> Message-ID: <20041128232828.58956.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Joseph Bloch wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > >Nope. I am asserting that in order to be an atheist, you must > believe > >in the non-existence of god. To simply not have faith in or > knowledge > >knowledge of god's existence is agnosticism. > > > > > > You can redefine things to mean what you want them to mean, rather > than > what they really mean (to the people to whom they apply), but it > seems > rather pointless. Much like this entire conversation, which could > just > as easily be had in any AOL chatroom with the word "Atheism" in the > title. Joseph, as we've clearly shown here, it isn't me redefining words here. People have been quoting from Websters, OED, etc and all back up my assertions. > > Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). The position that god(s) do > not exist does _not_ require proof any more than the position that > Santa Claus does not exist. On the contrary, Santa Claus is proven not to exist because all claimed 'facts' about him are provably wrong: there is no santa-land at the north pole, there are no flying reindeer or sleighs ever caught on radar, and all the acts of gift giving ascribed to him are provably the acts of others. Saint Nicolaus once DID exist, and can historically be proven to have existed, and performed deeds which became legendary, but we also can prove that he is now dead, ergo there is no Santa Claus and this can be proven by evidence that he no longer exists as a living being by the positive fact of the existence of his remains in a crypt. Atheism is not the lack of belief in god(s), but the belief in a lack of god(s). ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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 benboc at lineone.net Sun Nov 28 23:31:53 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:31:53 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheism etc. In-Reply-To: <200411281900.iASJ06018136@tick.javien.com> References: <200411281900.iASJ06018136@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <41AA5FE9.2020108@lineone.net> Well, i don't know anything about probability, but it seems to make sense to me that there are perfectly good, ordinary reasons for the phenomenon of belief in gods etc., throughout human history - reasons to do with human psychology, and sociology - and that these are all that are needed to explain such beliefs. No need to invoke any kind of explanation that involves supernatural phenomena, or any other highly unlikely scenarios. For me, at least, Mr. Occams beard-remover settles the issue. Yes, "God" DOES exist - as an idea in the minds of certain people. I suppose this makes me an Occamist :-( (Or a Razorite) ben From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 29 00:28:28 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:28:28 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] umbilical cord stem cell breakthrough claim Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041128182633.01a8fb78@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200411/kt2004112617575710440.htm By Kim Tae-gyu Staff Reporter A team of Korean researchers claimed Thursday they had performed a miracle by enabling a patient, who could not even stand up for the last 19 years, to walk with stem cell therapy. During a press conference, the scientists said they had last month transplanted multi-potent stem cells from umbilical cord blood to the 37-year-old female patient suffering from a spinal cord injury and she can now walk on her own. [etc] From eliasen at mindspring.com Mon Nov 29 00:53:15 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:53:15 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <41AA72FB.2080908@mindspring.com> John K Clark wrote: > The Forbin Project has just come out on DVD, anybody who has not already > seen it has 24 hours to do so before they must hang their head in shame. > The > movie is 35 years old now but it is still the most intelligent and accurate > portrayal of Artificial Intelligence ever put on film. In my opinion > this is > one of the best movies ever made, without a doubt it is the most underrated > movie ever made. Be warned however this film will scare you; there is no > blood or gore and the special effects are primitive by modern standards, > but > if The Forbin Project does not scare your brain then you have not > understood > it. > > This is one of the very rare occasions when the movie is better, much > much better, than the book. When I read the book years ago I remember > thinking the premise was great and with a few changes it could be really > great, but as it is the book was just mediocre at best. With genius you > wouldn?t expect B grade moviemakers to have they kept all the > brilliant parts and eliminated all the stupid parts. All I can say is that > if you don?t think this old movie is exceptional then there is > something wrong with you. There's something wrong with me, then. :) Probably it's because I've read the book about a dozen times since I was ten. The book is far better than the movie, which was a significant letdown. The first time I saw the movie, I couldn't believe how awkward and silly it became. All of the social commentary was lost. Colossus became a '50s sci-fi caricature of a computer with a buzzy, barely-understandable voice synthesizer. A couple of decades later, I went into the movie remembering how bad it was, expecting the worst again, and enjoyed it a little more. Still, the subtle social implications were lost, replaced by posturing and an interminable speech by Colossus. I even re-read "The Fall of Colossus" and "Colossus and the Crab" recently. These veer off into silly sci-fi territory of Martians helping to destroy Colossus and visiting Earth, but these books also address very plausible social aspects caused by Colossus; there are religious sects that worship Colossus and become its secret police. Colossus performs a variety of brutal tests to understand human behavior. Mankind falls into incompetence and disarray, after having their Great Benefactor shut down. These are the best parts of the latter books. Overall, a very fun read, though. For this kid, it was my first introduction to Singularity-like ideas. Glad to hear it's on DVD. I probably won't buy it, but I might rent it again sometime. -- 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 jbloch at humanenhancement.com Mon Nov 29 01:39:43 2004 From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:39:43 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <41AA7DDF.4050009@humanenhancement.com> I must say I agree with John on this one. I am a fan of both the books and the film (and will fully admit that they are very different from one another). Admittedly technology has outstripped the special effects (the voice synthesizer, the fact that there are mechanical relays and big reel-to-reel tapes in the Colossus complex, etc.), but I don't find that too distracting when I remember that it was made many decades ago (any more than the now-outdated technology keeps me from enjoying "Conquest of Space"). Much of the film holds up well; Colossus and Guardian using their own invented mathematical language-- centuries beyond anything humans could comprehend-- to communicate; the humans-- still not understanding what they're dealing with-- trying to trick the computer with a bit of slight-of-hand; Forbin's reaction when he learns just how far Colossus is micro-managing his life (and the implication; would Colossus nuke Kiev if Forbin didn't eat his grapefruit?); great stuff. I also think the music is great; very apropos to the theme. What strikes me as being particularly notable about this film is the fact-- unusual for a 1960's scifi film-- that the bad guy (Colossus) wins. The resolution of the film is completely atypical for its time (and quite creepy); that in and of itself is reason to see it, from the perspective of the science fiction fan with an interest in the history of the development of the genre. If the film has a flaw, it's one that is shared by the book (and, I might add, the recent third "Terminator" film); the "accidental" AI. That's a hook that always sticks in my craw, but somehow the process of the characters gradually discovering the truth mitigates it for me. Plus, I must say I'm a fan of Eric Braeden (Forbin). Sure, Dr. Charles Forbin is pretty much the same character as Dr. Otto Hasslein from "Escape from the Planet of the Apes", but dagnabbit, he plays that character _well_. Joseph John K Clark wrote: > The Forbin Project has just come out on DVD, anybody who has not already > seen it has 24 hours to do so before they must hang their head in > shame. The > movie is 35 years old now but it is still the most intelligent and > accurate > portrayal of Artificial Intelligence ever put on film. In my opinion > this is > one of the best movies ever made, without a doubt it is the most > underrated > movie ever made. Be warned however this film will scare you; there is no > blood or gore and the special effects are primitive by modern > standards, but > if The Forbin Project does not scare your brain then you have not > understood > it. > > This is one of the very rare occasions when the movie is better, much > much better, than the book. When I read the book years ago I remember > thinking the premise was great and with a few changes it could be really > great, but as it is the book was just mediocre at best. With genius you > wouldn?t expect B grade moviemakers to have they kept all the > brilliant parts and eliminated all the stupid parts. All I can say is > that > if you don?t think this old movie is exceptional then there is > something wrong with you. > > John K Clark jonkc at att.net > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > From riel at surriel.com Mon Nov 29 02:46:01 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:46:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Not believing in Eris is also a religion In-Reply-To: <41A9078F.2090809@pobox.com> References: <41A9078F.2090809@pobox.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 27 Nov 2004, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > I bet you didn't even know you were an atheistic Flomnurker until I just > now told you. Remember, not believing in Flomnurk is also a religion. I am an agnostic Flomnurker, since I have no idea who s/he/it is. Since I have no intention of finding out who Flomnurk is, can I be a fundamentalist agnostic Flomnurker ? 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 hal at finney.org Mon Nov 29 03:32:07 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:32:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project Message-ID: <20041129033207.4E45857E2C@finney.org> As I recall, Colossus didn't really "go bad", but rather followed the same logic as in the recent I, Robot movie: that humans would be better off if they didn't run the world. It is perhaps debatable whether this is a Friendly or unFriendly conclusion. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:44:40 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:44:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <41AA7DDF.4050009@humanenhancement.com> Message-ID: <20041129034440.91654.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Joseph Bloch wrote:> > > If the film has a flaw, it's one that is shared by the book (and, I > might add, the recent third "Terminator" film); the "accidental" AI. No less plausible than an accidentally evolved intelligence in meatware. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 04:19:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:19:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution again In-Reply-To: <012601c4d599$7775d4e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <012601c4d599$7775d4e0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041128201229.0294bda0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, first of all, the selection might be more subtle, regarding resources between men. Many years ago, a female friend of mine remarked that if "all else were equal, size means something". However, with all things, there are limits. 4-9 inches is the comfort range for most women. 90% of men are in the range 5 - 7 inches. My own partner likes them on the long, not over 9.5 inches, wide, again not over 10cm, and loves really wide tips. You can be sure this will be in my spec sheet for the next body! But, without exception many other issues override, especially compatibility, which is a vector of infinite dimensionality..... Spike sez: >I had an idea which follows up on our discussion >from last week. >... >Now, what if humans preferentially chose partners >with larger penises? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 04:32:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:32:55 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheism etc. In-Reply-To: <41AA5FE9.2020108@lineone.net> References: <200411281900.iASJ06018136@tick.javien.com> <41AA5FE9.2020108@lineone.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041128202337.029294f0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Yes, there was a point where I got tired of disproving the irrational supernaturality which is so common, and finally asked the questions: why? que bono? In the perspective of evolutionary psychology and sociobiology it became very clear. Add the discovery by Penfield (the surgeon whose operations led to the discovery of hemispherical differences) of a location within the sylvan fold which when stimulated resulted in patient experiences very similiar to NDE reports) and we come to a physical structure in the brain for generating these. And to top it all off, remember evolution selects for survival and reproductive success...... All of the arguments here are easy to deduce, hard to refute, and fits the scientific materialist pov extremely well. The really interesting point is that if it is physical, then it's nano, and therefore subject to design and engineering. The few kinds of altered states which are of sufficent benefit for our Monkey Brains is a small subset of what may be possible. I hope to become an artist in this medium. (pun noted) >Yes, "God" DOES exist - as an idea in the minds of certain people. > >I suppose this makes me an Occamist :-( >(Or a Razorite) > >ben ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 04:40:23 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:40:23 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Not believing in Eris is also a religion In-Reply-To: References: <41A9078F.2090809@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041128203817.0293bdb8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Neither do I. Now absence of postings does not prove postings of absence, but I conjecture that as with most email lists, there are lots and lots of nurkers out there.... >I am an agnostic Flomnurker, since I have no idea who >s/he/it is. Since I have no intention of finding out >who Flomnurk is, can I be a fundamentalist agnostic >Flomnurker ? > >Rik ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From fortean1 at mindspring.com Mon Nov 29 04:41:12 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:41:12 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Two examples of major government software programs failing. Message-ID: <41AAA868.A5DE0EAC@mindspring.com> Posted to the RISKS list. From: Debora Weber-Wulff Subject: The coming catastrophe in German social services On 1 Jan 2005 Germany will switch over from two systems for compensating people who do not work (Arbeitslosenhilfe and Sozialhilfe, money for people who have worked but their unemployment insurance has run out and social services payment for the poor) to a new one, Arbeitslosengeld II, called ALG II or Hartz IV (after the guy who chaired the commission that thought this mess up). In order to make sure that no one hides any assets there is a 16-page application form that needs to be filled out and all sorts of documentation supplied. It takes an official at the public offices about an hour to put all of this information into the central system just for one person. Germany's jobless rate is at about 10% of the population.or 4.2 million people officially registered, I could not find the number of people on Sozialhilfe. The system, however, was not finished on time. The time for starting the data entry kept being slipped. When the data entry began, not all of the workers could enter data at the same time, because the system overloaded. The system has to be rebooted every day at lunch time, because otherwise it would be too slow in the afternoon. (Anyone hear hanging processes screaming?). The data connections are very slow, and sometimes die, taking all of the data entered up until now with them. It can take up to an hour for the data entry station to permit a new logon. If data entered is incomplete (and it often is, as someone missed one of the many questions) the system automatically deletes the record after about three or four weeks. Last week, a software update was put on the central system in N?rnberg, crashing the system so completely, that the backup had to be restored a day later. (At least they had one!). In desperation some office managers pleaded with their workers to do overtime and come in on the weekend to enter data. But there was a fire in the central computing system and no data could be entered at all. Amazingly, they have managed to calculate some of the payouts and send the information to the people receiving them. But since they do not yet have all of the forms and cannot put in all of the data in time, many offices are being forced to just pay people some money in January and figure out later if it was too much or too little. So we pretty much have a great example of everything going wrong that possibly can - one wonders perhaps why Germany has so many of these projects at the moment: this, the TollCollect scheme, the health card proposed for 2006, etc. There's a nice article in c't (in German) on why large software projects don't work in Germany: (c't 23/2004, IT-Gro?projekte: Warum so viele Vorhaben scheitern, S. 218) It ranges from people without knowledge of systems deciding what to implement to the politics of procurement. And, of course, a good bit of wishful thinking - hoping that computers can cure problems that have deeper causes. Prof. Dr. Debora Weber-Wulff, FHTW Berlin, Treskowallee 8, 10313 Berlin Tel: +49-30-5019-2320 http://www.f4.fhtw-berlin.de/people/weberwu/ From: Pete Mellor Subject: Recent fiasco with computer system at Child Support Agency The Child Support Agency is a UK Government organisation set up some years ago to trace absent parents and extract maintenance payments to the parents of the children they have abandoned. (In the way of the world, the absentees are usually the fathers, and the abandoned are usually the mothers, but the opposite can occur.) The CSA has never worked well. Under the 'old legislation', the calculation of payments due was complicated and time-consuming, and left little time for staff to trace the absentees and enforce payment. Under the 'new legislation', which went into effect on 3 Mar 2003, the algorithm for calculating payments was simplified to allow more effort to be concentrated on enforcement. To implement the new rules, a computer system was procured from EDS under a contract valued at GBP 456 million over 10 years. On the BBC Radio 4 'Today' news and current affairs programme this morning (Fri 19 Nov 2004), the Work and Pensions Secretary, Alan Johnson, stated that the new computer system is "problematic", but, under pressure from the interviewer, John Humphrys, he admitted that "disastrous" might be a better word. The backlog of cases is growing at 30,000 per month, and has now reached around 250,000 cases. The CSA's debt (money owed to abandoned parents and children) stands at GBP 720 million, and, in addition, GBP 1 billion has been "written off". Of 478,000 absent parents, 417,000 "have not paid a penny". (I presume that these statistics cover the whole life of the CSA under both the 'old' and 'new' systems, and reflect the great difficulty of tracing those who owe the maintenance and enforcing payments, rather than being due solely to recent computer problems.) Applicants are regularly told that their cases cannot be progressed, since certain "incidents cannot be resolved" on the new computer system. So far, only new cases have been entered. 95,000 cases are still stuck on the 'old system'. These applicants should have received interim payments of GBP 10 per week since March 2003, but the 'new system' cannot cope with this, either. Two employees of the CSA were interviewed anonymously. It appears that once an incident has occurred while processing a case, no further work can be done on that case. (For "incident" read "system failure".) One interviewee claimed that the new system "cannot cope with change". For example, if a couple decide to get back together (which happens, and which means that maintenance payments no longer need to be enforced), there is no way of entering this information into the system. The underlying problem seems to be an inadequate requirements specification. Alan Johnson blames EDS. (The CSA has withheld GBP 1 million per month from payments due to EDS under the contract, to a total of GBP 12 million so far.) Tony Collins of Computer Weekly said that, in his opinion, the responsibility lay 50/50 between customer and contractor, and that CSA probably did not know what they wanted, and their requirements were therefore unstable. On Wednesday, Alan Johnson faced tough questions in Parliament. On Thursday, the chief executive of the CSA resigned. According to Johnson, this was just because he had been in post for four years. (Presumably he wanted to spend more time with his family!) Another triumph for UK Government IT procurement! The official CSA website is: http://www.csa.gov.uk/ This includes a description of the method of calculating payment due. To hear the brief report from the Today programme on Wed 17 Nov 2004, visit: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/zwednesday_20041117.shtml To listen to a summary of the background to the problem, and (in a later item) the Work and Pensions Secretary, Alan Johnson, wriggling on a hook, on Friday 19th November, visit: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ and follow the links. Peter Mellor, Centre for Software Reliability, City University, London EC1V 0HB +44 (0)20 7040 8422 Pete Mellor Scott Peterson -- Microsoft Mantra: Hey! It compiles! Ship it! 447/600 -- "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 Mon Nov 29 04:51:30 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:51:30 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [Skeptic] Re: Living in Ireland -the reality Message-ID: <41AAAAD2.B2214DFD@mindspring.com> On Friday, November 26, 2004 3:54 PM +10:30 Terry W. Colvin wrote: > [Is this a leg pull? -twc] > > > I know this is a response to a rather old post and I apologize for my > tardiness... > I lived in various counties in Ireland (Not the same thing as > Northern > Ireland, BTW -there is no conflict in the South) from 1986 > until 1999, > when I moved to the UK. > The bad news: > We had no electricity, no toilets, no running water. We were not > unusual. Most of our neighbors didn't either. > Since we are not catholic, there was little chance of getting > employed > or a decent place to rent. We were treated as second class citizens, > known as 'blow-ins'. We were refused service in all catholic > pubs and > some shops and restaurants. > We were stopped on the street by the cops regularly and > searched for no > apparent reason. We were ripped off by the locals at every > opportunity. There are drunks everywhere, and real mental > cases wandering around on > the streets accosting people for money/booze. > Car insurance is prohibitively high. Irish roads (about the same > standards as much of Africa) meant we needed a new > gearbox/clutch/suspension every year or so. > It rains almost every day, and the winds are icy and blasting > for much > of the year. > The attitude to science? There were 5 religious education lessons per > week in our local high school and 2 science. Catholic prayers > had to be > done before and after every lesson, and in the mornings. > The good news: > You won't have to send your kids to school. (That's why we > did it). You > are very unlikely to get burgled, mugged, raped, beaten up or > murdered. Or indeed, acknowledged at all. Enjoy. : ) AR Sounds like rubbish to me, it would have to be a very isolated place to have no water or electricity. As far as I found the locals are pretty friendly (my relatives live in Ireland) and although they have their fair share of drunks and catholics a lot of the drunks are tourists or visitors (especially in Dublin :-)). Education is compulsory up to age 15. The weather is no worse than the UK. And the roads aren't that bad either. That isn't to say there aren't places like it somewhere in Ireland. Trev ---------------------- well, we visited a not particularily touristy far-away Donegal last summer, staying at "St John's Point" (look it up, peninsula hanging into the Atlantic) And the place was friendly and prosperous (besides being beautiful) all the way (we drove from Dublin). We haven't seen any overt religocity or backwardness. Some survey just has found the Republic of Ireland the best place to live in the world, overtaking the Scandinavians - even with the bad points from the weather. (Which was cold, windy and wet about 70% of the time, but it somehow suited the landscape...) Eva ------------------------ I lived in the RoI for two years, moving to the U.S. just this past May. The only Irish people who would be without plumbing and electricity are Travelers, who are like the Gypsies of Eastern Europe. Unfortunately, they are held in very low regard and are treated badly by most of the Irish people I met. - Greg ------------------------ The only time I ever heard that term was when I watched the movie Snatch. In my experience, the slang term for Travelers was "knackers". - Greg ------------------------ Travellers and Romany are PC, the only other one I know is gypsy. And they are badly treated everywhere in Europe. Just yesterday there was an article (in G2) about an exception - a permanent concreted site with facilities; with fulltime (gypsy) caretakers made the site clean and crime-free and the local community accepting the people there. Interviews showed the hate that existed for decades and then slowly changed into acceptence and even friendship. All our "democratic" and "freedom-loving" west should adore them - their tanacity to cling to their unsettled life. However, if, as above, the sites they visit over the year are civilised - they are behaving accordingly, sending their kids in the local schools etc. Eva -- "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 Mon Nov 29 05:19:53 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:19:53 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [Skeptic] Re: The Forbin Project Message-ID: <41AAB176.D7982404@mindspring.com> At 06:54 PM 11/28/2004, Terry W. Colvin wrote: > All of the social > commentary was lost. Colossus became a '50s sci-fi caricature of a computer > with a buzzy, barely-understandable voice synthesizer. A couple of decades > later, I went into the movie remembering how bad it was, expecting the worst > again, and enjoyed it a little more. Somewhat coincidentally about 4 people have sent me copies of this picture. I thought it was probably from a powerplant and not a computer. Snopes already have it on their web site as it's actually a control panel from a submarine. The only story from that period that even came close to the modern computer that I ever saw was Murray Leinster's short story "A Logic Named Joe". [] -------------- next part -------------- Scott Peterson -- Isn't it strange that the same people who laugh at gypsy fortune tellers take economists seriously? 478/594 From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Nov 29 05:44:12 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:44:12 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution again In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041128201229.0294bda0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <014201c4d5d6$74f3d130$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Hara Ra Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] evolution again >Well, first of all, the selection might be more subtle, regarding resources between men. Of course. How do we ask the right question? >Many years ago, a female friend of mine remarked that if "all else were equal, size means something". >{snipped gory details} Here is how we sharpen this line of inquiry. We are trying to understand why humans have this oddball shape with the curiously oversized subsystems such as genitals, heads and butts (possibly in that order). Look at those systems that humans have which are larger than would be optimal for maximum survival. It isn't immediately obvious why a particular oversized muscle might have negative survival advantage, but muscles do use energy and must be fed, requiring the individual to slay and eat more. So a large muscle has its survival cost. If it has a balancing survival benefit, then there is nothing to explain. In the previous discussion, my own puzzlement at our large asses was partially addressed. They may help us run, which is surely a survival benefit. Considering the survival cost/benefit ratio then, those systems with the highest ratios would be those systems most likely to have been developed by mate selection, not survival selection. Does that make sense? Now the question becomes: what human subsystems have the highest survival cost/benefit ratio? For the reasons suggested last week, it probably isn't our rears, altho the C/B ratio of those magnificent buns would probably be greater than 1. I once would have argued that the highest ratio was our heads, for we lose a lot of heat through those bulbous organs. Many highly successful organisms do fine with far less in the old brain case. But clearly brains are some good for survival, especially if one must understand seasonal cycles for instance. The very highest C/B ratio system for humans might then be the penis, for clearly it is far larger than necessary to pass along the genetic material, as evidenced by the far less well endowed but anatomically similar chimps. But the cost is also immediately obvious: in a pre-technology pre-clothing world, the large penis would be a clear liability in a fight. Being highly sensitive and vulnerable, a larger target is not a good thing. Consider the fights you have personally witnessed. Many of them end with a direct hit south of the border, do they not? One hit there and that fight is oooooverrrrr. So the survival cost of a large penis is immediately obvious. Does it then follow that the largest survival cost to benefit ratio in humans is the penis? If so, would we not conclude that its development was driven by mate selection? If so, does it not follow that if there is introduced some mechanism which can supress the mate selection mechanism (such as clothing) would not the size of the penis be eventually driven downward by survival selection? If so, would not this predict that those human subgroups which clothed themselves first have had more time to reduce those wildly oversized high C/B ratio systems? And the last to clothe human subgroups the least time? If I dare to stretch this notion a little further, it would apply to *all* human characteristics that may have been driven to higher than unity survival cost/benefit ratio. That predicts that those human subgroups that have developed in the harsh northern climates (which would have required clothing earlier) should have smaller gentals, less of everything in the way of things we consider sexy, less of broad shouders and narrow hips, less in the protruding buttocks department, less in female breasts, generally less overt sexiness. Those groups which were shaped by mate selection in milder climates (which would allow them to clothe themselves later, if ever) might then have more subsystems driven to higher C/B ratios. So those humans subgroups that came of age in mild climates might be expected to be sexier. They also get the last laugh *in a sense* because in modern technological times, *all* humans live in the mildest of environments: indoors, with heaters. So they are not carrying all the non-necessary and mostly non-sexy cold climate adaptations. On the other hand, the cold weather human subgroups would have been required to master technology sooner and to a greater extent, in order to survive the harsh climate. So the cold-climate bulbous heads would have had a *smaller* survival cost/benefit ratio than the same individual in a mild climate. We are apparently entering an age when we will be able to design our own bodies. Perhaps humankind will eventually be a curious combination of sexy mild-climate adapted bodies with harsh-climate adapted brains. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Nov 29 06:05:32 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:05:32 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [Skeptic] Re: The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <41AAB176.D7982404@mindspring.com> References: <41AAB176.D7982404@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041128235844.01b4cc68@pop-server.satx.rr.com> >The only story from that period that even came close to the modern >computer that >I ever saw was Murray Leinster's short story "A Logic Named Joe". `That period'? What *are* you talking about? FORBIN the movie came out in 1970; the novel COLOSSUS was published in 1966, when mainframes were all over the place. Leinster's story was way back in March 19 *forty* 6. *That's* impressive. Damien Broderick From alex at ramonsky.com Mon Nov 29 07:12:12 2004 From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:12:12 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [Skeptic] Re: Living in Ireland -the reality References: <41AAAAD2.B2214DFD@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <41AACBCC.2020909@ramonsky.com> [Is this a leg pull? -twc] No, it isn't a leg pull. I still suffer back pain as a result of living that way. This is what we experienced. I have photos, if you'd like, of me coming from the well with buckets of water, etc. It was five years ago, and it was in West Cork, Laois, Offaly, Kerry and Mayo (where my son was born.) I am well aware that conditions in Dublin and the larger cities are nothing like this, but we always lived in rural areas and it was very unusual for an English person to be able to get a place to rent with electricity etc. The only places we could find to rent were hovels. We were not married at the time but had 2 kids, and the locals called my wife a prostitute. One prospective landlord in West Cork pulled a shotgun on me and our baby son when he found out we were English. Education is compulsory, school is not. Many people teach at home and there is no problem with that. The weather was a lot worse than I have experienced in the UK so far, on average two or three degrees colder and a heck of a lot more rain. The locals were very, very friendly to tourists, who are after all a major part of their income. They changed their attitude if you wanted to live there. We were not travellers (the Irish call them 'Tinks', short for Tinkers, and they are reknowned for stealing; hence the bad reputation). Conditions may have changed a great deal during the last five years due to EU subsidies, but I can give you the addresses of friends I still have over there living in these conditions right now. My sons visited them a month ago and they were mighty glad to come home to toilets and hot water. There is a wonderful American couple over there who were my neighbors; they'd be happy to tell you how they lived before they inherited a lot of cash; check out Tony & Christa Lowes; Eskevaud, Allihies, West Cork, Eire. I think they're on line these days. Tony fixed my well when it got full of cow poo one winter : ) . Best, AR ********************* Terry W. Colvin wrote: >On Friday, November 26, 2004 3:54 PM +10:30 Terry W. Colvin wrote: > > > >>[AR] >>I know this is a response to a rather old post and I apologize for my >>tardiness... >>I lived in various counties in Ireland (Not the same thing as >>Northern >>Ireland, BTW -there is no conflict in the South) from 1986 >>until 1999, >>when I moved to the UK. >>The bad news: >>We had no electricity, no toilets, no running water. We were not >>unusual. Most of our neighbors didn't either. >>Since we are not catholic, there was little chance of getting >>employed >>or a decent place to rent. We were treated as second class citizens, >>known as 'blow-ins'. We were refused service in all catholic >>pubs and >>some shops and restaurants. >>We were stopped on the street by the cops regularly and >>searched for no >>apparent reason. We were ripped off by the locals at every >>opportunity. There are drunks everywhere, and real mental >>cases wandering around on >>the streets accosting people for money/booze. >>Car insurance is prohibitively high. Irish roads (about the same >>standards as much of Africa) meant we needed a new >>gearbox/clutch/suspension every year or so. >>It rains almost every day, and the winds are icy and blasting >>for much >>of the year. >>The attitude to science? There were 5 religious education lessons per >>week in our local high school and 2 science. Catholic prayers >>had to be >>done before and after every lesson, and in the mornings. >>The good news: >>You won't have to send your kids to school. (That's why we >>did it). You >>are very unlikely to get burgled, mugged, raped, beaten up or >>murdered. Or indeed, acknowledged at all. Enjoy. : ) AR >> >> > >Sounds like rubbish to me, it would have to be a very isolated place to have >no water or electricity. As far as I found the locals are pretty friendly >(my relatives live in Ireland) and although they have their fair share of >drunks and catholics a lot of the drunks are tourists or visitors >(especially in Dublin :-)). Education is compulsory up to age 15. The >weather is no worse than the UK. And the roads aren't that bad either. That >isn't to say there aren't places like it somewhere in Ireland. > >Trev > >---------------------- > >well, we visited a not particularily touristy far-away >Donegal last summer, staying at "St John's Point" >(look it up, peninsula hanging into the Atlantic) >And the place was friendly and prosperous >(besides being beautiful) >all the way (we drove from Dublin). >We haven't seen any overt religocity >or backwardness. > >Some survey just has found the Republic of Ireland >the best place to live in the world, overtaking >the Scandinavians - even with the bad points >from the weather. >(Which was cold, windy and wet about 70% >of the time, but it somehow suited the landscape...) > > >Eva > >------------------------ > >I lived in the RoI for two years, moving to the U.S. just this past >May. The only Irish people who would be without plumbing and >electricity are Travelers, who are like the Gypsies of Eastern Europe. >Unfortunately, they are held in very low regard and are treated badly >by most of the Irish people I met. > > - Greg > >------------------------ > >The only time I ever heard that term was when I watched the movie >Snatch. In my experience, the slang term for Travelers was "knackers". > > - Greg > >------------------------ > >Travellers and Romany are PC, the only other >one I know is gypsy. And they are badly >treated everywhere in Europe. >Just yesterday there was an article (in G2) >about an exception - a permanent >concreted site with facilities; >with fulltime (gypsy) caretakers made the site >clean and crime-free and the local community >accepting the people there. >Interviews showed the hate that >existed for decades and then slowly >changed into acceptence >and even friendship. > >All our "democratic" and "freedom-loving" >west should adore them - their tanacity to cling >to their unsettled life. However, if, as above, >the sites they visit over the year are civilised - >they are behaving accordingly, sending their >kids in the local schools etc. > >Eva > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Nov 29 07:33:01 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:33:01 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project In-Reply-To: <41AA7DDF.4050009@humanenhancement.com> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <41AA7DDF.4050009@humanenhancement.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:39:43 -0500, Joseph Bloch wrote: > I must say I agree with John on this one. I am a fan of both the books > and the film (and will fully admit that they are very different from one > another). Admittedly technology has outstripped the special effects (the > voice synthesizer, the fact that there are mechanical relays and big > reel-to-reel tapes in the Colossus complex, etc.), but I don't find that > too distracting when I remember that it was made many decades ago (any > more than the now-outdated technology keeps me from enjoying "Conquest > of Space"). > To save money, the computer used for Colossus was the payroll computer for the film studio. Reel-to-reel tape storage was common in 1970 when the film was released. BillK From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Nov 29 08:34:05 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:34:05 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Economist on information markets: Guessing games Message-ID: <470a3c520411290034244c6133@mail.gmail.com> Economists and policymakers are just beginning to understand the use of information markets TALK is cheap, but money speaks the truth. That might be the credo behind the recent, rapid rise in the use of novel markets to forecast everything from political events to business successes and failures. The theory is that the aggregated hunches of many people with money at stake are likely to be more accurate than the opinion of disinterested experts or of whoever happens to be at home when a pollster calls. Indeed, it is easier to put your money where your mouth is in information markets than in many "proper" markets. Because you can "sell" without first "buying", short-selling, which is limited in many financial markets, is essentially unconstrained. And because the bets are smaller than in financial markets, participants are unlikely to be prevented from backing their opinions by restrictions on borrowing. There have been some efforts to use prediction markets to improve public policy. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=3400241 From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 12:47:50 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:47:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [Skeptic] Re: Living in Ireland -the reality In-Reply-To: <41AACBCC.2020909@ramonsky.com> Message-ID: <20041129124750.82350.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Sounds like your offense was being English on a rainy day.... ;) Now, I am impressed when a Brit complains about bad plumbing (what might the dentistry be like in Eire?) but the parts about no compulsory public schooling, and a landlord pulling a shotgun sound downright home-like to me. If I wasn't so set on the Free State, I might be interested in checking it out. --- Alex Ramonsky wrote: > [Is this a leg pull? -twc] > > > No, it isn't a leg pull. I still suffer back pain as a result of > living > that way. This is what we experienced. I have photos, if you'd like, > of > me coming from the well with buckets of water, etc. It was five years > > ago, and it was in West Cork, Laois, Offaly, Kerry and Mayo (where my > > son was born.) I am well aware that conditions in Dublin and the > larger > cities are nothing like this, but we always lived in rural areas and > it > was very unusual for an English person to be able to get a place to > rent > with electricity etc. The only places we could find to rent were > hovels. > We were not married at the time but had 2 kids, and the locals called > my > wife a prostitute. One prospective landlord in West Cork pulled a > shotgun on me and our baby son when he found out we were English. > Education is compulsory, school is not. Many people teach at home and > > there is no problem with that. The weather was a lot worse than I > have > experienced in the UK so far, on average two or three degrees colder > and > a heck of a lot more rain. > The locals were very, very friendly to tourists, who are after all a > major part of their income. They changed their attitude if you wanted > to > live there. We were not travellers (the Irish call them 'Tinks', > short > for Tinkers, and they are reknowned for stealing; hence the bad > reputation). > Conditions may have changed a great deal during the last five years > due > to EU subsidies, but I can give you the addresses of friends I still > have over there living in these conditions right now. My sons visited > > them a month ago and they were mighty glad to come home to toilets > and > hot water. > There is a wonderful American couple over there who were my > neighbors; > they'd be happy to tell you how they lived before they inherited a > lot > of cash; check out Tony & Christa Lowes; Eskevaud, Allihies, West > Cork, > Eire. I think they're on line these days. Tony fixed my well when it > got > full of cow poo one winter : ) . > Best, > AR > ********************* > > Terry W. Colvin wrote: > > >On Friday, November 26, 2004 3:54 PM +10:30 Terry W. Colvin wrote: > > > > > > > >>[AR] > >>I know this is a response to a rather old post and I apologize for > my > >>tardiness... > >>I lived in various counties in Ireland (Not the same thing as > >>Northern > >>Ireland, BTW -there is no conflict in the South) from 1986 > >>until 1999, > >>when I moved to the UK. > >>The bad news: > >>We had no electricity, no toilets, no running water. We were not > >>unusual. Most of our neighbors didn't either. > >>Since we are not catholic, there was little chance of getting > >>employed > >>or a decent place to rent. We were treated as second class > citizens, > >>known as 'blow-ins'. We were refused service in all catholic > >>pubs and > >>some shops and restaurants. > >>We were stopped on the street by the cops regularly and > >>searched for no > >>apparent reason. We were ripped off by the locals at every > >>opportunity. There are drunks everywhere, and real mental > >>cases wandering around on > >>the streets accosting people for money/booze. > >>Car insurance is prohibitively high. Irish roads (about the same > >>standards as much of Africa) meant we needed a new > >>gearbox/clutch/suspension every year or so. > >>It rains almost every day, and the winds are icy and blasting > >>for much > >>of the year. > >>The attitude to science? There were 5 religious education lessons > per > >>week in our local high school and 2 science. Catholic prayers > >>had to be > >>done before and after every lesson, and in the mornings. > >>The good news: > >>You won't have to send your kids to school. (That's why we > >>did it). You > >>are very unlikely to get burgled, mugged, raped, beaten up or > >>murdered. Or indeed, acknowledged at all. Enjoy. : ) AR > >> > >> > > > >Sounds like rubbish to me, it would have to be a very isolated place > to have > >no water or electricity. As far as I found the locals are pretty > friendly > >(my relatives live in Ireland) and although they have their fair > share of > >drunks and catholics a lot of the drunks are tourists or visitors > >(especially in Dublin :-)). Education is compulsory up to age 15. > The > >weather is no worse than the UK. And the roads aren't that bad > either. That > >isn't to say there aren't places like it somewhere in Ireland. > > > >Trev > > > >---------------------- > > > >well, we visited a not particularily touristy far-away > >Donegal last summer, staying at "St John's Point" > >(look it up, peninsula hanging into the Atlantic) > >And the place was friendly and prosperous > >(besides being beautiful) > >all the way (we drove from Dublin). > >We haven't seen any overt religocity > >or backwardness. > > > >Some survey just has found the Republic of Ireland > >the best place to live in the world, overtaking > >the Scandinavians - even with the bad points > >from the weather. > >(Which was cold, windy and wet about 70% > >of the time, but it somehow suited the landscape...) > > > > > >Eva > > > >------------------------ > > > >I lived in the RoI for two years, moving to the U.S. just this past > >May. The only Irish people who would be without plumbing and > >electricity are Travelers, who are like the Gypsies of Eastern > Europe. > >Unfortunately, they are held in very low regard and are treated > badly > >by most of the Irish people I met. > > > > - Greg > > > >------------------------ > > > >The only time I ever heard that term was when I watched the movie > >Snatch. In my experience, the slang term for Travelers was > "knackers". > > > > - Greg > > > >------------------------ > > > >Travellers and Romany are PC, the only other > >one I know is gypsy. And they are badly > >treated everywhere in Europe. > >Just yesterday there was an article (in G2) > >about an exception - a permanent > >concreted site with facilities; > >with fulltime (gypsy) caretakers made the site > >clean and crime-free and the local community > >accepting the people there. > >Interviews showed the hate that > >existed for decades and then slowly > >changed into acceptence > >and even friendship. > > > >All our "democratic" and "freedom-loving" > >west should adore them - their tanacity to cling > >to their unsettled life. However, if, as above, > >the sites they visit over the year are civilised - > >they are behaving accordingly, sending their > >kids in the local schools etc. > > > >Eva > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From jonkc at att.net Mon Nov 29 16:40:24 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:40:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Forbin Project References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org><00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <41AA521C.9090800@pobox.com> Message-ID: <054e01c4d632$4417dd20$f6ff4d0c@hal2001> "Eliezer Yudkowsky" > Can't say I share your enthusiasm. Even 2001 was less anthropomorphic. I assume you mean both movies attributed human motivation and characteristics to something that was not human. Well that?s true, but I see nothing wrong with that. Granted doing such a thing to a rock or a tree would be a bad idea but in this case we?re talking about a very intelligent entity that is probably conscious. I?m not saying they would think just like we do but drawing analogies to human behavior is an important tool, in fact just about the only tool we have. > When Colossus went bad, the comment was: "That didn't take long, even by > our standards." And how much time would it take for a mind that operated a thousand times faster than yours to make a decision? John K Clark jonkc at att.net From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 30 01:35:54 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:35:54 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041129193133.01b76f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Mike's arguments in favor of god have so convinced me that I was overjoyed to receive in the mail today a miraculous BIBLICAL PAPER HANDKERCHIEF!!! I learned that when I write my name in the middle of this PAPER HANDKERCHIEF and mail it back to the church AT NO COST TO MYSELF, I will receive the blessings of God, including BIG BUCKS!!! Additionally, all the drunks, drug abusers and sexual degenerates in my HOUSEHOLD will be saved by the TOUCH of the Lord upon their BODIES!!!! The sacred miraculous HANDKERCHIEF is warranted by Acts 19, 11-12, which records how the APOSTLE PAUL sent just such NASAL HYGIENE ITEMS to the distant followers of JESUS, whereupon they were healed and BLESSED. The amazing low cost discovery that this BLESSING can be distributed via a PAPER handkerchief is not explicitly warranted in the good book, but who am I to DOUBT these messengers, especially since they will PAY THE POSTAGE for the return of the BLESSED PAPER HANDKERCHIEF? Unfortunately I failed to read the full covering text in time and hastily used the SACRED PAPER ITEM for an entirely different purpose, which I fear might preclude returning it to the church through the UNITED STATES MAILS for CLEANSING and spiritual RE-CHARGING. Damien Broderick From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Nov 30 02:12:27 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:12:27 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041129193133.01b76f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <001101c4d682$0b4bdc30$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Damien Broderick" > Unfortunately I failed to read the full covering text in time and hastily > used the SACRED PAPER ITEM for an entirely different purpose, which I fear > might preclude returning it to the church through the UNITED STATES MAILS > for CLEANSING and spiritual RE-CHARGING. Well, at least you applied our tax dollars towards something useful! Marie Alena Castle (from the Atheist Alliance, an organization the government has *not deemed fit to call a religion* and, therefore, which organization isn't qualified to get all the free goodies enjoyed by other religious organizations ... why, I don't believe it ever occurred to those dumb infidels to call themselves a religion!) has written (excerpted): COST #1. RELIGION PROSPERS FROM YOUR MONEY. The wall separating state and church is full of pass-throughs. Who do you think makes up the revenue shortfall caused by religious tax exemptions? You do! If you own or rent any property, residential or commercial, the property taxes are several hundred dollars higher than if religious property, worth billions of dollars, was also taxed. You pay more, because they pay nothing. IRS estimates of money that accrues to religion in exemptions, subsidies and donations is over $170 billion a year - just to promote religious fantasies! That's over $2 billion a year per state on average. Think what a truly secular society could do with that! Lower our taxes substantially, fix our roads and bridges, improve our schools, rebuild deteriorating neighborhoods. And if you think religious charitable works are paid for by religious institutions, think again. Anything significant they do is funded by the government. It is always extremely difficult politically for governments to find a compelling reason to deny religion whatever it wants. If you own a business and want to expand, you must abide by zoning laws designed to preserve neighborhood values. Not so for religious institutions. They can expand as it pleases them, adding to traffic congestion and noise, restricting views, destroying historic preservation areas and generally enhancing their interests at the expense of everyone else's. Now, here's a low blow. If you lend money to religionists who then declare bankruptcy, the money they tithe to their church cannot be touched to help repay you. The church gets its tithes while you get the shaft. It's the law. [end excerpt] You know, if I were a free-stater/out-and-out-libertarian, why ... I would holler to the rafters about how religions (all except for the atheist religions) are diverting so much in the way of resources and sucking off so much in the way of taxes from us poor working stiffs. And the discrimination doesn't stop there, as atheist serfs have to pay double duty - (1) for not being recognized as a "religion"; and (2) for being taxed to benefit the "legitimate" religions. I tell ya' ... it's unmitigated bigotry ;-(( Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brentn at freeshell.org Tue Nov 30 03:32:46 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:32:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <001101c4d682$0b4bdc30$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: (11/29/04 18:12) Olga Bourlin wrote: >You know, if I were a free-stater/out-and-out-libertarian, why ... I would holler to the rafters about how religions (all except for >the atheist religions) are diverting so much in the way of resources and sucking off so much in the way of taxes from us poor >working stiffs. And the discrimination doesn't stop there, as atheist serfs have to pay double duty - (1) for not being recognized as >a "religion"; and (2) for being taxed to benefit the "legitimate" religions. I will point out, for sake of fairness, that religions without organizations, such as many Neopagan faiths, do not receive recognition from the government. Most Pagan groups don't even have 501(c)(3) status. I'd be willing to bet that Hindu temples in the US are in the same boat, though I have no data to speak about that authoritatively. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Nov 30 04:50:48 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:50:48 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! References: Message-ID: <001a01c4d698$296144b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Brent Neal" > I will point out, for sake of fairness, that religions without organizations, such as many Neopagan faiths, do not receive recognition from the government. Most Pagan groups don't even have 501(c)(3) status. I'd be willing to bet that Hindu temples in the US are in the same boat, though I have no data to speak about that authoritatively. I am actually opposed to all forms of "oh-how-special" tax exemptions for religious groups (in my post I was trying to be mock-serious). At the very least, I would like religions to be taxed like any other entertainment business. Olga From fortean1 at mindspring.com Tue Nov 30 06:43:02 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:43:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) The end of cheap oil [new subj] Message-ID: <41AC1676.914F5CE7@mindspring.com> There was a decent article in a recent issue of National Geographic that provided a broad analysis of current and projected reservoirs: < http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/feature5/index.html > J. Scott Evans At 02:15 PM 11/29/2004, you wrote: >I'm doing a translation, and *once again* I get to deal with this line: > >'Based on current consumption figures, the earth's reserves of oil are >predicted to run out in about 40 years' time.' > >OK. Now how *real* is this prediction? If it's bonafide, who wants to be >around in the areas of the world where oil will still be available in >ever smaller amounts? (And many of us, myself included, live near such >sources...) > > >Paul W Harrison, TESL >interEnglish (Finland) -- "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 hkhenson at rogers.com Tue Nov 30 06:53:06 2004 From: hkhenson at rogers.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:53:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] I knew this was coming In-Reply-To: <054e01c4d632$4417dd20$f6ff4d0c@hal2001> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <41AA521C.9090800@pobox.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041129/full/041129-1.html Published online: 29 November 2004; | doi:10.1038/news041129-1 Brain imaging could spot liars Mark Peplow Tests reveals patches in the brain that light up during a lie. Lying activates tell-tale areas of the brain that can be tracked using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), according to scientists who believe the technique could replace traditional lie detectors snip Faro and his colleagues asked six volunteers to fire a toy gun. The subjects then lay inside an fMRI scanner and lied about having fired the shot. They also received a polygraph test. Five more volunteers who did not shoot the gun were tested in the same ways to compare their responses. Both tests caught out the liars and identified the truth-tellers in every case. The fMRI scan showed that specific areas of the brain were active during lying, including key parts of the frontal, temporal and limbic lobes. Overall, more areas of the subjects' brains were activated when they lied. snip However he points out that the method will need to be made much cheaper before it could be used routinely. Efficient lie detectors are needed to beef up security in airports, he says, but million-dollar fMRI machines are simply not an affordable solution. snip It is too early to tell whether fMRI can be fooled in the same way as the polygraph, says Faro. However, he says that the results are promising because these characteristic brain patterns may be beyond conscious control, rendering it much more difficult to cheat. From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Nov 30 07:02:54 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:02:54 -0800 Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... In-Reply-To: <41A8F8FC.1080202@lineone.net> References: <200411271900.iARJ0Z008494@tick.javien.com> <41A8F8FC.1080202@lineone.net> Message-ID: <41AC1B1E.4010402@mac.com> ben wrote: > > > I have a question, quite apart from the other considerations here: > > You seem to be assuming that the kind of god that religious people > believe in is automatically due the kind of worship they give it. > > Your quite reasonable questions refer to a celestial hacker, but I'd > like to know what sanction could there possibly be for worship of ANY > god, however it is construed? > > What moral authority could any god really have over us, other than > brute force? As far as i can see, the only valid moral authority has > to come from within each person, not imposed from outside, regardless > of the source. If somebody tells me that eating peanut butter on > wednesday is wrong, i'm going to want to know why, and it'd better be > a good reason, that i can consider and agree with. Otherwise, it's > just bullying. Maybe i would refrain from doing it if i was persuaded > that i would go to hell, or suffer some equally undesirable fate, but > that's got nothing to do with behaving morally. Well, this is a way of asking what kind of God would deserve or draw out or inspire worship. Relatively intelligent, independent beings aren't very likely going to worship any being, no matter how powerful, on the basis of power alone and some command presumably backed by that power. So what sort of being would be so inspiring, uplifting, life changing and so on that worship would be a likely and not apparently inappropriate response? The question can't even be asked, much less answered, when we are still busy rebelling against the worship-demanding supposed God of our parents. While I have mostly lost belief that such a Being exists, I know deeply what that kind of being would be like for me. It might be somewhat different for you. > > Even if you do believe in a god, that's no reason to respect it, let > alone follow it's percieved wishes. Surely there must be, somewhere in > our history, at least one sect whose scripture reads something like > "we believe in almighty god, and we think he's a complete bastard"? > If the god is merely a more powerful being then indeed this is so. If the god is a separte, limited, but more powerful/knowledgeable/wise being than oneself then respect or fear is likely but probably not worship. But conceptions of God are not this limited. -s From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Tue Nov 30 07:29:12 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:29:12 +1100 Subject: [extropy-chat] I knew this was coming References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <41AA521C.9090800@pobox.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Message-ID: <00b401c4d6ae$4a1dd860$b8232dcb@homepc> > It is too early to tell whether fMRI can be fooled in the same way as the > polygraph, says Faro. However, he says that the results are promising > because these characteristic brain patterns may be beyond conscious > control, rendering it much more difficult to cheat. As I understand polygraphs (and I have only a lay understanding which could easily be wrong) they work on galvanic skin response. A person convinced that they can't be caught out in a lie is likely to be pretty "cool" about lying and not be stressed enough to produce changes in skin chemistry. I do get how combining the equipment with a skilled interviewer could improve the results by getting better baselines for comparison (by asking questions that would also trigger other sorts of emotional and stress responses rather than outright lying, and then comparing), but ultimately that means its not just the polygraph but the polygraph plus "expert" interviewer that is actually producing the result. I think polygraph interviewers themselves could probably learn to fool the polygraph plus other interviewers by knowing how to beat not the technology but the interviewer. I'd have thought the fMRI would work on a quite different principle whereby what would show up would be activated areas of the brain. I recently saw a TV show in Australia where it was alledged that scientists were claiming to have been able to use fMRI to track single thoughts. Sounds like neat technology but I've grown sceptical of most types of popular technology reporting where the mechanisms are not explained. Often the most incremental advances are reported along with the wildest most optimistic extrapolations of their potential impact. I'd be in favour of good and widespread lie detector technology but I'm scpetical that it will be easy to produce any technology that will not also come coupled with the need for an accompanying human expert to interpret the results. Lying with varying degrees of skill and success seems to be too much an integral part of what people do to succeed in a competitive world made up of other people to be bypassed by simple tech solutions. I suspect (but don't know that) lie detecting tech will work only on some folks that think it will work on them and are not particularly interested in beating it. Brett Paatsch From eugen at leitl.org Tue Nov 30 09:22:16 2004 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:22:16 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] I knew this was coming In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <41AA521C.9090800@pobox.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Message-ID: <20041130092216.GG1457@leitl.org> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 01:53:06AM -0500, Keith Henson wrote: > It is too early to tell whether fMRI can be fooled in the same way as the > polygraph, says Faro. However, he says that the results are promising > because these characteristic brain patterns may be beyond conscious > control, rendering it much more difficult to cheat. If this is just coarse-res elevated activity in a few areas, cheating would take about the same finesse as fooling the polygraph. They measure the difference in computation requirements in neutral (calibration) questions vs. the value-laden ones. If you know which thought pattern activates the same areas, and stop doing that when asked a critical question, the pattern change will become much more difficult to track. Also, currently high-resolution fMRI is a time-consuming process taking several human experts and some very expensive, nonportable hardware. It's use will be limited to very few high-profile cases -- where the subjects will be far more likely to receive specific training how to fool the machine. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl ______________________________________________________________ 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: From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Nov 30 09:54:07 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:54:07 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Atheists launch inquisition... Message-ID: <483D64E30D008A4E930645FE7B92CEA40684C8@tpeexg01.compal.com> Is there some cause-effect? If you believe in something (such as God), you have higher probability to get it. If you don't believe in something (such as God), you have less probability to get it. As someone said, this is the power of intention - and the Law of Attraction. Thanks. Walter. --------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brentn at freeshell.org Tue Nov 30 10:58:05 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 05:58:05 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <001a01c4d698$296144b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: (11/29/04 20:50) Olga Bourlin wrote: >From: "Brent Neal" > >> I will point out, for sake of fairness, that religions without >organizations, such as many Neopagan faiths, do not receive recognition from >the government. Most Pagan groups don't even have 501(c)(3) status. I'd be >willing to bet that Hindu temples in the US are in the same boat, though I >have no data to speak about that authoritatively. > >I am actually opposed to all forms of "oh-how-special" tax exemptions for >religious groups (in my post I was trying to be mock-serious). > >At the very least, I would like religions to be taxed like any other >entertainment business. > I'm opposed to tax exemptions for darn near everything, mainly because I'm pretty much opposed to taxes. Mock seriousness aside, the point I was making backhandedly is that even if you did tax religious organizations as you suggest, neopagan groups wouldn't pay them, because they, as a rule, don't exist in the eyes of the government. Which is the way -all- religious organizations ought to operate, IMO. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From amara at amara.com Tue Nov 30 13:46:49 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:46:49 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution again Message-ID: >Now, what if humans preferentially chose partners >with larger penises? This would explain why humans >have larger penises than chimps, would it not? size, but what about COLOR ? Here is proof that the Vervet monkey is _not_ color-blind (*) http://www.amara.com/notcolorblindmonkey_med.jpg Background info on the Vervet http://www.gateway-africa.com/fuanaflora/Animals/VervetMonkey.html http://members.tripod.com/uakari/cercopithecus_aethiops.html http://www.enviro.co.za/vervet/ (*) photo taken by a friend in Africa a couple of years ago Amara P.S. You want to add color to your next body-mod Hara Ra? :-) From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Nov 30 14:01:21 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:01:21 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Remote control brain: all in the mind Message-ID: <470a3c52041130060161aa7d54@mail.gmail.com> In the not too distant future a man is working in the backyard of his home when there's a knock at the front door. He's busy, but expecting a friend, so he begins scrolling through a menu in his mind, looking for a command to open the door. A moment of concentration, an electronic surge, and "click", his friend walks in. A mind-controlled home may sound like a scene straight out of science fiction, but it's an idea on which researchers in the US and Australia are making progress. Reports last week suggested that an American research team had tested a surgically implanted brain-computer interface, or BrainGate, in a human subject. It is hoped the device, the size of a small aspirin, will ultimately allow disabled people to operate complex machinery using their thoughts. Meanwhile, in Australia, scientists have had considerable success with the Mind Switch, a non-surgical device that uses brain waves to operate switches. Professor Ashley Craig, a neuroscientist at the University of Technology, Sydney, who helped develop the Mind Switch, said society could make increasingly sophisticated use of mind control in the future. http://www.smh.com.au/news/Science/Remote-control-brain-all-in-the-mind/2004/11/27/1101495457455.html?oneclick=true From megao at sasktel.net Tue Nov 30 14:04:16 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:04:16 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] I knew this was coming In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> References: <20041128181842.0502457E2C@finney.org> <00c101c4d596$7510c320$e3ff4d0c@hal2001> <41AA521C.9090800@pobox.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Message-ID: <41AC7DE0.8000902@sasktel.net> The side benefit of this is that security concerns will push funding for more of the equipment, leading to faster, better , cheaper technology for the more revenue sensitive applications in medicine. Those of us relying on state-sponsored medicine budgets to purchase imaging equipment and hire operators welcome this spin-off. From natasha at natasha.cc Tue Nov 30 15:16:57 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:16:57 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] evolution again In-Reply-To: <014201c4d5d6$74f3d130$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041128201229.0294bda0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <014201c4d5d6$74f3d130$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041130091413.0d3a9bd0@pop-server.austin.rr.com> Thanks Spike ? just the right touch to accompany my morning coffee. Natasha At 11:44 PM 11/28/2004, you wrote: >Hara Ra >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] evolution again > >Well, first of all, the selection might be more subtle, regarding > resources between men. > >Of course. How do we ask the right question? > > >Many years ago, a female friend of mine remarked that if "all else were > equal, size means something". > >{snipped gory details} > >Here is how we sharpen this line of inquiry. We are trying to understand >why humans have this oddball shape with the curiously oversized >subsystems such as genitals, heads and butts (possibly in that order). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 16:33:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:33:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041129193133.01b76f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041130163307.17699.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > Mike's arguments in favor of god Typical atheist agit-prop. I've never said I'm "in favor" of god. Please apologize and commit yourself to actually read my posts in the future. Writers like to say critics can't read, but can writers do any better? ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 16:47:32 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:47:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130164732.32022.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brent Neal wrote: > (11/29/04 18:12) Olga Bourlin wrote: > > >You know, if I were a free-stater/out-and-out-libertarian, why ... I > would holler to the rafters about how religions (all except for > >the atheist religions) are diverting so much in the way of resources > and sucking off so much in the way of taxes from us poor > >working stiffs. And the discrimination doesn't stop there, as > atheist serfs have to pay double duty - (1) for not being recognized > as > >a "religion"; and (2) for being taxed to benefit the "legitimate" > religions. > > > I will point out, for sake of fairness, that religions without > organizations, such as many Neopagan faiths, do not receive > recognition from the government. Most Pagan groups don't even have > 501(c)(3) status. I'd be willing to bet that Hindu temples in the US > are in the same boat, though I have no data to speak about that > authoritatively. Hindu temples, among other pagan faiths, do receive recognition from the government. Prisoners have won cases protecting their right to pagan rituals (with the exception of animal sacrifices). There is even a form at the IRS/Social Security offices you can fill out to claim exemption from Payroll taxes for religious reasons. As much as everyone here likes to pretend to rationalism (in spite of my proof that atheism is as much a religion as any other), you need to realize the political power that comes from being religious of any sort. Religious expression (or non-expression) is so powerful that you cannot be compelled to testify about anything that is part of your religous beliefs, you can't be compelled to participate in social welfare tax programs, among a number of other things. Furthermore, 501c3 is not the proper tax classification for religious groups. Many tax professionals have conned their churches into becoming 501c3 organizations, because those professionals are essentially government agents and don't know or understand that religious organizations do not operate under tax law, they operate under ecclesiastical or canon law. A proper religious organization is organized as a Corporation Sole. When a church converts to 501c3 they are no longer churches, they are merely non-profit religious groups. The IRS is trying to attack the use of Corporation Sole, because governments want to get at the assets of churches. This was the basis of the whole priest scandals in the last several years, why the government did so much smearing in the media but essentially could not force any Bishop into anything unless a church in his diocese where abuse had occured had been tricked into becoming a 501c3 previously, which put that parish under government law. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 16:50:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:50:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] I knew this was coming In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20041130015235.03258e10@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com> Message-ID: <20041130165046.41762.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Keith, this is your out! You can submit yourself to this brain scan and submit it as proof that you are being persecuted! --- Keith Henson wrote: > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041129/full/041129-1.html > > Published online: 29 November 2004; | doi:10.1038/news041129-1 > Brain imaging could spot liars > Mark Peplow > Tests reveals patches in the brain that light up during a lie. > > Lying activates tell-tale areas of the brain that can be tracked > using > functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), according to scientists > who > believe the technique could replace traditional lie detectors > > snip > > Faro and his colleagues asked six volunteers to fire a toy gun. The > subjects then lay inside an fMRI scanner and lied about having fired > the > shot. They also received a polygraph test. Five more volunteers who > did not > shoot the gun were tested in the same ways to compare their > responses. > > Both tests caught out the liars and identified the truth-tellers in > every > case. The fMRI scan showed that specific areas of the brain were > active > during lying, including key parts of the frontal, temporal and limbic > > lobes. Overall, more areas of the subjects' brains were activated > when they > lied. > > snip > > However he points out that the method will need to be made much > cheaper > before it could be used routinely. Efficient lie detectors are needed > to > beef up security in airports, he says, but million-dollar fMRI > machines are > simply not an affordable solution. > > snip > > It is too early to tell whether fMRI can be fooled in the same way as > the > polygraph, says Faro. However, he says that the results are promising > > because these characteristic brain patterns may be beyond conscious > control, rendering it much more difficult to cheat. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Nov 30 17:00:07 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:00:07 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <20041130163307.17699.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041129193133.01b76f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041130163307.17699.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041130105442.01a43ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:33 AM 11/30/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > Mike's arguments in favor of god > >I've never said I'm "in favor" of god. >Please apologize and commit yourself to actually read my posts in the >future. Eh? An `argument in favor of' does not mean `endorsing the position proclaimed by' or `liking a lot'. It means `supporting that side of the argument', as in this dictionary definition of *pro*: 1. An argument or consideration in favor of something: weighing the pros and cons. 2. One who supports a proposal or takes the affirmative side in a debate. ADVERB: In favor; affirmatively: arguing pro and con. No apology called for, as far as I can see, unless Mike's hyper-subtle intention was to *ridicule* the traditional idea of a god. Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 17:02:03 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:02:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <001a01c4d698$296144b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041130170203.34190.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Brent Neal" > > > I will point out, for sake of fairness, that religions without > organizations, such as many Neopagan faiths, do not receive > recognition from > the government. Most Pagan groups don't even have 501(c)(3) status. > I'd be willing to bet that Hindu temples in the US are in the same > boat, though I have no data to speak about that authoritatively. > > I am actually opposed to all forms of "oh-how-special" tax exemptions > for religious groups (in my post I was trying to be mock-serious). > > At the very least, I would like religions to be taxed like any other > entertainment business. Freedom of expression and concience cannot be taxed. If you are for it, you are no kind of libertarian. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "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!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From pharos at gmail.com Tue Nov 30 17:07:25 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:07:25 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041130105442.01a43ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041129193133.01b76f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041130163307.17699.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041130105442.01a43ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:00:07 -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:33 AM 11/30/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > Mike's arguments in favor of god > > > >I've never said I'm "in favor" of god. > >Please apologize and commit yourself to actually read my posts in the > >future. > > Eh? An `argument in favor of' does not mean `endorsing the position > proclaimed by' or `liking a lot'. It means `supporting that side of the > argument', as in this dictionary definition of *pro*: > > 1. An argument or consideration in favor of something: weighing the pros > and cons. 2. One who supports a proposal or takes the affirmative side in a > debate. > ADVERB: In favor; affirmatively: arguing pro and con. > > No apology called for, as far as I can see, unless Mike's hyper-subtle > intention was to *ridicule* the traditional idea of a god. > If Mike were ever to post a load of complicated bollocks to the list (perish the thought!) and some courageous individual said that they didn't believe it -- Would that disbelief have to be a religious belief? Would it have to be their religion to disagree with Mike? Or can they just be permitted to disagree with said load of bollocks? :) BillK From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 30 17:28:42 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:28:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041129193133.01b76f28@pop-server.satx.rr.com><20041130163307.17699.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com><6.1.1.1.0.20041130105442.01a43ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <019801c4d702$0a0e43f0$60b32643@kevin> > If Mike were ever to post a load of complicated bollocks to the list > (perish the thought!) and some courageous individual said that they > didn't believe it -- Would that disbelief have to be a religious > belief? Would it have to be their religion to disagree with Mike? > > Or can they just be permitted to disagree with said load of bollocks? :) > > BillK Ha! You may disagree with bollocks on a standalone basis. I have done so in the past, such as with public education, without ever having to question my Mike worship. From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com Tue Nov 30 17:33:57 2004 From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:33:57 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Color vision (was: evolution again) Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188E1F7@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Amara Graps wrote: >> Now, what if humans preferentially chose partners >> with larger penises? This would explain why humans >> have larger penises than chimps, would it not? > > size, but what about COLOR ? > > Here is proof that the Vervet monkey is _not_ color-blind > (*) http://www.amara.com/notcolorblindmonkey_med.jpg Old world monkeys and apes have trichromatic vision like humans. New world monkeys have a variety of color visions; some are trichromatic (howler monkey); some nocturnal species are monochromatic, and most interesting are the polymorphic species where color vision is sex-linked: males have BG, BY, or BR vision while females can be BG, BY, BR, BGY, BYR, or BGR. Up to half of human females are tetrachromatic to some extent. This involves having two versions of the red or green photopigments on different chromosomes. In a particular cell the gene has a 50% chance of being expressed from either chromosome, and if they are different the woman will be tetrachromatic. Try counting the color bands in a rainbow; seven is the traditional number for trichromats and some women percieve up to ten! In fact, it seems to me that by having different red and green pigments some women could be pentachromatic. The extra colors would likely be a yellow of som etype. There is some research that indicates that all humans are tetrachromatic to UV in the retina but that ultraviolet light is blocked by the lens. Humans can sense polarization, but only across the entire field; google "Haidinger's Brush". Most vertebrates have four classes of cones; some more, some less. The mesozoic mammals that we evolved from had two, as they were nocturnal and color vision was not that important. We've reevolved trichromatic vision since then. Many birds are pentachromatic, but the mantis shrimp is the color vision champion. It has eight color pigments and color filters in the receptors to further increase the gamut. They also sense polarization of light much more efficiently than humans. additional polarization and From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 17:41:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:41:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] grow closer to god--through the mail!! In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041130105442.01a43ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041130174113.47151.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:33 AM 11/30/2004 -0800, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > Mike's arguments in favor of god > > > >I've never said I'm "in favor" of god. > >Please apologize and commit yourself to actually read my posts in > >the future. > > Eh? An `argument in favor of' does not mean `endorsing the position > proclaimed by' or `liking a lot'. It means `supporting that side of > the argument', as in this dictionary definition of *pro*: > > 1. An argument or consideration in favor of something: weighing the > pros and cons. 2. One who supports a proposal or takes the > affirmative side in a debate. > ADVERB: In favor; affirmatively: arguing pro and con. > > No apology called for, as far as I can see, unless Mike's > hyper-subtle intention was to *ridicule* the traditional idea of > a god. My intention is to point out that I don't know enough to know one way or the other, and neither do you or anybody else, so atheism is as much a religion as any other belief based on faith/lack of facts. Some self-proclaimed atheists, like yourself, have a knee-jerk reaction to such a statement, that is entirely emotional, not based on any rational basis of logic. You are so emotionally tied to being allergic to religion and convinced that jumping to the opposite extreme solves your allergy, but all you've done is change your drug of preference from an upper to a downer. You haven't solved your core problem of being an addict, in the metaphorical sense. What I am 'in favor' of is freedom of concience, which is the core issue of freedom of religion. Atheists get their skirts up in a bunch about religion in general being evil or anti-freedom, or pro-ignorance, when it just isn't so. The problem is that *organized* judeo-christian religions see a benefit in making people believe that socially virtuous behavior needs to be legislated, but no more than marxian religions teach their followers that economically egalitarian behavior needs to be legislated, or atheist religion tells its followers that denial of the existence of a creator needs to be legislated. The offensive behavior is the legislating against the freedom of concience of the individual to freely choose to commit virtuous behavior of their own free will. Doesn't matter who it is by that is compelling virtue. Freedom of concience is the strongest power an individual has against government, because government (at least here in the US) has absolutely no power over regulating what you think. Controlling what information you have access to regulates what you wind up thinking about that information. Using government, in the schools, in controlling which facts kids are exposed to (by removing the Declaration of Independence, by removing facts about why Thanksgiving was really celebrated, etc.), atheists are compelling thought through government to support their own unfounded faith, no differently than if the Catholic Church got to teach its version of history in the public schools. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From extropy at unreasonable.com Tue Nov 30 19:58:15 2004 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:58:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Eugenics and behavior modification Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20041130145037.08756b78@unreasonable.com> I was just helping my daughter wordsmith a term paper in medical ethics, and my mind wandered. I thought I'd pose a series of scenarios for your deliberation. I'd like to hear both your immediate emotional reaction and your considered ethical analysis, and your read on how the general public would view these ideas. Ignore any issues of futility, cheating, or superseding biotechnologies. I am *not* urging anything; I am examining a gedanken experiment. One of Heinlein's ideas was what if a foundation identified people with four long-lived grandparents and offered them a cash gift for each child they had after marrying another such person, in a (successful) attempt to breed humans for longevity. Would you object to such a plan? Does it matter what the criteria they want to select for? Examples: being white, not being white, having a high SAT score, or honorably serving in the military? What if couples are paid for every year they *don't* have a child? Consider blacks and Koreans in LA. Is there a difference between paying Koreans to have kids and paying blacks not to? Even though it is voluntary, does it smack too much of "genocide through economic pressure"? Does it matter what the sponsor's motivation is? What about rewards for other behaviors? Is there a difference between a group providing scholarships so that Hispanics can attend Harvard and a group that pays Hispanic students *not* to apply to Harvard? Although libertarians would not consider it a proper role of government, our country has used tax policy to influence social patterns for generations. How do the questions change if it is the government that is providing the selective benefit for those who either do or refrain from having children (or other targeted behavior)? Is there a difference between (tax credit for X) and (tax for not-X)? -- David Lubkin.